Dacian Trade with the Hellenistic and Roman World 9780904531404, 9781407352435

Table of contents :
Cover Page
Copyright Page
Table of Contents
PREFACE
I. INTRODUCTION
II. THE TRADE IN HELLENISTIC AND ROMAN PRODUCTS IN DACIA
III. DACIAN PRODUCTS DESTINED FOR TRADE
IV. COMMERCIAL ROUTES AND STATIONS
V. THE MERCHANTS
VII. CONCLUSION
REFERENCES
CATALOGUE OF FINDS
ABBREVIATIONS
PLATES

Citation preview

Dacian Trade with the Hellenistic and Roman World loan Glodariu revised by the author translated from the Romanian by Nubar Hampartumian

BAR Supplementary Series 8 1976

British Archaeological Reports l22

Banbury Road, Oxford OX2 78P, England GENERAL EDITORS

A.C.C. Brodribb, M.A. Mrs. Y.M. Hands

A.R. Hands, B.Sc., M.A., D.Phil. D.R. Walker, B.A. ADVISORY EDITORS

Neil Cossons, M.A., F.S.A., F.M.A. C.B. Burgess, M.A. Professor B.W. Cunliffe, M.A., Ph.D., F.S.A. Sonia Chadwick Hawkes, B.A., M.A., F.S.A. Prri�essor G.D.B. Janes, M.A., D.Phil., F.S.A. F _ nces Lynch, M.A., F.S.A. P.A. Mellars, M.A., Ph.D. P.:•, Rahtz, M.A., F.S.A.

B.A.R. Supplementary S eries 8, 1976: Roman World".

"Dacian Trade with the Hellenistic and

© loan Glodariu and Editura DACIA, Cluj-Napoca, Romanía, 1976. Previously published as "Relaiii comerciale ale Daciei cu lumea elenistica �i romana", Editura DACIA, Cluj-Napoca, Romanía, 1974.

The authors' moral rights under the 1988 UK Copyright, Designs and Patents Act are hereby expressly asserted.

All rights reserved. No part of this work may be copied, reproduced, stored, sold, distributed, scanned, saved in any form of digital format or transmitted in any form digitally, without the written permission of the Publisher. ISBN 9780904531404 paperback ISBN 9781407352435 e-book DOI https://doi.org/10.30861/9780904531404 A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library This book is available at www.barpublishing.com

CONTENTS Page Preface INTRODUCTION II

TRADE IN HELLENISTIC AND ROMAN PRODUCTS 1.

Wine and oil

2.

Pottery

17

3.

Bronze products

27

Silver products

35

5.

Glass

38

6.

Other products

44

7.

Greek and Roman coins

46

DACIAN PRODUCTS DESTINED FOR TRADE

IV

COMMERCIAL ROUTES AND STATIONS 1.

VI

10

4.

III

V

I

56

Maritime and river routes

59

2.

Roads to Dacia

61

3.

Roads in Dada

62

4.

Commercial stations

65

THE MERCHANTS

70

CONSEQUENCES OF THE RELATIONS BETWEEN DACIA AND THE HELLENISTIC AND ROMAN WORLD

VII

1.

Diffusion of amphorae

74

2.

Ceramic imitations of Roman products

78 85

3.

Local imitations of imported bronze vessels

4.

Imitations of Graeco-Roman coins

87

5.

Other Graeco-Roman influences

90

CONCLUSION

References

97 103

CATALOGUE OF FINDS Imported amphorae

131 132

Local amphorae

159

Imported pottery

164

Pottery imitations of imported products

178

Imported vessels and objects of bronze

193

Pieces copying imported bronze vessels Silver pieces

203 204

Vessels and objects of glass

206

Miscellaneous

211

Coins

215

Abbreviations

269

Plates and Maps

27

PREFACE

The writing of this book has demanded a detailed examination of the archaeological material of all types found in the Geto-Dacian settlements, fortifications and cemeteries which illustrate the relationship between Dacia and the Graeco-Roman world.

This work was only possible thanks to the

understanding and goodwill of the staff of the Institutes of History and Archaeology and of the various Romanian Museums.

Iexpress my sincere gratitude

to the late Professors C. Daicoviciu and M. Macrea.

Iam obliged and grate-

ful to the professors and the researchers who were so kind as to place unpublished material and information at my disposal:

A. Alexandrescu (Bucharest),

P. Alexandrescu (Bucharest), acad. Em. Condurachi (Bucharest), I. H. Crian (Cluj), H. Daicoviciu (Cluj), V. Eftimie (Bucharest), N. Gostar (Iai), N. Lupu (Sibiu), S. Marinescu-Bilcu (Bucharest), M. Petrescu-Dimbovia (Iasi), D. Popescu (Bucharest), Gh. Popilian (Craiova), I. I. Russu (Cluj), M. Rusu (Cluj), S. Sanie (Iai), Gh.

tefan (Bucharest), S. Teodor (Iai),

Al. Vulpe (Bucharest), E. Zaharia and Neculai Zaharia (Iai), Vi. Zirra (Bucharest). Ialso express my gratitude and thanks to the Directors and to the Scientific Staff of the museums for placing published and especially unpublished material belonging to their collections at my disposal:

Fl. Anastasiu (Braila),

N. Anghelescu (Ciirai), I. Berciu (Alba lulia), M. Bucoval

(Constan),

V. Cpitanu (Bacu), L. Chiu (Aiud), V. Chiu (Caracal), Fl. Costea (Braov), M. Davidescu (Drobeta-Turnu Severin), E. Dtirner (Arad), I. T. Dragomir (Gaiai), S. Dumitracu (Oradea),

t. Ferenczi (Cluj), Al. Firu (Craiova),

M. Ghigheanu (Corabia), N. Harjuche (Brila), M. Ignat (Suceava), B. lonescu (Oltenia), M. lonescu (Giurgiu), M. Irimia (Constana), Gh. Lazin (Satu Mare), L. M.rghitan (Deva), Fl. Medeie

(Timioara), Gh. Mihescu (tirgovite),

V. Mihi1escu-BIrliba (Piatra Neam), Gh. Moldovan (Sighioara), I. Paul (Sibiu), Al. Popa (Alba Julia), E. Popescu (Piteti), Gh. Purcrescu (Rm. Vilcea), A. Rädulescu (Constanja), Gh. Ràdulescu (Giurgiu), N. Rdulescu (Tecuci), S. Sanie (Iai), Z. Szkely (Sf. Gheorghe), M. Takcs (Aiud), V. Teodorescu (Ploieti), M. Turcu (Bucharest), V. Ursachi (Roman). The archaeological material discovered in the course of the long researches carried out on the principal Geto-Dacian settlements and fortifications of Romania has been absolutely indispensable to the writing of this book. Ihave to thank in particular the Directors of the main excavations who with great kindness placed at my disposal the material of interest to me which was in the care of the Institutes of History and Archaeology and in museum collections. Imention in particular the excavations at Barboi, Bnia, Bradu, Braila and B rilia, Cp?lna, Ce rnatu, Ceteni, Coste9ti-Grditea Muncelului, Craiva, Pecica, Piatra Neam

-

Bitca Doamnei and Cozia, Poiana, Popeti, Rctu,

Sf. Gheorghe, Tilica, Tinosu, Zimnicea.

The photographers I. Horvath and Ec. Comnescu and the artists E. Vajnr, S. Ba1ask6 and C. Smarandache are thanked for the illustrations. The object and aims of the author in writing this book are explained in the following pages.

INTRODUCTION

1. The importance of the economic, commercial, cultural, and in particular political and military relationships between the classical Graeco-Roman world and the neighbouring "barbarian" populations, and the resultant reciprocal influences (especially those over the peoples whose development was inferior to that of the Greek and Hellenistic states and Republican and Imperial Rome) has long attracted the attention of modern historiography, resulting in a number of specialist studies. The primary object of these works was the study of the political implications in the domain of the material and spiritual culture of these "barbarian" civilisations, which fell under the political influence of the Hellenistic Kingdoms and the Roman Empire at different times. For Dacia and its people, the proximity of the Graeco-Roman world and its influence were very important. The exchange of material and spiritual values between the Geto-Dacian and Graeco-Roman civilisations was of great benefit to the former through the numerous technical and cultural influences which eventually accelerated the economic and political progress of the Carpathians and lower Danube populations. The political history, especially of the wars between the Dacians and the Greek cities and their consequences, is well known today, in contrast to the lack of knowledge of their economic relations. Of course it is incontestible that their importance was grasped by all great modern historians, but the lack of comprehensive catalogues of discoveries and monographs concerning them has prevented the drawing of general conclusions on the trade relations with the Graeco-Roman world before the Roman conquest.

This is probably because the treatment of the Dacian

people has always been incidental in the monographs of non-Romanian historians when referring to general trading patterns or in specific studies relating to other aspects of economic, political and cultural history. Only by studying all existing material including coins, is it possible to make general judgements and to come to detailed conclusions on the relationships between the Geto-Dacians and the Graeco-Roman world. This is the purpose of the present monograph. From a geographical point of view this work only deals with the territory of present Romania and not all that inhabited by the Geto-Dacians in ancient times. Because the imported Graeco-Roman material has on the whole not been investigated in detail and as a result remains unpublished, we have to study the material in museums and archaeological collections. The Romanian Black Sea coast has not been included either as it is in a special situation, different from that of Dacia, owing to the presence of Greek colonies. Chronologically this work covers the period from the 2nd century B. C. to the Roman conquest of Dacia; the presence of Greek products in Dacia begins at aperiod earlier than the 2nd century but these are sporadic.

I

The influence of the Greek civilisation

-

transmitted either directly by

the Gi eek cities established on the western coasts of the Black Sea, or indirectly through the Celts in the intra- Carpathian area and the Thracians in the extra-Carpathian Age in Romania.

regions

-

stimulated the evolution of the Second IrOn

The 2nd century is the period of full maturity of the Geto-

Dacian La Tene civilization and the beginning of the acceleration of economic development and of rapid progress in all fields of its material culture.

From

this time on, the products imported from the Hellenistic world increased in proportion to the Geto-Dacian receptivity to Hellenistic influences.

The same

century showed more numerous, permanent and growing possibilities of exchange between Dacia and the Hellenistic world.

The role of Dacia in the

exchange of material and spiritual values with the classical world was now permanent and intensive.

Taking into consideration this situation, the im-

ported products dated before the 2nd century B. C. have just one introductory chapter in the general plan of this book, with the exception of the stamped and unstampedamphorae, which are included in the catalogue, and some other products not belonging only to the 2nd and 3rd centuries. The present work consists of two distinct parts: a short history of research on the subject; events in the Mediterranean world;

the first comprises

an outline of the principal political

the general state of trade in the 2nd -Ist

centuries B. C. (and especially Graeco-Roman commerce in Dacia);

and the

consequences of the economic-commercial Hellenistic and Roman penetration into the Geto-Dacian civilization.

The second part consists of a catalogue of

finds according to category (Hellenistic, Roman and local imitations) and a schematic catalogue of Greek and Roman coins, which are very important for the study of trade in Dada.

Of course, it is possible that there exist some

deficiencies or gaps in the catalogue, which is the first work of this kind, excepting those on stamped amphorae and coins.

The catalogue covers all

discoveries including those made in 1970 (inasmuch as the information concerning new discoveries is complete) and the finds from the more important sites occurring after this date.

But the possible deficiencies of information and

documentation cannot affect the interpretation to a degree which might change the general historical conclusions. 2.

Short history of the researches.

The presence of Graeco-Roman objects

in the Geto-Dacian settlements in Romania has long attracted the attention of scholars:

but the latter were not, generally, successful in distinguishing the

differences between imported and local products:

that was only possible after

the large-scale discoveries which lead to information and understanding concerning the Geto-Dacian civilization in the Second Iron Age.

However, there

are still few studies, in the ample literature of Dacian La Thne, dedicated to Graeco-Roman products and trade. The first valuable study in this field is the report of V. Prvan International Congress of History (Brussels 1923). the few finds at the time, perceived the implications economic point of view the lower Danube.

-

1

at the 5th

V. Prvan, in spite of -

particularly from the

of the Greek penetration into the territories north of

Subsequently the publication of such studies was sporadic.

2

The most abundant literature with regard to Greek and Roman products in Dacia is devoted to the amphorae.

The first research concerning amphorae

is the dlissertation 2 of D. Tudor at the Archaeological Conference in 1953.

The

same author studied the Greek and local amphorae

3

later.

their whole attention to the

V. Canarache

4

and Victoria Eftimie

5 gave

in another work published

stamped amphorae discovered in the Greek cities on the western coasts of the Black Sea (there are also some references in their work to other amphorae found in Romania).

Some articles publish chance finds.

local amphorae there are the studies of D. V. Rosetti

'

In the fields of the

6

and V. Eftimie. 8

The other categories of imported pottery have not been studied with the same interest as the amphorae.

There are also a few references to the local

imitations of the Greek and Roman pottery in the monograph of I. H. Crian, the article of M. Rusu Casan-Franga imitations.

10

regarding a hoard of pottery, the studies of Irma

and Al. Vulpe

ii

12

concerning the Delian bowls and their local

There are only a few works with special reference to metal-work;

those of J. Werner ,13 K. Horedt, and I. Glodariu.

18

14

D. Popescu,

15

D. Tudor,

16

D. Berciu,

17

The influences exerted by the Graeco-Roman civilization

on the civilian and military architecture from the zone of the Dacian capital city have been investigated by C. Daicoviciu, 19 while Em. Condurachi

22

R. Vulpe,

20

and Fl. Preda, 21

studied the problems of the Greek penetration and

its consequences. B. Mitrea in a monograph 23 and in a study, 24 and ludita Winkler E. Chirith

exchange between Dada and the Hellenistic and Roman world. works of I. Andrieescu,

27

I. Nestor,

32

31

25

and

have studied from a numismatic point of view the commercial

26

v

Pârvan,

D. Berciu,

28

D. M. Pippidi

In the principal

C. Daicoviciu9 H. Daicoviciu, 30 33

and R. Vulpe

34

occur a lot of re-

ferences concerning imported products, the commercial relations between Dacia and Graeco-Roman world and the influence of Graeco-Roman civilization in Dacia.

Some information concerning the above mentioned problems occurs

in the reports

35

of the excavations carried out in the Dacian settlements.

Also one must mention the study of the economic relations between the Greek and Roman world and the indigenous population in the monographs dedicated to Histria. 36 3.

The political situation and the commercial relationships during the 2nd

century B. C. -Ist century A. B.

The principal feature of the 2nd century

B. C. and Ist century A. D. is the permanent territorial and political expansion of Rome into the Mediterranean, Aegean and Black Sea.

The diplomacy and

the army of Rome conquered the whole Mediterranean basin (which became a "Roman lake"), profiting from the permanent disagreements among the Hellenistic states.

The Roman policy of expansion continued also into the

western, central and south-eastern areas of Europe, either through territorial conquests or through the system of political and military protectorates. The eastern policy of Rome, during the first three decades of the 2nd century, was dominated by the second and third Macedonian wars, the suppression of the Macedonian Kingdom and its transformation into a Roman province in 148 B. C.

Greece was to have the same fate as Macedonia two years later

and Pergamum was to be annexed after thirteen years.

3

Rome conquered new

territories in the eastern Mediterranean during the first half of the next century, as a result of the victorious wars against Mithridates.

Bithynia and

Syria were transformed into Roman provinces and Judaea into a tributary state.

The annexation of Egypt in the second half of the ist century B. C.

marked the end of a stage in ancient history. The Roman advance continued in Illyricum and central Europe at the time of Augustus so that all the peoples from the West of the Balkans and from the middle Danube areas fell under the supremacy of Rome at the end of the first decade of the first century A. D. its frontiers on the lower Danube: time of Tiberius.

At last, the Roman empire extended

Moesia became a Roman province at the

The next objective was the Dacian Kingdom.

The increas-

ing threat of Roman expansion and the annexation of the territories between the Danube and the Black Sea brought about many anxieties in Dacia.

The

political history during the three centuries before the Roman conquest of Dacia was marked by the numerous incursions and attacks of Dacians (alone or in anti-Roman coalitions) into the Roman provinces or into vassal zones and by "punitive' or "cleaning-up" Roman expeditions to the North of the Danube.

The frequent wars of Antiquity were disadvantageous to the development of economic-commercial relationships.

The Roman Empire brought (except-

ing the periods of the civil wars at Rome) peace and security within its boundaries, which were essential for the economic and commercial development of its immense territory.

37

Roman foreign policy, therefore, had direct

consequences on the development of craftsmanship and trade in the ancient world. •The exchanges between Dacia and the Greek cities, the Hellenistic Kingdoms and the Roman Empire later, are part of the general trade of that time. For this reason, it is necessary to make a general survey of the state of the commercial relations in the Mediterranean-Aegaean-Pontic areas in the 2nd century B. C. -Ist century A. D., with special attention to the regions whose production and trade were in constant contact with Dacia. The numerous wars of Rome, which extended considerably the territory of its Empire, continuously stimulated the lucrative commercial activities of the middle class.

lt seems that the influence of the mercantile interest in

Roman policy increased after the creation of the province of Asia.

Now,

the important growth in the number of Italian merchants and "the necessity" of their protection forced Rome to carry out some political and military measures to support them.

This orientation of Roman policy appears clearly

at about the end of the 2nd century B. C. (the laws of Caius Gracchus) and continues in the next century, especially at the time of Augustus and his successors. were:

Notable among the measures which concerned commercial activity the exemption from customs duties of Rome and its allies (after the

conquest of Ambracia), the establishment of Delos as a free port, the destruction of Corinth and the suppression of piracy.

They were advantageous not

only for the Romans, but also for the merchants of Asia Minor and Syria and, in general, for all the traders from the Eastern Mediterranean areas.

4

40

The

peace and the security within the Empire had favourable consequences in the development of craftsmanship and in this field there took place a complex process the salient feature of which was the gradual movement of the centre of activity in the crafts from the Orient to the Western provinces. At that time the Orient provided for trade the products of craftsmanship and of agriculture, 4' namely luxury pottery, lamps, terracottas, metal objects, glassware, textile products, wood, jewellery, scent, silk, and grain. Asia Minor was renowned for the textiles of Miletus and of Laodicea, for pottery, precious stones, wine, oil and dry fruits. 42 Syria was famous for the glassware of Sidon, the purple of Tyre, Indian cotton, pearls and precious stones (received from further east)

and metal products. 43 Egypt

was a great exporter of grain, papyrus, fine textiles, glassware, the famous products of Alexandrian metal-work, the black slaves of Ethiopia, silk, cotton, ivory, ointments, scents and spices. '' Italian craftsmanship played as large apart in the commerce of the Empire as Gallia and Hispania in the first two centuries A. D. It is noticeable that the development of the production of Italic craftsmen particularly in Campania, at Rome and in the North of the peninsula had included some specifically Alexandrian skills which were perfected, as in Gallia and Hispania late, by the oriental artisans. ' -

-

The principal products of Italian craftsmanship consisted of the famous Arretine ware, lamps, iron, silver, bronze and copper objects from Campania, lead water pipes, the iron tools from Aquileja, textiles from the north of the Peninsula and, from the time of Augustus, glassware. 46 From the beginning of the Ist century A. D. ‚ the workshops of Gallia competed with those of Italy in the production of pottery decorated in relief, lamps, bronze objects, and glassware. 47 These products (as well as the products of Northern Africa, Hispania and Britannia) are not studied in the present book, as they enter the trade of Dacia at a later date. The products of the Greek cities on the Black Sea coasts played a certain part in the commerce of Dacia (e.g. the wine from Sinope and Heraclea Pontica

‚

and the pottery from the cities on

the northern shores of the Black Sea); but the products of the Greek colonies on the Romanian Black Sea coast were more important. 48 The development of trade depended to a large extent, in addition to the necessary political-economic conditions, on the state of the maritime and overland routes. Progress made in navigation had very important consequences for the growth of commercial contacts. The developments begun in the Hellenistic period in the increase of the tonnage of commercial ships were continued in the Roman period, when big ships appeared. But the real progress in this field consists in the increase in ships of medium tonnage. 49 As a consequence of the accumulation of knowledge in the field of navigation and of the improvement of commercial ships, coastal sailing was now employed only for shorter distances and for the utilization of coastal currents. 50 The only important maritime routes for Dacia lay between Italy and the Aegean and between the Eastern Mediterranean and the Black Sea. The maritime route from Italy to the Aegean crossed the Corinthian isthmus (with the trans-shipment of the goods and of the passengers or the shifting by land of the ships), while another route rounded the Peloponnesus via Cape Malea. 51 The route between the Eastern Mediterranean and the Black Sea usually passed by Rhodes, which was at the end of the routes from Alexandria and from the ports of Syria and Palestine. North of Rhodes the route was identical with 5

the coastal passage (the coast of Asia Minor was preferred)

52

For the trade

of Dacia, the route Brundisium-Dyrrhachium, between the Italian ports and the Dalmatian coast was also important.

53

Even in normal conditions travelling took a long time

54

but the cost of

transport charges, both for goods and passengers, was not very expensive (for example, 2 drachmas for a passenger between Alexandria and Athens, 25 drachmas for about a ton of stone between Paros and Delos). 55 Populations and regions situated at long distances from the boundaries of the Hellenistic and Roman world were drawn into the circulation and the exchange of goods and products.

Indifferent to the forms of the commercial

transactions (itinerant or fixed, wholesale or retail), indifferent to the geographical position of markets (ports, inland or on frontiers) and to their specific character (specialized or non-specialized products) the same merchants sold the merchandise brought from different regions and bought other products, which were later sold elsewhere;

this process is equivalent in

modern terms to the import and export of merchandise. 56 Important changes took place in the structure and ethnic origins of the merchants from the different regions of the ancient world.

After the sporadic

and timid appearance of the Italians in the Aegean basin (here the Greeks and the Orientals held the monopoly of trade) from the middle of the 3rd century to the middle of the second century there followed their strong penetration into the Orient, although they did not take the place of the indigenous merchants, towards the end of the Republican period.

This was succeeded by a marked

decrease in the number of Italians in the East and the competition of Orientals even for the trade of western areas during the first centuries of the Empire. In the first period, the Italians appeared individually or in communities in Illyricum, Epirus, Thrace, Greece and in the Archipelago.

58

The political

and military events about the middle of the 2nd century (the destruction of Corinth and Carthage, the proclamation of Delos as a free port and the foundation of the province of Asia) favoured the penetration of Italians into the Orient. Now, the community of Italians in Delos became more in evidence and their numbers increased also in Boeotia, Athens, Pergamum, the province of Asia, in the Islands, Bithynia and Egypt. 59 The Italian communities were present in all the eastern regions, even beyond the limits of the Hellenistic world,

60

in the greatest period of their

expansion to the Orient which was from the wars of Mithridates to about the end of the Ist century B. C.

There were Italians in Illyricum, Macedonia,

Thrace, Epirus, Thessaly, Boeotia, Euboea, Athens, Argolis, Laconia, in the Archipelago (Delos, Lesbos, Chios, Samos, Cos), in the province of Asia, in the cities of

Ion i a

61 and Troasa, in Mysia, Lydia, Bithynia,

Paphiagonia, Pontus, Cappadocia, Cilicia, Syria, even in Arabia, Persia and India.

It is necessary to take note of the large number of Romans, in

communities or individually, involved in these lucrative activities:

the

majority of cives Romani or 'Pwo u came from the Greek areas of Italy, which had been admitted to the citizenship as a result of the laws of 89 and 88 B. C.

62

The substantial participation of Italians from the south

of the Peninsula in trade and also the fact that maritime commerce continued

6

to be in the hands of the Greeks, even after the conquest of the Mediterranean, explains the presence of Greek infl uences i n th e R oman commercial laws. 63 The Italian merchants penetrated into western Europe (Hispania, Gallia and Africa) from the end of the 2nd century B. C. 64 and continued to remain there during the Imperial period when the competition of the Orientals began. 65 The number of Italians 66 in the Oriental areas of the Roman Empire began to decrease during the first century of the Empire, when the presence of Orientals in trade became dominant even in Italy and the Western regions.

It

seems that the civil wars 67 were one of the principal causes of the decline of the Roman cives in the Oriental provinces.

The Syrian and Egyptian merchants

appeared in Italy about the middle of the ist century B. C.68

Orientals (par-

ticularly from Syria,but also from Tyre, Berytus and Nabataea) settled permanently even in Rome and in Puteoli, where they had their districts, shops, temples and cemeteries so that the city acquired a semi-oriental appearance 70 and in Hispania, Gallia and in North Africa.

It seems that the Italians did

not play a large part in the trade of the western and northern areas of the Black Sea,

71

which was dominated by the presence of Greek and Oriental merchants.

But the Italians were very active in Northern and North-Western Italy as is shown by the specialization of some Northern Italian centres in trade with the above mentioned zones. 72 The commercial relations of the territories to the North of the lower Danube in the 2nd century B. C. -Ist century A. D. were part of this political, economic and trade situation.

The political and military changes and the evolution of

the various branches of the economy (especially in trade and craftsmanship) influenced directly the relations between Dada and the Roman world. 4. The beginnings of trade between the Greeks and the Geto-Dacians. Trade between the populations to the North of the lower Danube and the Mediterranean or other European areas began at an early date and continued with some variations of intensity and importance throughout the whole prehistoric age.

The

discoveries in Dacia of Greek products dated to the beginning of La Tene and to the 3rd century B. C. prove the beginning of permanent relations between the Geto-Dacians and the Greek world.

The finds mark the first steps of

Greek commercial penetration which was to be intensified during the followir centuries. The few Greek finds (especially some pottery and products of bronze) in the Hallstatt cemeteries and settlements attest minor and sporadic exchanges in comparison with the next period.

There are many such finds in the areas

not far from the Greek cities on the western coasts of the Black Sea. The following discoveries in the territory of present day Moldavia are recorded: Bacu),

fragments from a Greek vessel (kylix?) at Brboasa (district of '

some sherds of Attic pottery (from a kylix and from a kantharos)

discovered in the settlement of poiana and a black slipped vessel from the 4th-3rd centuries B. C. in the cemetery 75 of Poiana. At Frumuiti (in '

South-Eastern Moldavia) a black painted kylix with the inscription NAY on its base dated to the 5th century B. C. 76

There are more numerous discover-

ies of Greek pottery in the settlement of Barboi (in the South of Moldavia): black and red figure lekythoi

''

and over a dozen vessels (now in the GalaJi

7

Museum). 78 There are also mentioned on the Danube an oinochoe at Brilia 79 and a kantharos and a bowl at Chicani. 80 Some Greek pottery has been found in the territory of Bucharest:

fragments

of a red figure vessel in the Tei district, 81 a kantharos at Fundeni, 82 and an Attic red figure skyphos from the 4th century B. C. at Mihtari. 83

Greek sherds

have also been discovered at Muntenia, some of them belonging to an Attic red figure vessel dated about the end of the 5th century, in the settlement of Zimnicea, 84 and a fragment of a red figure vessel at Coofeni de Jos (in the district of Dolj),

85

a vessel of the Askos type at Chirnogi 86 and some pottery

at Alexandria. 87 The finds of Greek pottery in Transylvania are less numerous:

two fragments of a black slipped vessel from the 5th century B. C. at

Iliusa,

88

a kantharos from the second half of the 4th century

-

the beginning of

the 3rd century at Cepari 89 and a lekythos datable from the 3rd century B. C. at Bratei. 90

There have also been discovered in the intra-Carpathian area of

Dacia two vessels of the oinochoe type (one of them, black varnished dated from the 5th century, the second, with incised decoration, from the 3rd century B. C.) and an Attic brown-red vessel from the 4th century B. C. discovered probably at the present day city of Aiud. 91 The amphorae represent a special category of Greek pottery, but they will be discussed in the section of the catalogue devoted to imported amphorae. Some other Greek products have been found, in addition to pottery, in the North-Danubian territories, viz. the helmets from Fcu (Muntenia), Gostav, (Transylvania).

94

(Oltenia), Jidovin

95

92

and Zimnicea

(Banat) and Ocna Mure

93

96

The first two finds dated from the 4th century B. C.

and the

others are datable from the 6th-5th centuries B. C. 98 There are a few known discoveries of bronze from the North of the lower Danube:

vesse l s

i n th e

terr i tories

the stray handle and its joint from a basin

(the 4th-3rd centuries) at Chic an i-Braila,

99

an Ion an lesbos at Balanoaia 100 i

and the vessel found recently at Fntinele (near Zimnicea) dating from the 4th century B. C. 101 Numerous objects of precious metal discovered in the southern areas of Romania, reflect Greek fashion or influence: pieces of silver or gilded silver from the grave of Hagighiol (dated about the end of the 5th century-the beginning of the 4th century B. C.

'

102 a helmet of gold from Cotofeneti 103 (in the

Prahova district), a helmet of silver found probably at the Iron Gates, 104 a vessel of silver from the Iron Gates

105

a rhython of gilded silver from

Poroina, 106 and a phiale of silver from the grave of a warrior discovered at Zimnicea. 107 The presence in Romania of the products of Greek fashion from the 6th3rd centuries B. C. is important for the dating of the archaeological assemblages and for the construction of the chronology of the Geto-Dacian culture.

The

presence of Greek products is still rare in the settlements and the cemeteries of the indigenous populations and is more frequent in the southern areas of Moldavia and of Muntenia. Some of the Greek objects, especially of precious metal and of bronze, were gifts received by the various local chieftains or made to their order,

8

either by specialized workshops or by itinerant artisans.

But the greater

part of Greek products very likely arrived through the normal channels of trade.

From an historical point of view their presence signifies the begin-

ning of commercial relations between the Geto-Dacians and the Greek world and they reveal the origin of the varied and numerous influences exerted by Greek civilization on the indigenous population.

9

THE TRADE IN HELLENISTIC AND ROMAN PRODUCTS IN DACIA

1.

The discoveries of amphorae in the Geto-Dacian settlements are a sign

of the existence of commerce of wine and oil in the Danubian-Carpathian regions.

Though the amphorae are products of pottery, they are not included

in the next chapter concerned with trade of Hellenistic and Roman pottery in Dacia, because of their distinctive utilization which differs from that of other vessels.

The amphorae were manufactured especially to carry wine, oil,

dye-stuffs, and resins and they were bought centres of production

-

for their contents.

-

often a long distance from their

For that reason, the problems

of the amphorae are different from general pottery and in consequence a special chapter is devoted them. The amphorae

(Pl.

XV) were the ideal means in the ancient world of pre-

serving the contents from deterioration resulting from contact with the air, but the transport of amphorae presented some difficulties because of their fragility.

For that reason, in the ancient trade in wine, oil and dye-stuffs

it was preferred to transport by ship.

Overland transport was utilized only

when the road was flat or situated near the navigable parts of the rivers. Fragments of amphorae occur commonly in the sites of Dacia, particularly in those situated in the neighbourhood of the Danube and its tributaries. 108 The intact and fragmentary amphorae, stamped or not, and discovered in Romania reach approximately a total of 1100 pieces (one third of the amphorae are stamped

109

-

the stamps in pl. 16, 17, 19, 39).

They have been found,

isolated or in archaeological assemblages, in different spots in 117 localities (p1. 2). The most numerous discoveries occur in the area of the lower Danube, their number decreasing gradually from Zimnicea to Turnu Severin. for the number of finds of amphorae are the following areas:

Notable

the confluence

of the Siret with the Buz au, the confluence of the Siret with the Danube (Barboi, Braila, Galai, Garvn, Tuluceti, Naziru, Sihleanu), the confluence of the Ia1omia with the Danube (Lunca, Hirova, Fáceni, Ograda), the zone of Cälárai (Borcea, Dichiseni, Coslogeni, Rosei, Câlrai) and the area between lake Mostitea and lake Greaca (Vârti, Mtnstirea, Coconi, T.riceni, Spanjov, Oltenia, Cscioarele, Greaca, Prundu, etc.).

There are

fewer discoveries in the rest of the territory of Muntenia and Oltenia; these the more important are in the areas of the lower Arge

among

and lower

DTmbovia (Popeti, Bucharest, Moteni, Ttnganu), in the sub-Carpathian zone between the Olt and the upper 01tej (Ocnia, Govora, Polovragi, Baia de Fier) and especially at Cetáeni

(on the upper Dimbovia).

Some amphorae

(stamped or not) occurred at Crsani and Tinosu. In the areas between the eastern Carpathians and Prut are to be noted the discoveries between the Prut and the Btrlad (in the zone of the river Elan: 10

B'trlàesi. Ghireasca, Igeti, Horga, Fedeti) and particularly the more numerous finds in the zone between the Siret, the lower Jijia, the upper Birlad and Crasna (the South of the plateau of Suceava), the plain of Jijia, and the North of the plateau of Btrlad (Ciurea, ofroneti, Boroeti, Scinteia, Mogoeti, Cercu, Ciurbeti, Doroban,

orogari, Cotnari, Belceti).

In Moldavia there

are important discoveries from the South of the confluence of the TroJus with the Siret (icani, Rugineti, Diaconi) and especially at Poiana. coveries are known in the sub-Carpathian hills: oimului, Tirpeti, Tirgu Ocna.

A few dis-

Piatra Neam, Piatra

In the region of inter-Carpathian Dada, amphorae have been discovered only at Moigrad, Cetea, Craiova, Costeti and one very improbably at Govjdia. South

There are no amphorae discovered in the area encompassed in the

by the southern Carpathians, in the West by the Olt defile and the mid-

dle course of the Mures, in the North by the confluence of the Some and in the East by the Eastern Carpathians:

rivers

discoveries of amphorae are

unknown also in Banat, Criana and in Maramure. Taking into account the frequency of the discoveries of amphorae in the inter-Carpathian zone over many years from the beginning of the 20th century to some years ago, it is unlikely that their number will increase in the future to reach a figure comparable to that of amphorae discovered in the extraCarpathian areas.

Amphorae are usually found in the Geto-Dacian settlements

and cemeteries from Muntenia and Moldavia, which in contrast are rare in the inter-Carpathian areas, from the point of view of the number both of sites of discovery and of pieces found.

From 1100 pieces contained in the catalogue

only 4 certainly and i doubtfully come from the inter-Carpathian territory of Dacia. •Is it possible (as is suggested by a superficial study of the distribution map of amphorae) that the trade in southern wines and oils ceased at the limit of the eastern and southern Carpathians?

On the other hand, it is difficult to

accept that the inter-Carpathian Geto-Dacians did not appreciate the southern wines and oils to the same extent as their brothers on the other side of the mountains. The well-known passage of Strabo 110 (relating to the eradication of the vines by Burebista with the support of Deceneu) concerns geographically the whole of Dacia and not only a certain part of its territory and is concerned with only a short part of the whole period of the Greek trade of wines and oils. Finally, even the discoveries of amphorae confute the efficacy of the law of Burebista.

The most recent work devoted to the discoveries of stamped am-

phorae in Romania, concluded (on the basis of the catalogue of finds and of their distribution map): 111 "this trade was restricted to the world of the GetoDacian tribes between the Danube and the Carpathians". 112

Only a few dis-

coveries have occurred since the publication of that statement, and they cannot change the conclusion cited above.

But the investigation

in detail of the dis-

coveries from the extra- Carpathian area and especially the study of their accumulation in certain Geto-Dacian settlements lead to some reasonable explanations and different conclusions. Study of the catalogue demonstrates both the distribution of the amphorae almost entirely in the extra-Carpathian area and their agglomeration in certain settlements.

For example:

approximately 65% of the amphorae discovered

11

in the extra-Carpathian areas come from 11 localities (out of a total of 112 localities where the amphorae have been found):

Br aila, Cetãjeni, Ciurea,

Cräsani, Floreti, Medgidia, Poiana, Popeti, Rãctu, Tinösu and Zimnicea): 48% of the amphorae found in the above mentioned localities have occurred in 4 of them:

Ceteni, Poiana, Popeti and Tinosu).

There are 146 stamped

amphorae (intact or fragmentary) and the fragments of unstamped amphorae from Ceteni (but their number must be greater because not all of the discoveries are recorded, especially those made by chance)

113

and 200 intact and

fragmentary amphorae (4 from them stamped) at Poiana. The abundance of amphorae at Ceteni and Poiana (greater even than that which is known for the Geto-Dacian sites) is not accidental. The settlement of Ceteni is situated on the upper Dtmbovia, near the well-known road which links the lands on either side of the Carpathians, through the Buzau Pass. Poiana is situated on the Siret (at the South of the mouth of the Trotu) at the extremity of the commercial road which crossed the Carpathians through the Oituz Pass. tains

It seems very possible that the wine was carried acro ss the moun-

not in amphorae (because of the state of roads at that time), but in cer-

tain receptacles more practical to transport by carts, for instance the traditional and ordinary casks of wood and skins

114

of the Geto-Dacian world.

This is the explanation for the great number of amphorae found at Ceteni and Poiana.

In any case the existence of trading posts at Ceteni and Poiana

was necessary for the exchange of products between the two sides of the Carpathians.

Some other settlements of Moldavia (Bradu, Räcätu and

Ciurea) also played a part similar to Cetãeni and Poiana in the trade of southern wine and oil. A great number of amphorae have also been found in some Dacian sites in the territories of present day Muntenia and Oltenia:

Crsani, Popeti,

Tinosu, Mtnstirea, Zimnicea, Ocnia, and Càlrai, which were the GetoDacian markets for the wine and oil carried over a long distance.

In those

markets then took place the exchange of products between the Greek merchants and the indigenous population from the neighbouring villages. It is noticed that a different situation existed at Floreti

115

in Dobrogea:

the presence of

26 amphorae in a pit, all of the same provenance (Heraclea Pontica) and of the same date, proves either the existence of a storehouse or a hiding place used for unknown reasons by some merchants. Geographically, the distribution of amphorae shows the areas in which southern wines and oils were traded.

Chronologically, the study of amphorae

contributes to the establishment of the volume and the intensity of this trade in different periods.

Further, the study of amphorae from the point of view

of their provenance makes clear the centres from which the wines and oils were carried to Dacia. Regarding the provenance of the stamped amphorae in Dacia, D. Tudor noticed that the import of Thasian amphorae has been much exaggerated 116 and V. Eftimie considered that 60% of the stamped amphorae discovered in the same province come from Rhodes, and the others from Thasos, Cnidus, Cos, Sinope, Heraclea Pontica.

117

The distribution of the amphorae in-

cluded in the catalogue is presented in the first table according to their centres of provenance.

12

3

2

rn-i

2

?

3

111-lI

3 2 Rhodes

3 1

i 3

IB.C.-IA.D.

3

2

IV-In

I

U-I?

Coo?

5

UI -U

Chios, Rhod s, Thasos

I

2

IB.C.?

I 1

?

I

rn?

3

U?

5

111-U

3

?

I I Rhodes?

3

Rhodes

5 3

4

4

2 85

IB.C.-! A.D.

and Coo

4

UB.C.-IA.D.

and Co.

5

IB.C.-! A.D.

3

4

3 I

2

350-300

Herocleia

3

Heracleia

2

I

I

I

I

2

7

IB.C.?

I

rn-ii

304

90

5

IA.D,?

I

05

5

I

I

1

5 3

II

IB.C.-! A.D.

IVB.C.-IA. E.

701

9

oodThasos

26

1085

Rhodes gets the first place in the numerical order of the stamped amphorae discovered in Romania, followed by Heraclea Pontica, Sinope, Thasos, Cnidus, Chersonesus and Cos.

101 stamped amphorae whose provenance is not deter-

mined must be added to the number of those discovered in Dacia (some of the 101 amphorae have decayed, while others are lost or unpublished).

The number

of known stamped amphorae reaches a total of 304 pieces, but 304 represents the number of stamps and not that of stamped amphorae, for it is known that some amphorae had two stamped handles. to the stamped amphorae, that those

It is remarkable too, with regard

of Italian provenance, which are well

known in the Western provinces and sometimes in the Eastern areas of the Roman empire, are missing in Dacia. As a result of the facts above mentioned, there is a clear preponderance of Rhodian stamped amphorae in the discoveries from Dacia.

It is possible

that some future discoveries will change the numerical order of the other centres of provenance, but the finds which have occurred during the 15 years since the publication of the statistics of V. Eftimie have confirmed the importance of Rhodes as a source of stamped amphorae. Certainly, the determination of the provenance of unstamped amphorae is more difficult than that of stamped amphorae, especially for the two centuries before the conquest of Dacia.

However, taking into account those determina-

tions which, on the basis of study of the unstamped amphorae, have been made as to the provenance of unstamped amphorae in Dada, the following numerical order results:

Rhodes, Thasos, Heraclea Pontica, Cos, the Roman amphorae,

and the amphorae from Sinope and Chios.

But it is remarked, with relation

to these results, that the provenance of the majority of unstamped amphorae discovered in Dacia is not yet known.

Also, it must be noticed that the graffi-

ti and the signs painted on the amphorae are not important for the determination of their provenance. They represent either the distinctive signs of owners 118 or of the customers.

119

Research into the distribution of amphorae in certain

periods is very important for the general conclusions concerning the trade of wine and oils in Dacia.

This is why there is an abundant literature dealing with

the chronological problems of the amphorae discovered in Dada. V. Prvan fixed the following chronology concerning the penetration of amphorae into Dada: the 4th-3rd centuries B.C. for the Thasian amphorae, the 3rd -ist centuries B. C. for the Rhodian amphorae and 2nd -ist centuries for Cnidian amphorae.

D. Tudor

121

has the same opinion as V. Pârvan with re-

gard to the Thasian amphorae but for him the penetration of the Rhodian amphorae took place in the 3rd-2nd centuries B. C. and that of amphorae from Cnidus in the 2nd -ist centuries B.C.;

the amphorae from Heraclea Pontica

penetrated into Dacia at about the same time as those from Thasos and the amphorae from Sinope during the 3rd-2nd centuries B. C.

The determination

of the provenance of the amphorae dated to the Ist century B. C. is very difficult because the vessels cease to bear stamps;

but this does not mean the

end of the trade of wine and oil in Dacia. V. Eftimie noted the predominance of Rhodian amphorae in Dacia during the 3rd-2nd centuries B. C.

123

and the presence North of the Danube of

amphorae from Heraclea Pontica and from other centres on the Black Sea shores in the ist century B. C. and sporadically in the next century.

15

lt is very difficult to establish a more exact dating of amphorae (especially of those unstamped) for many reasons:

the lack of information about most

of them and their fragmentary state of preservation, which means that it is not possible to determine their type or form, etc.

In consequence, vague

datings such as the 3rd -Ist centuries B. C. or the 3rd century B. C. -ist century A. D. occur frequently in the technical literature.

But in spite of these

difficulties it is possible to observe some situations, which are represented graphically in fig. 1. The chronological distribution of amphorae, with its unavoidable lack of precision, shows a certain evolution in the trade in southern wine and oil. The amphorae dated to the first two centuries of their penetration (the 4th-3rd centuries B. C.) are about three times fewer than those from the 2nd century B. C. -Ist century A. D.

The numerical increase in the amphorae during the

3rd -Ist centuries B.C. ceased in the next century.

Certainly, the most ac-

tive commerce of wines and oils in Dacia was in the 2nd -ist centuries B. C. The situation of the north-Danubian territories is sometimes different from that of some cities on the western and north-western coasts of the Black Sea.

The study published two decades ago

124

concerning the stamped

amphorae discovered in the Greek cities on the shores of the Romanian Black Sea pointed out the preponderance of Rhodes in the trade in wine and oils before the 2nd-Ist centuries B. C. recent statistic

125

‚

when the supremacy of Thasos began.

A

regarding the discoveries of stamped amphorae at Histria

established the following numerical order of their centres of provenance: Sinope, Rhodes, Thasos and

-

Cos, Cnidus,Chersonesus etc.

a long distance behind

-

Heraclea Pontica,

The majority of the stamped amphorae found

at Histria dated in the 2nd-Ist centuries B.C.

126

Another study

127

devoted

to the stamped amphorae discovered at Tyras, Histria, Tomi, Callatis, Bizone and Odessus, noted the absolute preponderance (with some fluctuations) of amphorae coming from Sinope, Rhodes and Thasos. The Pontic cities above mentioned have a similar situation to the GetoDacian territories in the following respects: Rhodes in the commerce of wines and oils

1) the important part played by

and 2) the chronology of the con-

tinual variation of the different categories of stamped amphorae (and in consequence the chronology of the trade with the centres of provenance of stamped amphorae).

It seems that the opinion 128 concerning the absence of

the Pontic Greeks as intermediaries between the centres of production and the north-Danubian areas continues to be valid.

Certainly this possibility is

not to be excluded, but most of the trade took place directly between the sellers, from their centres of production,

and the indigenous purchasers.

A difficult problem is caused by the discoveries of Thasian coins and amphorae.

It is noticed in Dacia that the discoveries of Thasian stamped

amphorae date only from the 4th-3rd centuries B. C., while the coin finds attest a large spread of the Thasian tetradrachmas from about the middle of the 2nd century B. C. to the first two decades of the next century. 129 I seems that lack of precision in the determination of unstamped amphorae, with many of them actually coming from Thasos, explains the contradiction between the dating of the Thanian amphorae and the dating of the Thasian tetradraclimas found in Dacia. In fact, the problem concerns the chronology of the Thasian trade in Dacia. 130 16

From the study of the trade in wine and oil which developed in Dada over a period of about five centuries, the following general conclusions can be reached: The commerce of southern wines and oils is attested in the territories of present day Moldavia, Muntenia and Oltenia.

The great number of stamped

or unstamped amphorae discovered in Dada prove the existence of an intensive exchange of products which took place even in the small Geto-Dacian settlements.

This commerce covered probably the whole territory of Dacia,

but the trade in wine and oils carried in amphorae was specifically in the extra-Carpathian territories.

However, the discoveries from Poiana and

Cetäeni suggest the existence of a trade in wine and oil over the mountains in the intra-Carpathian areas. The trade in wines and oils played a big part in the general exchange of products in the territories situated to the North of the lower Danube.

Gradual-

ly, with the development of the trade, some places of exchange were preferred both by the foreign merchants and the indigenous population.

These became

important commercial centres, like the above mentioned Dacian settlements of Muntenia and Oltenia.

Certain products were preferred to others in the

different Geto-Dacian settlements.

Also trade was carried on by merchants

coming from only certain regions of the Greek and Graeco-Roman world.

The

provenance of amphorae discovered in Dacia attest firstly the presence of Rhoclian merchants, who are more numerous than the Thasian and Pontic traders, who occur in the Dacian trade at the same time.

In any case the

trade in wine and oil in Dacia is orientated to the Aegean and Pontic producers. This trade developed permanently until the conquest of Dada by the Romans and continues in different conditions in the centuries after that event. lt seems that some changes in the intensity and the volume of trade took place at the end of the ist century B. C.

The numerical decrease of the dis-

coveries of amphorae dated to the Ist century B. C. is not accidental.

As in

former centuries, the political and economic transformations into centres of production and the political and military situation of some areas influenced the intensity and the orientation of the commercial exchanges; 11 now, in the ist century B. C. the reduction in the volume of trade in Dacia is the consequence of complex causes.

Among these were the Roman advance into the Balkans,

Roman policy concerning the Greek cities and the change of general orientation, as regard its direction, in the trade of Dacia with the Graeco-Roman world. The principal feature of the trade in wine and oil in Dacia until the Roman conquest was the absolute predominance of the Aegean and Pontic producers. 2.

Trade in pottery.

The numerous and systematic archaeological re-

searches over the last two decades have provided for the study of imported pottery a great number of vessels occurring in the Geto-Dacian La Tne sites. The study of this pottery is very important not only for the establishment of the chronology of Geto-Dacian sites and for the distinction of the influences exerted on the local pottery (both problems known in archaeological research for a long time) but also for the increase of understanding of the Dacian trade with the classical Graeco-Roman world.

17

Imported pottery occurs frequently in the Geto-Dacian settlements from the 2nd century B. C. -Ist century A. D. and consists of vessels of different forms and size, decorated or not, made with atechnical skill always superior to locally made products.

There are

132

in particular high or low dishes and

saucers with a simple or strongly pronounced profile. They are decorated either with palm leaves and little lines arranged concentrically inside, or with vegetable decoration in relief (usually leaves and stalks) on their lips and sides. There are also flat plates with low rims sometimes decorated similarly to dishes and saucers. The vessels of kantharos type of an elaborate form, with handles (p1. XXIII, XXIV) are the most numerous among the imported pottery. Their forms present many particular details and varied decoration: simple forms with straight lips, semi-circular or angular handles free of decoration or painted partially in red, other forms with a short stem and with horizontal handles with zoomorphic addition on the top (heads of birds) and lastly the unique ones with elaborate decoration similar to that discovered at Racatau (p1. 48). These kantharoi took the place of the beautiful "Delian" bowls discovered rarely in the area to the North of the Danube, although their frequent imitation by the Geto-Dacians supposes the existence of a larger number originally than is suggested by the finds. The Geto-Dacians appreciated and used the Hellenistic pitchers and jugs (Pl. 23, 47, 48 more of them were decorated with geometric and floral patterns) and also the delicate little vessels for scent and ointments (p1. 27, 49). Certainly, many homes of the indigenous aristocracy were lighted by -

imported Greek lamps and were adorned with Hellenistic vessels decorated in relief and with terra sigillata pottery. The

Geto-Dacians did not possess all the forms of Hellenistic and

Roman pottery, for some of them were too expensive for the ordinary people, but the fragments of imported vessels found in Dacia prove that they knew of many of the products made, with superior skill, by the Greek potters. The imported pottery is classified in the catalogue of the present book as follows: painted pottery, pottery decorated in relief and terra sigillata, and other categories. From the point of view of the forms of vessels, the classification takes into account the existing number of pieces (there are no groups or types represented only by a few examples). There are the following important groups: dishes, saucers, plates, jugs and pitchers, kantharoi and cups with two handles, lamps, unguentaria, bowls and other categories. It must be noticed that the distribution of vessels in the above mentioned categories takes account first of the forms and only secondly of the decoration. The imported vessels have not been classified into luxury pottery and domestic pottery for two main reasons: 1) we do not want to treat the forms which differ in structure in the same category; 2) a strict demarcation (according to modern criteria) between luxury and domestic pottery was not possible in antiquity because the criteria of such a distribution differed from one region to another.

For

example the Geto-Dacians considered as luxury products the vessels of kantharos type and the jugs (of lagynos and lekythos types) which were, on the other hand, commonplace in all the Greek cities. From our point of view we consider that the indigenous populations appreciated all the imported pottery as luxury products marketed at different prices depending not only on their value but also especially on local taste. 18

The imported fragmentary or intact pottery (regardless of the kinds of vessels and their dating) have been found in the territories of 52 localities, mainly in settlements, more rarely in cemeteries or as isolated finds

(Pl.

3).

Of

these localities 13 are situated in Moldavia, 18 in Muntenia and Oltenia, 20 in Transvlvania and in Dobrudja (at Hirova which had an important geographical position for trade).

In Moldavia, the discoveries in the area of contact between

the plateau of BIrlad and the plain of Jijia (Ciurea, Dorobant, Tometi), and especially on the Siret (among them, the important Dacian settlements at Bradu, Ràc.tu, Poiana and at Barboi, at the mouth of the Siret) and of the sub-Carpathian zone (Piatra Nearn, Piatra

oimului, Tg. Ocna) are mentioned.

In Muntenia and Oltenia the most numerous localities where imported pottery occurred are situated on the course of the Danube or in its neighbourhood (from Braila, and continuing with Clrai, Ulmeni, Coconi, Zimnicea, Celei to Dunreni);

certainly there are finds in the other zones (the well known Dacian

settlements of Popeti, Bucharest, Crsani, Tinosu, Ceteni).

The most

numerous discoveries in the intra-Carpathian territories, are situated in their southern zone (from East to West:

Cernatu, SfIntu Gheorghe, Cuciulata,

Arpau de Sus, Sibiu-Guteria, Tilica, Costeti, Gràditea Muncelului); finds are also noted in some other well known Dacian settlements and fortifications, such as Pecica, Craiva and Cetea. teni, Ulmu, Radovanu, Giurgiu Stnnicoar

The finds from 8 localities (M1u-

in Moldavia and Muntenia,

Checea, Oradea,

and Timooara, in the intra-Carpathian zone) form a total of 52,

and are uncertain owing to either the lack of information concerning the kind of find (amphorae or other pottery) or the lack of precision with regard to the place of discovery and the chronology of the archaeological material. It is noted in relation to the diffusion of imported pottery (see Table 2) that, as with amphorae, the discoveries are more frequent in the extraCarpathian areas of Dacia (32) than in the intra-Carpathian zone (20).

How-

ever, the geographical distribution according to the place of discovery is totally insignificant if it does not take into account the existing number of pieces:

90% of the whole quantity of imported pottery found in Dada comes

from the extra-Carpathian territories and only three Dacian settlements in Moldavia account for 70% of it (Rtcät1u, Poiana and Bradu).

Among the sites

of the Muntenian territory is noted the well known settlement of Popeti on the Arge, where 16% of the total of imported amphorae from Dacia have been discovered.

The result is that, if the four great Geto-Dacian settle-

ments (Ràctãu, Poiana, Bradu and Popeti) are excluded from the calculation, then the quantitative distribution of imported pottery according to the locality of the finds is about the same as that in the Geto-Dacian settlements which are situated either in intra-Carpathian or in extra-Carpathian territories. It seems that the settlement of Pecica on the Lower Mure, on account of the great quantity of imported pottery discovered in it, is an exception to the above mentioned situation. 133

The finds from this site will somewhat change

the proportion of imported pottery found in the intra-Carpathian zone of Dada.

We cannot make other more detailed observations concerning this

problem, because of our lack of knowledge about the quantity of finds. It is difficult to discover the reasons for the extreme in pottery in the intra-Carpathian areas.

19

paucity of the trade

The following could be suggested

as the principal reasons:

the difficulties of carriage of some breakable pro-

ducts on the rough roads, and the small number of Dacian settlements (rather than strongholds) which have been investigated in the intra-Carpathian areas. It is noted that in the settlements of the neighbourhood of Dacian citadels from the Ortie mountains (to the extent of their investigation), the imported pottery does occur.

But there is a special situation, which has been noticed,

namely the existence of an indigenous pottery which different in fashion and pretension (for that reason it is called pottery "of the court") from the pottery of the other zones of Dacia and which is comparable sometimes with Hellenistic products. 134 One must pay attention, in connection with the comparison of the discoveries of different zones of Dacia, to the fact that only two Geto-Dacian settlements of Moldavia (Bradu and Rctu), investigated in recent years, have furnished over 40% of the total imported pottery discovered in Romania.

It

is hardly probable that future excavations in the intra-Carpathian zone will still arrive at results which could be comparable, in this respect, with those from Rácätäu and Bradu:

a simple survey of all the discoveries occurring in

the intra-Carpathian zone over a long period of research, gives no indications in this direction.

And more, the imported pottery brought to light from the

two Moldavian settlements in the last years had added to the abundant quantity of such material known at Poiana long ago. In the light of the present state of research, the absolute preponderance of the extra-Carpathian territories in discoveries of imported pottery can be seen, and it is impossible to see a satisfactory explanation of the rarity of such finds in the intra-Carpathian zone.

It is possible that the general orien-

tation of trade in Dada, and the nature of the principal products brought and sold in its different areas, constitute another reason, besides the difficulties of transport and the limited extent of research, but this last problem will be discussed in the final conclusion. Ihave now investigated the field of imported pottery and the frequency and the diffusion of the principal categories of Hellenistic and Roman vessels. It is noticed, taking into account all the discoveries, that there is a quantitative preponderance of small vessels, followed by those of middle size;

and also

that the Geto-Dacians preferred certain types of vessel. Painted pottery, pottery decorated in relief and terra sigillata (excluding the painted kantharoi, the cups with dots in relief and bowls) represent a little over 12% of the total of imported pottery (Table 2).

This pottery is

distributed uniformly in the whole territory of Dacia (p1. 4).

There are to

be noted the discoveries in the settlements of Bradu, Rctãu and Poiana (in Moldavia), those of Popeti and Bucarest (in Muntenia) and those of Grditea Muncelului and Pecica

(in Transylvania).

of Dionysos (p1. 23, 48), discovered at Poiana,

135

The jug with the mask

is the most remarkable

piece among the finds. The geographical and quantitative distribution of the types of vessels presents the following evidence (Table 2): 21%;

jugs and pitchers (p1. 5):

about

7% in Moldavia, in the southern half of Mun-

tenia an(l in the South of Transylvania; (p1. 6):

dishes, saucers and plates:

kantliaroi and cups with two handles

over 32% in the se t tlements on the Siret and on the Bistrija in 20

Moldavia, in the middle and the South of Muntenia and rare in Transylvania; lamps (p1. 5),over 3% discovered in the same settlements on the Siret, in the central and southern Muntenia and in the South of Transylvania;

unguentaria

(Pl. 5), over 5% in the southern half of Moldavia, in central Muntenia and in the South of Transylvania; bowls (Pl. 7): tenia; other categories: 15. 5%

over 3% only in Moldavia and Mun-

The spread and the frequency of the principal types of vessels in Dacia are important in two ways:

first it shows a certain preference in the regions for

the different types and secondly the same types show generally the zones where their centres of production were situated. lt can be seen from the catalogue that different sorts of vessels occurred generally in various quantities in the Geto-Dacian settlements of Moldavia and Muntenia.

It is noticed, for example, that dishes, saucers, plates and ves-

sels of Kantharos type held an absolute predominance in the discoveries of the territory of present day Moldavia (especially in the great settlements on the Siret) and that pitchers, jugs and bowls found in the Geto-Dacian settlements of Muntenia are more numerous than those discovered in Moldavia. These peculiarities are the result of two principal causes: the preference of the indigenous population for certain types of vessels and more especially the different sources whence the pottery was imported. Taking into account the fact that these vessels consisted of domestic types which were spread over a large geographical area, it is not possible to make other affirmations than those concerning the existence of the principal centres of production of the imported amphorae in the Black Sea and Aegean basins. lt seems that the workshops on the northern shores of the Black Sea furnished the majority of imported pottery found in the Geto-Dacian settlements of Moldavia.

This fact is attested by the analogies between the usual forms of

pottery occurring in Romania, in the eastern areas of Dacia, and the pottery discovered in the Greek cities situated in the South of the territory of present day USSR.

But more, even the analogies concerning the unusual and rare

forms indicate a provenance from the Greek cities.

lt seems also that the

interesting kantharos decorated with zoomorphic and anthropomorphic patterns discovered at Rc.tu

136

came from North of the Black Sea or via that area,

as did the series of jugs with human masks (from which some pieces have been found at Piatra Neam

(Bttca Doamnei 137 ), Poiana 138 and Barboi 139

which were also manufactured in the cities on the northern coasts of the Black Sea. The imported amphorae found in the Geto-Dacian settlements of Muntenia came probably from the workshops of the Greek cities situated on the western shores of the Black Sea or on the coasts of the Aegean (especially from Asia Minor). 140 The few discoveries up until now in Transylvania present a rather different situation.

lt is noticed, in spite of the small number of finds, that the imported

forms of pottery occurred in the south-eastern half of Transylvania and especially that those recovered in the settlements from the area of the great bend of the Transylvanian Olt came also (probably) from the Pontic workshops, but by the intermediary of the settlements situated over the mountains.

21

Finally

(anticipating an observation contained in a future chapter), the forms of imported pottery in south-western Transylvania and particularly those which have inspired the local imitations datable to the ist century A.D. ,came from the regions situated in the West of Dacia, especially from Pannonia. 1411 The chronological distribution of the imported pottery reveals some interesting general conclusions.

Some precise information is necessary before

the statistical data concerning this problem can be assessed. The number of imported vessels, whose territorial spread has been presented above, reaches a total of 383 pieces which have been found, with some rare exceptions, in the Geto-Dacian settlements and fortifications.

Other

pieces must also be added to this total, but their number is unknown because they are either fragmentary or lost.

We will pay attention in the following

observations only to the pieces which have been exactly determined.

lt must

also be noticed that the possibilities of determination of the forms have been decisive for the establishment of the chronology of the above mentioned vessels. The dating of the vessels of uncertain type (because of tl-eir fragmentary state of preservation) has generally been fixed according to the chronology either of the cultural layers or of the sites where they have been found. The chronological distribution of the imported pottery is based mainly upon the existing chronological determinations concerning their centres of production from the Hellenistic and Roman world.

It includes also the imported vessels

which were manufactured or used during the end of the 3rd century B. C. and a part or the whole of the following century, in addition to the imported pottery dated from the 2nd century B. C. The imported vessels are dated in the following periods, according to the existing chronological framework concerning both the centres of production and their places of discovery: tury B.C.;

the Ist century B. C.; A. D.;

the 3rd-2nd century B. C.;

only the 2nd cen-

the end of the 2nd century-the beginning of the Ist century B. C. the ist century B. C. -the beginning of the ist century

the ist century A. D.

lt is not possible to establish shorter periods

than those mentioned above, owing to the present state of knowledge concerning the dating of a part of the imported pottery and to the presence of some types of vessels which cannot be dated more exactly. It is to be noted with regard to the principal categories of imported vessels (fig. 2) that only a few categories of pottery are present and that they are very rare in the first and the second of the periods mentioned above (the 3rd-2nd centuries B. C. and the 2nd century B.C.), with the exception of the "Delian" bowls, of which there are only a little over a dozen pieces.

All categories of

vessels are represented in the following periods, with numerical fluctuations from one century to another. The painted pottery from the first period continues its quantitative increase until about the middle of the ist century B.C., when it begins to decrease gradually, becoming extremely rare in the following century.

On the contrary,

the pottery decorated in relief and terra sigillata increased progressively from the end of the 2nd century B. C. to the ist century A. D.

Dishes, saucers and

plates, vessels of Kantharos type and lamps are numerous and increase progressively.

Numerically, the presence of jugs and pitchers is almost

22

TABLE 2,

U

cent. B.C.

at I cent. B.C.

cent. B.C.

Site i III vvrni III ivvii VIII ix

I

Arpaude Bus

2

BaiboØ

3

sonçuntl

4

Bradu

at Iat cent. B.C. I cent. A.D.

en1dcent.eariy In'

III rd -1I nd cent. B.C. No.

POTTERY

Iu III wvvr VII vIn

ru III iv

I -

teIB.0

earlyiA.t

I

cent. A.D. Total

vvi VII vm

rumrvvvlvll VIII

lvvVIII

1

5 n

n

7 a

1

1

I

7*0

‚

0

1

Comments

in Ell tvvvr VII Val

7

3

17

1

pottery amphorae?

29--r,

n 5

Braqov

6

Br011a

7

Bucureti

8

I

I

I 1

1

I

2 2

1

1 1

1

1

n

'Butea

10

Celel

Ii

Cernatu

12

Cet54en1

13

Cetea

14

Checea

15

Clurea

16

Coconl Costetl

18

Cralva

19

Cr9nani

20

Cuciulata

21

Dorobant

22

Dunhrenl

23

Gherla

n

2-,2 1+

fl

1

1

2 n

n

s

n

n 0

0

1

0

2

3+

2 1

1

1

2

2

2

j

n

1

2

1

12+ 3

3

1

1 fl

0

0

0

n

Glurgiu

B?r5ova

n

1

GrSdI9tea Muncelolel

Ipotet1

1

2

24

27

1 1

1

25

26

+

1

0

17

12

1

C6iärnt

9

1

n

4

1

2

33

18

N

N 1 1

28

MIu9tesi

29

Oradea

30

Pecica

31

Plstra Neamt

32

Piatra clmului

33

P1oetl

34

P01mm

35

Popestl

36

Radovanu

37

Rhc5tu

1

same piece

a

0

I

I

before 106

I

same piece

A.D. 7 1 1 1 1

1

n

3 1

7+

3

ii

1

4+

I 1

5

1

1

3

3

3

2

4

216

2

11416116

18

N

I 76-i.

N

38

Satuhmg (S6cele)

39

Sf

40

BIble

41

S1gh1oara

42

STnuiecar6

.

2

1

n 9 N

3

1

5 6 1

3

1

1

4

I

I 6 1

2

1

9

1

2 16 1

Slobozia

44

Tilica

45

Tlm1oara

46

.J'j50

47

Tg.Ocna

48

Tomett

49

Ulmen'

50

IJimu

51

VaduSSpat

52

ZimnIcea

1

1

29

a 12

24

2

2

itI+n

1

1

1

1

Gbeorghe

43

47 -c n

1 i

1

2

1

1

1

1 I

I

0

1

1

2 1

1 1

3

2

10-i-

3

‚

1. 2

2 1

1

2 a

n

1

1 3 1

1

7

II

Intermediate between those decorated in relief and the dish

Total per category

II

overall total

=

Lamps

6 a

2 1 2

10+n

I - Painted pottery VI

ii

VU

=

1

5

24

13 a

it 4 2 9 6 2 4 N

VIII

-

6 1 134

43 N

it

U = Relief decorated and terra siglllata Unguentarla

5

LU

=

13

I 2

10

44 364 1 4 n n

0

50

Dishes, large bowls, plates

Other categories or uncertain

IX

=

Bowls

1

2 N

57 N

iv

=

2 N

53 N

Jugs and flagons

n - number of pieces uncertain

3 48

N

1 14 26 N

5 57

6 7 ii

146 N

V = Kantharl and cups with handles -

Many pieces

30 a

360 N

383

3 doublestamped pieces

constant in the different periods in contrast to the unguentaria which, it seems, are more numerous at the end of the 2nd-the beginning of tt-e ist century B. C. and in the ist century A. D.

Lastly, it is seen that the other types of pottery

(which have not been included in the above mentioned categories owing to the nature of existing information concerning them) also increase progressively. Taking into account only the number of vessels and not the different categories of pottery, their distribution produces the results shown graphically in fig. 3. The distribution of the pieces (taking into consideration only the pieces determined) in the periods longer than those above mentioned, is the following: -

the 3rd-2nd centuries-the beginning of the Ist century B.C.:

77 pieces

in addition to a few others dated especially in the 3rd century B.C.; -

the ist century B. C. -ist century A. D. (without, of course, the pieces included in the first period):

about 300 (approximately 100 from the ist

century B. C. and about 200 from the ist century A.D.). In conclusion, we believe that the statistical data gives a picture of the progressive increase of the different categories of pottery until the Ist century A. D. with the above mentioned exceptions concerning the painted pottery and excepting of course, the "Delian" bowls whose forms disappear in this period. 142 lt seems that the scarcity of the imported painted pottery to the end of the ist century B. C. and its rarity in the ist century A. D. is directly connected with the occurrence and the development of the indigenous production of painted vessels which were able to cover the local needs and implicitly to limit the possibilities of the marketing of imported painted pottery. the statistics demonstrate

At the same time,

the continuous and progressive increase of the

quantity of imported pottery as the period of the Roman conquest of Dacia grows nearer. *

*

*

lt can be seen from the catalogue of discoveries and from the section above, that the presence of the Hellenistic and Roman pottery in Dacia, especially in some certain areas, is a usual and natural fact.

There was no quantitative in-

crease of Hellenistic and Roman pottery to the detriment of other products imported from the Graeco-Roman world, but in fact a general increase in volume of Dacian trade. However, we must not lose sight of the fact are made in the future

-

-

even if further discoveries

that the proportion of pottery in comparison with

that of other Hellenistic and Roman products in trade, is still small.

143

For

example it is enough to compare the number of imported vessels above mentioned and that of amphorae which have also an incomparably higher price. Very likely the traders, either Greek and Orientals or Romans, preferred to roam the roads of Dacia with the merchandise which gave them a good income.

Probably, the principal obstacle in the way of the marketing of a

large volume of Hellenistic and Roman pottery in Dacia, was, apart from the difficulties of carriage of breakable and voluminous merchandise, the indigenous pottery, which produced remarkable pieces similar to those known in the field of painted pottery.

25

The situation concerning the discoveries of imported pottery in Dacia is not unique in comparison with other territories situated outside the frontiers of the Graeco-Roman world;

d what is more, this situation differs only in

the details of the presence of tue varius

categoies of imported pottery, as

a consequence of the particular features

fthe production of workshops from

different areas and of local demands, but in no case from the pint of view of the quantity represented by imported pttery. logues published recently,

144

We refer to the existing cata-

concerning the southern area of the USSR, for a

comparison with the territories adjoining the Grae co-Roman world and situated near Dacia, and consequently with the products of appi xirnately the same centres which sent their merchandise to the Danubian-Carpathian areas. There, as in Dacia, pottery played a small part among the Graeco-Roman imported products;

trade consisted especially of wine, oil and sculpture. 145

The trading of pottery in the Carpathian-Danubian areas, in the light of our present knowledge, covered especially extra-Carpathian Dacia, and consequently it has produced there the great number of finds, finds which are also remarkable from the point of view of their quality.

The same situation as in the trade

of southern wines and oils is noticeable in the exchange of pottery;

certain

centres existed whose products were marketed. If the great quantity of pottery discovered at Popeti is explained by the local needs existing in this settlement of long duration and large area, then the long duration and the large area of the settlements of Poiana and especial lt of Bradu and Räcátãu can be explained by the existence there of the market centres where the Graeco-Oriental traders sold their great quantity of pottery. In this case, the natives of Rctu and Bradu were the intermediaries between the Geto-Dacian neighbouring areas and the traders arriving from elsewhere. We believe that the impressive quantity of imported vessels found in the two settlements and its proportion to the whole pottery discovered in Dacia (40%) is a telling argument for this being the situation.

The fact may be added that

the two settlements are situated on the banks of the Siret, the course of this river being an excellent link between the Geto-Dacians from the territory of present day Moldavia and the Greeks on the western and northern coasts of the Black Sea. lt is also noticeable that the trading in Dacia in Graeco-Roman pottery was orientated towards the centres of production on the Black Sea and in the Aegean basin. The commerce in ointments and perfumes was also orientated towards the centres of the Aegean basin and eastern Mediterranean (where the Oriental centres were famous for these products).

The Roman domination

over the Balkan areas (including Dobrudja) does not seem to have disturbed the trade, which continued to be in the hands of the Greek traders.

Taking

into account the number of finds, the partial orientation of the intra-Carpathian settlements towards the West is only an ascertained fact, without other importance or significance. But the most important conclusion from the study of the impo±'ted pottery concerns the fact of the continuous and progressive increase of the quantity of Graeco-Roman pottery in Dacia, parallel to the approach of the date of its inclusion in the empire;

it is proof of the increasing possibilities of participa-

tion of the Carpathian-Danubian territories in the exchange of materials with the Graeco-Roman world. 26

3.

The commerce in bronze products and vessels

Vessels and objects

•

of bronze of Graeco-Roman fashion from the Second Iron Age discovered in Romania have been noticed, besides the pottery, in the historical-archaeological literature about Dacia. 146

The information, in the main, is liLited to

simple and general references.

The interest of the scholars was attracted

only, either by products out of ordinary 147 and grouped in small deposits (hoards) 148 or by the great number of finds in some Geto-Dacian settlements and fortifications . 149 of bronze

-

The number of the Graeco-Roman vessels and objects

the majority in a fragmentary state of preservation

-

discovered

in the Geto-Dacian settlements and cemeteries, has increased in the course of time, so that at present they are an ordinary element among the finds of those sites. The study of the bronze objects, and especially of the bronze vessels, reveals some interesting and varied features.

The large majority of them

are mass-produce (dozens and hundreds of them are identical) and they are scattered in the vast territories which are situated either within or without the Graeco-Roman world (and consequently they are well-known).

These

vessels and objects of bronze, as products subjected to the fashion and to the variable taste of the buyers, changed their forms, and more frequently their details, at not very long intervals and in consequence most of them can be dated to limited periods.

The determination of these limited periods is based

upon the time (in general of short duration) needed for their production and upon the fact that these products were not in use for a long time, being perishable.

Some vessels of bronze are dated, and constitute a means of dating other

archaeological material within the limits of periods which are shorter than those of the circulation of different types of ancient coins. The production of vessels and objects of bronze during the period investigated by the present book was a skilled craft of the specialized workshops situated in important centres of the Graeco-Roman world, some of them, like Alexandria, being famous owing to the abundance and the fineness of their products.

The products of the Campanian workshops, which were very wide-

spread, were also famous.

The other workshops, existing in almost all

Greek cities, had not reached the celebrity and the prestige of those situated in Alexandria and Campania.

Other workshops comparable, from the point

of view of the quantity and the quality of products, with those from Alexandria and Campania (as for example the workshops of Gallia), either did not exist at this time, or their activity was only just beginning.

An understanding of

these facts contributes to the determination both of the centres of production of bronzes and of the direction of penetration of these products into Dacia or into other areas situated on the boundaries of the Graeco-Roman world.

The

identification of the centres of production dated from the end of the ist century A. D.

‚

and particularly from the 2nd century A. D. will be more and more dif-

ficult and especially the provenance of products without the stamps of their workshops. Various types of vessels and objects of bronze have been discovered in Dacia., 150 from the domestic implements of the kitchen and fine lamps to the small pieces which were used for different purposes. There are numerous types of saucers and bowls, with legs or not, with handles fixed or movable, 27

undecorated or decorated with palmettes, leaves, dolphins, ovolos, astragali etc. and there are also a large number of casseroles, paterae and colanders. The little buckets with different profiles and with the extremities of handles decorated with heads of swans, the pitchers of wine whose forms and handles were among the most beautiful pieces of this kind, occur ordinarily in the great settlements. The lamps of bronze, simple or with skilled decoration, candelabra with simple forms or richly decorated, figurines and anthropomorphic appliques occur more rarely among the finds. We will present in the following, a summary survey of the principal categories of bronze vessels discov ered i n Dac i a i51 (the terminology of the different types of bronze vessels is used in Romania more rarely than that of the amphorae or other pottery). There are various types of saucers and bowls, which differ in the details of their forms. The type with pedestal and movable handles has two variants belonging to different periods: the first variant (p1. 51) is with ovolos and astragali on the lip, ovolos on the rim of the pedestal and trapezoidal joint, with ribs on the superior part; the second variant (p1. 38, 51) differs from the first in the narrowness of the lip and the simplicity of the decoration of its rim, the lack of ovolos on the rim of the pedestal, the profiled joint decorated with a palmette, fret leaf (30/a) etc. Two other types occur less frequently in Dacia: one of them has a semi-calotte form with a low pedestal and a fixed handle decorated with snakes or do1phins 53 while the other type has a trapezoidal form with rings which jointed the body of the vessel onto the tripod (15/3). The saucer with handle and joint decorated with circular ribs (from Craiva, 11/a )is a singular vessel. The cauldrons are also more rare in Dacia. The type of concave form and rounded bottom has two variants which differ in having the lip turned up outside (30/b) or inside (29/a). The casseroles, which are more numerous in Dacia, have the following variants: angular body (11/c), truncated cone body with rounded sides, some of them being stamped (18/a, b) and bottom of pedestal form (34).

The little buckets

-

situlae

-

which are very numerous in the Geto-Dacian

settlements, have the following variants: with shoulder and straight lip (10/8) or with ovoidal form with a vertical border to the lip (10/10), with the extremities of the handles decorated with heads of swans or with the handles thickening in the middle, and with various joints decorated with dolphins, leaves with the form of a heart with spine and hooks, or with Medusa or Faun masks, etc. Pitchers, which are numerous in Dacia, present various forms: with the mouth in the form of a club 154 (with the handles decorated with heads of lions, dolphins, human masks (8; 10/18), with spout (13), with the body in the form of a cone and the handles with antennae (16), with short spout, and the body in the form of a cone, with leg and outraised handle (18/c), with the body in the form of a bitruncated cone and with a large mouth (23; 24/b). There are also vessels of krater type (10/32), the colanders (of indeterminate type owing to their fragmentary state of preservation), paterae with the handles in the shape of a ram's head (25/c), candelabra trilychnoi (12/a, 19/h), simple (19/3), or decorated lamps (25/e; 27/r), fragments of statuettes (10/26; 11 /V). 28

A lot of the imported vessels of bronze have signs of some repair which has obviously been made by the local artisans;

other vessels are variants

(which differ very little between them) of some types well known in the GraecoRoman or in the barbarian world.

Some scholars, taking into consideration

the repaired vessels and the variants of the vessels above mentioned, have exaggerated the number of the imitative pieces discovered in Dacia and also the possibilities of the Geto-Dacians in the field of the sculptural arts.

We

will discuss this problem in the special chapter devoted to the Geto-Dacian imitations of Graeco-Roman bronzes.

We consider, until the occurrence of

some conclusive proof concerning the existence of the local imitations, that the products whose bronze and technical execution are identical with the similar pieces known in other countries, are all imported. The geographical distribution (Pl. 8) of the bronzes in the different zones of the Carpathian-Danubian countries is different from that of amphorae and pottery.

The finds of bronzes are scarce in Moldavia, more numerous in

the central and southern area of Muntenia and very abundant in the great meander of the Olt and especially in the area between the confluence of the Tlrnave rivers with the Mure

and the southern Carpathians and there are

stray finds in north-eastern Oltenia, Banat and in the northern half of Transylvania. The well known Geto-Dacian settlements and fortifications are present in the list of the discoveries.

The finds occur in Moldavia (with one exception)

only in the settlements and fortifications of Piatra Neam Rcàtu, Poiana and Barboi.

(Bitca Doamnei),

The finds of Muntenia and Oltenia, are noticed

in the settlements of Popesti, Crsani, Tinosu, Bucharest, Ocnia

157

and

Polovragi (the place with the largest number of finds). Bronze pieces have been discovered in the settlements of Braov (Pietrele lui Solomon) and Dainic, which are situated in the East of the intra-Carpathian area.

The

Dacian settlements and fortifications of Costeti, Luncani (Piatra Roie), Grditea Muncelului, Cáptlna, Tulica, Sibiu (Guteria), Craiva and Cetea are situated in the area of the maximum concentration of the finds, with regard to both the number of the localities of discovery and the quantity of finds. However, only to enumerate the settlements and fortifications mentioned above is not sufficient for the analysis of the quantitative distribution of the vessels and objects of bronze in the different areas of Dacia.

For that reason,

we will present in the following, some statistics of the number of discoveries (Table 3).

9% of the total of vessels and objects of bronze included in the

catalogue come from the Geto-Dacian settlements of Moldavia, where Poiana alone held 6% of the whole quantity of finds which have occurred in Dacia. 20% of the total of bronze pieces have been found in Muntenia and Oltenia (the largest quantity of bronzes being discovered at Popesti

-

10. 70% of the total).

The number of the bronze finds at Popeti is greater than the total of the bronze pieces discovered in all the other sites of Muntenia and Oltenia together. The total of certain finds in the extra-Carpathian area of Dacia (the present day territories of Moldavia, Muntenia and Oltenia) represents approximately 29% of the total of the number of vessels and objects of bronze coming from the Carpathian-Danubian countries.

The concentration of the vessels and objects

of bronze in intra-Carpathian Dacia represents 70% of the total of Dacian finds.

29

The majority of bronzes have been discovered in the Dacian citadels of Costeti, Craiva, Luncani (Piatra Roie) and Tilica. The finds of Costeti (approximately 30% of the total) are more numerous than those occurring in the whole of Dacia; the finds from Costeti with those of Craiva together represent 42% of the total of bronzes discovered in Romania. The predominance of intra-Carpathian Dacia is evident from the number of the bronze finds. The concentration of these products is especially noticed in the great GetoDacian settlements and fortifications situated either in extra-Carpathian areas or in the intra-Carpathian zones; the bronzes occur rarely in some settlements where other products such as amphorae or pottery have been found in great quantity (for example Bradu and Rãcãtãu in Moldavia, Ceteni in Muntenia). Other observations, less important than those concerning the geographical and quantitative distribution of vessels and objects of bronze, concern the numerical composition of the principal categories of bronze products discovered in Dacia. 158 certain pieces are registered in the catalogue, 22 saucers, bowls and cauldrons, 11 casseroles, paterae and colanders, 32 situlae, 12 pitchers and amphorae, 38 other categories and 43 pieces for unknown use (fig. 4). It can be seen from these figures that the natives preferred firstly situlae and secondly saucers, basins and cauldrons; it seems that they appreciated less casseroles, paterae, colanders, pitchers, amphorae and other categories of vessels and objects of bronze which have occurred more rarely in the finds. We must, however, take into account the fact that the products were of different market values and that they were sold at prices which differed very much from one category to another. Statuettes, candelabra and lamps were among the most expensive products, owing to their elaborate forms and the technical difficulties of their manufacture, in contrast with the -situlae and the cauldrons which were ordinary cheap vessels, manufactured easily. The proportions of the different categories of vessels and objects of bronze discovered in Dacia are not different from those found in other territories situated in the neighbourhood of the Graeco-Roman world. For example, the comparison, even generally, between the bronzes discovered in Dacia and the Graeco-Roman bronze products found in the South of the ussi, 158 in Pannonia 159 and in ancient Germany 160 has led to the conclusion that there are some similarities which maybe fortuitous. The few existing differences cannot change the conclusions we have reached, even if the centres of production are different in some measure, from one region to the other. The shape of objects can indicate, with enough certainty, their centre of production, or, at least, the regions where these centres are situated, even if the determination of the workshops is possible only in the case of products marked with the stamps of the workshop-owners. The valuable information of the ancient authors which has been mentioned in the archaeological literature for a long time, referring to the skill of the bronze and silver craftsmen in the Graeco-Roman world 161 and, the existence of a certain specialization in the production of the different workshops, 162 is very important for the study of vessels and objects of bronze.

30

TABLE 3.

ad No.

Site

1

Barbot

2

Berghin

3

BIrIBleti

4

Braov

5

Bucurestt

6

Clral

7

CpTlaa

S

Cerbl

9

Cetea

10

CostetI

11

Cralva

12

Crsani

13

Crtsttan

14

Dalntc

15

Dipa

16

Dunrirenl

17

Geoagtu?

to

Gi4dItea

I

Late

V

1I nd

I II

III

IV

I5t cent. B.C. 10t cent. A. D. -

18t cent. B.C.

Ist cent. B.C.

B.C.

BRONZES

V VI

I III

IV

V

VI

I II III

IV

V

Ist cent. VI

I

Luncant

20

Moigrad

III

IV

V

VI

Total per site

N

N

I

I

I

I I

1

I

1

2

I I

1

1

1

4

I

I 1

1 1

1

1 2

1

1

1

2 1

5

1 29

2 7

4

2

3

2 1

1

1

2

47

1

23

1 1

2 I

I

N

N 1

1

1

3

t

I N

N

Muacelutut 19

II

A.D.

2 I

1

3

N

3

1

t

4

1

9+ N

N

21

Ocnita

22

Pecica

23

Pescari

1

24

Pistra Neamt

I

25

polana

26

Folovragl

27

Popesti

N

t

I 2

2 1

N

1

2+ N 4

1+

1

2

1

1

t0- N

N N 1

6-.-

2*

N

N

3

I

t

N 1

1

1

28

Poroschla

20

R5clstäu

2

30

Sibiu

2-i. 1?

31

17

*

N

I 2 1

4)?)

I

tmteul

I

Stivanlel IS 13

Tlnosu

34

Ulmeni

35

Site of finds uncertain

36

Site of finds uncertain

3

1

Titipca

1

6+ N 4

I

5 I

I

1

1

1

1 1

2

3

9+

5*

2 8

3

1

1-f

NN 2

Overall total Dishes and layers

N

1

Total per category

=

1

IT

=

Casseroles

15 +N

21 +N paterae, colanders

III

2 2 20

N

=

Sltulae

IV

=

Jugs and amphorae

1

20? 33*

16

8

2

5

7

4

158

*

N

42

158

+

N

N 78 *14 V = Other categories

VI

=

Uncertain N =number of pieces uncertain

V. Parvan considered Dacia as try of bronze vessels",

163

"...

a market of the Graeco-Italian indus-

at a time when the bronze-ware products of the dif-

ferent centres of the Roman world were not well known.

The increase in the

number of bronze finds in Dacia and progress in the study of the vessels and objects of bronze, now make possible the statement that the overwhelming majority of these products came from the Italian workshops. workshops

164

The Campanian

which were famous in antiquity because of the quantity and the

quality of their bronzes have furnished the greater part of the vessels and objects of bronze discovered in Dacia.

Saucers, bowls, situlae, casseroles

(one of them found in the settlement of Fetele Albe was made by the off icina of L. Ansius Diodorus, according to its stamps), paterae, candelabra, and other categories of bronzes discovered in Dacia, came from the Campanian workshops. There are also other centres of provenance for some of the products discovered in Dacia.

For example, the bronze lamp with the handle in the shape

of two coiled snakes, discovered at Popeti, the fashion of which and its style of decoration shows an oriental (perhaps Alexandrian) provenance.

It seems,

in the light of present evidence, that the Alexandrian workshops supplied their famous vessels and objects of bronze especially to Italy and to the great Greek centres and furnished their ordinary products

-

their fashion and decoration

is hardly distinguishable from those of the products of other centres areas situated not far from Alexandria.

-

to the

The fashion and the quality of execu-

tion of other bronze vessels show a Greek provenance, coming from the workshops of cities situated in the neighbourhood of Dacia. 165 In conclusion, the majority of vessels and objects of bronze discovered in the Geto-Dacian territories came from Italian workshops, the products of other workshops, probably in the Greek cities, being rare and incidental.

The

final observations with regard to the vessels and objects of bronze discovered in Dacia, concern their chronological distribution during the 2nd century B. C. Ist century A. D.

-

We have mentioned above that the possibilities of dating of

bronzes are more numerous than those of other products, but also in this case, the scarcity of information concerning some of them and the fragmentary state of preservation of others makes it impossible to date them accurately. We have used for the study of the bronzes the following periods: century B.C., the end of the 2nd-the ist century B. C.

‚

the 2nd

the Ist century B.C.,

the Ist century B. C. -the Ist century A.D., and the Ist century A. D.

Two

categories of products existed in Dacia during the first period, while all the categories have occurred from the end of the 2nd century B. C. and the ist century B. C.

(fig. 4).

The numerical distribution of the bronzes in periods

comes from fig. 5. The greatest number of pieces belong to the period from the ist century B. C. -the ist century A. D. (these pieces cannot be dated only to the ist century or only to the Ist century A. D.).

The comparative study of the chronology of

finds, establishes the fact that the number of bronzes discovered in the Dacian settlements (or generally in Dacian areas) is always greater in the ist century A. D. than in the preceding century with the exception of the pieces discovered in the settlements which ceased during the ist century.

The number of vessels

and bronze objects increases considerably and progressively from the 2nd century B. C. to the ist century A. D. 32

The vessels and objects of bronze discovered in Dcia lead to the same conclusion concerning the continuous increase of the volume of Graeco-Roman merchandise in the Dacian market during the Second Iron Age and especially in the last century of the existence of the Dacian state.

The total number of

those pieces is greatest in the period between the 2nd century B.C. and ist century A.D. The publication of some works

166

devoted to the Graeco-Roman bronze

products discovered in other countries of Europe, makes it possible to compare the situation of Dacia with that existing in the other areas situated near or far away from the boundaries of the Roman Empire.

The comparison

concerns the bronzes of different European countries, dated only from the 2nd century B.C.-ist century A.D.

The conclusions of a comparative study cf

the products discovered in Dacia and those found in the other European countries is that, from the point of view of the number of bronze finds, Dacia belongs to the European area which is rich in this kind of discoveiy.

It is one

of the countries preferred by the Italian traders in Graeco-Roman bronzework.

The differences resulting from the comparison between the presence,

the territorial distribution and the density of bronze finds and those concerning other imported products are explained especially by the fact that the vessels and the objects of bronze were luxury products.

The routes of penetration

of Graeco-Roman bronze-work into the Carpathian-Danubian areas differed from those of amphorae and pottery.

The different populations of the Graeco-

Roman world appreciated products in bronze as being luxury goods.

In fact

these products were not ordinary objects even in the homes of the Greeks and the Romans.

These products must have often formed part of the rich plunder

taken by the populations situated near the Empire, during their attacks on the Roman provinces.

Probably some vessels and objects of bronze discovered

in the north-Danubian areas came from the plundering of the Roman territories by the Geto-Dacians during the last two centuries before the Roman conquest of Dacia, but trade furnished the majority of the bronze products discovered in Dacia.

These products had many advantages, such as their small compact

size for transport and a good price in the market, providing a big profit for the traders.

Bronze products have been discovered particularly in the great

fortified settlements and fortifications which were their principal market. The members of the aristocracy, priesthood and of the court of the Kings of the great Geto-Dacian settlements at Popeti and Poiana and of the settlements situated near the strong Dacian citadels, such as Tilica and Craiva and especially those in the zone of the Ortie mountains were the principal buyers of the vessels and objects of bronze.

This fact explains the density of dis-

coveries in the sites mentioned above and especially in the area of the Dacian capital.

The presence of Graeco-Roman (rather Graeco-Italian) bronze-

work in Dacia was the consequence of this trade.

We consider, taking into

account the evidence existing in other areas neighbouring the Graeco-Roman world and on the basis of our present knowledge concerning the trade of antiquity, that the bronzes discovered in Dacia were brought by the traders directly from the southern Italian centres of production or from the Greek cities situated near Dacia.

The bronzes occurring in Dacia, clearly confirm

the conclusion made on the basis of the pottery finds, with regard to the orientation of the trade of the Carpathian-Danubian territories (especially intraCarpathian Dada) towards the centres of production situated in the western 33

countries of the Roman Empire.

This western direction of trading, partially

explains the rarity of bronze-work in the eastern territories of Dacia.

The

chronological distribution of these products confirms the conclusion of the chapter concerning the progressive increase of Graeco-Roman goods in the Carpathian-Danubian areas and the progressive increase of the active participation of Dacia in the trade with the Roman empire, until the date of its conquest by the Romans.

34

4.

Silver products in Dada.

The products in precious metal consti-

tute a special category of the Carpathian-Danubian finds from the 2nd century B.C.

-

Ist century A.D.

Gold and particularly silver objects were

very numerous in Dacia and they have been the subject of many articles and general works in Romanian and foreign technical literature.

We will deal,

with one exception only, with the silver vessels, of various forms, decoration and dating;

the personal ornaments, because of their particular features

and problems constitute a vast material for a special work.

The exception

mentioned above is a piece of iron and silver which does not belong to the category of personal ornaments.

167

The numerical and geographical spread

of the silver vessels over Dacia is very reduced in comparison with that of other categories of archaeological material.

The silver vessels have been

discovered at Bucharest, Vedea, Calafat, STncrienj, Surcea and at unknown locality of Oltenia (Pl. 8).

The number of the types of vessels occuring in

Dacia is also not very great.

There are, generally speaking, four principal

types, two of them having many variants. The most simple form of silver vessel which is known in Dacia, is represented by the conical cups decorated either with a gilded narrow band on the rim or with a fine fluting on the inside of the vessel, below the rim. type of vessel has been discovered at Bucharest (1), Vedea ( 6/ a ), ( 4/ a -e) and in Oltenia (unknown locality) (7). type:

This

Sincr.ieni

There are two variants of this

conical cup (Bucharest, Stncräieni, Oltenia) and hemi-spherical cup

(Stncräieni, Vedea) either with the gilded band on the rim and circular incised decoration below the rim (STncrieni) or only with the circular incised decoration below the rim (Bucharest, Stncrieni). Two other conical cups with outside decoration, belong to the following type (4f-g) of goblets with pedestal and handles, which is represented by the fragmentary and intact pieces discovered at Sncräieni(4/f-o) and by the fragmentary pieces from Surcea ( 5/a -d).

This type has two principal variants,

one with the twisting handles ended with antennae and the other with the handles with a quasi-circular section bent onto the rim of the vessel.

Both

variants have been found at Stncrieni ‚169 and bases of pedestals belonging to this type have occured in the hoard of Surcea. Two other types of silver vessel

discovered in Dacia are represented

by the pitcher with one handle from Vedea (6/b) and by the saucer from Calafat (2). Finally to be noticed is a probable iron haft of a weapon decorated with silver applique in the shape of a lying lioness. The number of the silver objects mentioned above reaches a total of 25 pieces (24 vessels between them), but possibly the number of the silver pieces in Dacia was greater than that of the objects occuring in the finds. This possibility is suggested by the reliefs of Trajan's column which represent the Dacians coming back with plunder consisting partly of metal vessels probably of precious metal, 170 after their incursions over the Danube during the war from A. D. 101-102; the other reliefs represent the spoils of metal ressels 171 captured by the victorious Romans in Trajan's wars.

Vessels of

precious metal were very much appreciated by the royal courts of different peoples surrounding the Roman empire, and Dacia was no exception. Metal vessels almost always formed part of the gifts given by the Roman

35

governors to the "barbarian" kings for the security of their provinces. The essential problem of the silver vessels discovered in Dacia concerns their origin: are they Geto-Dacian indigenous products (after Graeco-Roman patterns) or Graeco-Roman imported products? This problem cannot be solved definitely, since there are a number of different doubtful points.

For

this reason, the objects included in the section of the catalogue devoted to silver products, are not separated (as in the case of the other categories of objects) into two parts, imported products and indigenous imitations of the imported products. We will present the principal arguments in favour of each hypothesis as to the origin of the silver vessels discovered in Dacia, but we do not hope to elucidate this problem conclusively. The silver vessels (with the exception of that discovered in Oltenia) have been found together with gold and electrum ornaments (in one case) or with silver ornaments alone in the other cases. As a result the study of the provenance of the silver vessels takes into account firstly the study of the ornaments which have been found with them. 172 The composition of these hoards shows a period of accumulation which is longer than the date of their burial, established on the basis of the date of the latest piece. The pieces composing them should have been brought together at different times and in consequence they come from different sources. For this reason, we think that the study of the origin of silver vessels must avoid a general analysis embracing all the types existing in Dacia and including all of them within the limits of one category of the hypothesis mentioned above. As a result we will discuss every type of vessel which has been mentioned above. The saucer-vessel from Calafat is almost the only vessel without problems concerning its provenance. The form, and especially the decoration of Alexandrian style point to a workshop of the Graeco-Roman world, 173 situated either in Alexandria or in southern Italy. The pitcher with a handle from Vedea, because of its bitnincated conical form, has been considered a local silver reproduction of the Dacian bitruncated conical vessel which is well known in pottery.;

174

but this pitcher

is an imported product made in an Italian, or more probably, a Greek workshop in the cities situated on the shores of the Black Sea. 175 An artisan, probably local, has repaired its handle. The undecorated bowls of conical or hemi-spherical shape constitute another type of silver vessel. The simple form of this type, even if it was originally Greek, may be an argument for calling it a Geto-Dacian indigenous product influenced by Graeco-Roman patterns. 176 But there are also some vessels from Thrace and the Graeco-Roman world which from the point of view of form, gilded decoration and dimensions are identical. 177 For this reason there are a number of possible centres of production. Similar problems occur with the goblets. The form, the ornamental patterns and the technique of gilding of all the types of goblets found in Dacia, are Graeco-Roman, 178 but the technical execution of their decoration differs very greatly from that of similar pieces in other countries and especially from that of Graeco-Roman products. While the ornamental patterns of these products are in relief (resulting from the hammering of the silver on a mould), those of the pieces from Slncrâieni

show an

i mpresse d

decoration, resulting from hammering with a sharp tool directly on the vessel.

36

The bases of the pedestal cups from Surcea have all their ornamental patterns in relief, like Graeco-Roman products.

These were discovered to-

gether with two phalerae, a small iron anvil and a silver bar.

The exis-

tence in Dacia of two categories of products is a result of these facts. There are products with Graeco-Roman forms and decoration and others whose technical execution is different from that of Graeco-Roman pieces; these products, and the iron anvil and the silver bar discovered at Surcea, prove the existence of an active local craft in Dacia.

179

In conclusion,

there are three possibilities concerning the provenance of the silver vessels: I)

They are the work of Geto-Dacian artisans who have drawn their inspiration from Graeco-Roman products.

2)

They were produced in Dacia, but by Greek itinerant artisans.

3)

They were produced in Graeco-Roman workshops and spread into Dacia by trade, or as plunder or by some other means.

We cannot decide in favour of one possibility, against the other two.

We

must also take into account the economic-cultural consequences of the conquest of the Greek Pontic cities by Burebista.

The submission of the Greek

cities and their inclusion in the Dacian state (even for a short period) brought about facilities for trade and for travel for the traders in Dada.

For this

reason we are inclined to take into consideration the last two amon the three possibilities concerning the provenance in Dacia of sil ver vesse ls, 180 namely that some vessels were made in Dacia by Greek itinerant artisans and some others (including the conical and hemi-spherical cups) were manufactured in Graeco-Roman workshops.

The analysis of the silver in these vessels (which

is at present being undertaken) must produce new evidence concerning this problem.

This analysis may show whether the silver of the vessels came

from the mines of Dacia or from those of other countries, and we must pay careful attention to the results of analysis, bearing in mind that coins were also an important source of silver. 181 All the silver vessels mentioned above are dated from the 2nd century B.C.

-

ist century A.D.

The conical and hemi-spherical cups date to the

end of the 2nd century B.C.

-

ist century B.C., the vessel from Calafat

dates from about the middle of the ist century A.D. and the goblets with handles from the Ist century B.C. Ist century A.D. These are the earliest types of silver vessels discovered in Dacia. The handle with the silver -

statuette from Costeti is dated from the ist century B.C. or more probably from the ist century A.D.

Some modifications of these dates are possible,

taking into account the dating of the other pieces in the hoard; but this chronology is generally accepted.

In conclusion, only a few silver vessels have

been discovered in Dacia and in the other countries neighbouring the GraecoRoman world.

These vessels, made in Dacia by itinerant artisans or im-

ported from foreign centres of production, were luxury products bought by the members of the aristocracy, by the local chieftains or by the Dacian kings.

Their rarity in comparison with other products is remarkable not

only in Dacia but also generally in all European countries neighbouring the Roman empire. 182

37

5.

The trade in vessels and objects of glass.

Vessels or other objects

of glass are only sometimes mentioned and illustrated in Romanian archaeological studies in contrast with other Graeco-Roman products discovered in Dacia, which are generally well known in the technical literature. The dispersal of information among different publications and especially the existence of unpublished material in museums made it impossible to produce general conclusions which can be important for the determination of the chronology of the settlements, and for the study of Dacian trade with the classical world. Furthermore, foreign collections and works of reference devoted to glassware and its craft both inside and outside the Roman empire, took no notice of the glass vessels discovered in Roman Dacia and in the Roman Balkan provinces because these finds were recorded in the technical literature of Romania and of neighbouring countries, without description and adequate illustration and without the presentation of other archaeological material which occured with them. 183 However, vessels and objects of glass have been mentioned by Romanian archaeological scholars since the time of the beginning of the systematic archaeological excavations in the great Geto-Dacian settlements dating from the La Tène period. 184 The first work of reference l85 devoted to the GetoDacian culture and civilisation also mentioned glass-ware finds. The archaeological context of these finds and the chronology of the settlements where they have been discovered, were also known. The archaeological and historical study of the glassware discovered in the Geto-Dacian settlements is very difficult, for the following reasons: It is impossible to find a lot of pieces from the old excavations, and the number of these old finds is uncertain, and the calculation of the fragmentary pieces is only approximate. The quantitative estimation of these finds is approximate, and the conclusions, especially those concerning the chronology, are based upon the characteristic features of the glass itself.

The chronological limits are generally

very wide and they have been established by taking into account the dating of the settlements where they were found and the technical features of the glass paste (the dating of which sometimes differs from that of the settlements). We, however, took no account of the chronological limits of the settlements, except when the other Graeco-Roman material (especially bronze vessels) was of a similar date. From the point of view of the shape, the glass vessels discovered in Dacia belong to two categories: millefiori vessels and uniform coloured vessels (blue, shades of yellow-green, yellow, blue, pink, or colourless). There are millefiori vessels with a skilful combination of colours (3/g, 6/d, 9/c, 11/2-5), vessels of opaque, maroon, or blue glass with light coloured stripes or plain blue vessels and transparent vessels with a dark or very light tint. The determination of the forms of the vessels is more difficult than that of the colours, since many glass vessels are fragmentary. There are the following principal forms of vessel, of blown or moulded glass, taking into account the very few existing intact pieces and the more numerous pieces which are reconstructed and of the individual fragments, which form the majority: dishes and saucers of different dimensions, cups and glasses, cups with handles of Kantharos type, bottles, unguentaria and bowls.

38

TABLE 4:

Late Ist

Cent.

B.C. early Ist cent. A.D. -

Site

No. 0

Ist cent. B.C.

1

2 0

I

BarboØ

2

Boroda

3

Bucureti

4

Cpflna

5

Checea

6

Costet1

GLASS

ist half let cent. A.D.

3

ifi

V

2nd half Ist cent. A.D.

4

U

V

I

ist century A.D.

5

H

i

11111

Total

6 IV

V

Ill

7

UIIVV

I

I

1 1

1

5

1

7

1

10+

11 N

N

7

Crsan1

O

Grdltea Muncelului

9

Luncanl

10

Pecica

II

Polana

12

Popestl

13

Retu

14

Tlnosu

15

Ulmenl

16

Vales, lzvoarelor

17

Ztinnicea

1 1

15

1 1+

6+ 1 2

2

24 N

N 2

I

40+

43 N

N 1

1? 1

1

1

4

2

2

1+2

2

6

3

6

1

1

2

1

14 N

6 10+

33 N

1

2

2? 1

air. 1

13+ N

N 21 N 1+

1

25

N 27N

N 1

1 I

I

Total per category

1

2

7

I I

3

4

2

6

17

1

1

3

4?

19

11

1

1

7 100

190N

N Overall total

I

Millefiorl Vessels

10

II

=

Ribbed Bowls

7

III = Bottles

25 IV = Cups and Beakers

20 V = Other Categories

I20-fN

190 )4

N = Number of pieces Uncertain

There is a large variety of dishes and saucers from the point of view of dimensions, fabric and form. The majority of these vessels belong to the category of ribbed dishes (1; 3/b; 11/9; 28; 12/c) with many variants. Cups (2; 11/6 ;7; 15), glasses (11/30-32) with a pedes t a lor w ith ou t ; b ott l es (9 / a,b; 12/a-b) with handle or not, occur more rarely in the finds, and other pieces, such as the little sticks of glass (11/26), the scarab with hieroglyphs from Poiana (11/34) and the amulet of Men discovered at 20pe9ti (12/t) are extremely rare finds. These products are not widespread over the Geto-Dacian territories. They occur especially in the great settlements and fortifications, but they do not occur in all those sites where other imported products have been discovered. Glass vessels and objects have been discovered in the southern half of Moldavia, in the Geto-Dacian settlements situated on the Siret (Râctu, Poiana, Barboi), in the central and southern part of Muntenia (Tinosu, Crsani, Bucharest, Popeti, Zimnicea), in the area between the middle Mure, the river Sebe and the southern Carpathians, in Transylvania (Cpilna, Costeti, Luncani Piatra Roie, Grditea Muncelului) and as single finds in western Romania (Boroda, Pecica, Checea). The number of -

places where glass has been found reaches a total of 17 (3 in Moldavia, 6in Muntenia, and 8 in Transylvania). The volume of finds differs from one locality to another and its estimation in many cases is very approximate. For this reason, we are not always certain of the accuracy of the number given in the catalogue or in the statistics. The number of vessels and objects of glass (excluding the fragments) discovered in Romania (table 4) reaches an approximate total of 200 pieces: 34 (about

18%)

in Moldavia, 59

(31%)

in Muntenia and 96 (50.5%) in Transyl-

vania. 190 pieces out of the total of 200 vessels are datable. The numerical concentration of finds in some Geto-Dacian settlements is remarkable (table 4).

A large quantity of glass ware has been discovered in Moldavia, in the

settlement of Poiana, (33 pieces, about 17% of the total), in Muntenia in the settlements of Tinosu (about 27 pieces, 14.2% of the total), Popesti (about 21 pieces, 11% of the total) and Bucharest (about 7pieces, 3.7% of the total). The majority of the glass vessels discovered in intra-Carpathian Dacia, have been found in the settlements and in the fortifications of the area of Grditea Muncelului: (about 43 pieces, 22.6% of the total), Costeti (about 24 pieces, 12.6% of the total), and in the citadels of Luncani-Piatra Roie (about 14 pieces, 7.3% of the total) and of Cpilna on the Sebe§ valley (10 pieces, 5.2% of the total). The finds are rare in localities other than those mentioned above: a little over 5% of the total of glass ware discovered in the CarpathianDanubian territories. The distribution of pieces into categories and into groups of types is very difficult, because of their state of preservation. We have included in the catalogue only the fragments belonging to vessels whose types can be determined and we have not taken into consideration the pieces recorded in the technical literature as "different fragments of glass vessels" or as "fragments of glass vessels". There are the following categories: millefiori vessels, ribbed vessels, bottles, cups and glasses and other categories. The distribution of the vessels into categories is represented in the graph on fig. 6. It is possible that some fragments belonging to the other definite categories have been included in the last category, their determination being 40

doubtful because of their state of preservation.

The bad state of preserva-

tion of the vessels and objects of glass, and the impossibility of determining exactly their type is characteristic of the finds of Dacia, of the Graeco-Roman world and its neighbouring countries. For this reason, we cannot draw conclusions concerning the importance of some types among the glass products discovered in Dacia, but we can draw some conclusions with regard to the geographical and quantitative distribution of glassware in Dacia, taking into account the fragility of glass products, the existing means of transport in antiquity and the possible markets for these goods in the indigenous areas. Glassware was generally carried by ships; the overland route was used only when the countries were lacking navigable rivers. The glassware market was conditional on local demand and on the local purchasing capacity existing in the northern Danubian territories or in other countries. We have mentioned above that the finds are numerous in the great settlements of Poiana, Popeti, Tinosu, Gräditea Muncelului, Costeti and that they are rare in the small settlements. We have also mentioned the density of these finds in Poiana in comparison with their rarity in Rctáu, in contrast with the density of other finds of imported products which have been discovered there. The differences mentioned above between Poiana and Rictáu can be explained by the difficulties of transporting glass and by the different marketing possibilities existing in the case of each locality. Perhaps Poiana was also a centre of exchange and a commerical emporium of glassware for the surrounding countryside. The situation of the settlements of Popeti and Tinosu in Muntenia was similar to that of Poiana, and explains the great number of finds occuring in these sites. The local aristocracy and probably the local merchants of the three localities bought vessels and others objects of glass. The concentration of the finds in i nt ra -C arpathi an Dac i a the area of the citadels of the Orâtie mountains.

i s

evident in

The number of vessels

and objects of glass discovered in intra-Carpathian Dacia is at least equal to the number of similar pieces occuring in extra-Carpathian Dada. The great number of finds at Grditea Muncelului is explained by the marketing possibilities existing in this settlement, which was the political and religious centre of Dada. The Dacian capital specially attracted the traders in valuable products, such as glass or metal ware. The same is true of the settlement and citadel of Costeti, and the citadels of Piatra Roie and Cpilna, whose military chiefs and aristocracy very much appreciated glass vessels. Grâdistea Muncelului was probably the market and centre of exchange of products between the foreign traders and the local merchants.

The difficul-

ties of transporting glassware explain the rarity of these products in the other areas of intra-Carpathian Dacia, but the non-existence of these products in the Dacian citadels of Bãnia, Tilica and Piatra Craivii (the last two sites with great ancient deposits) cannot be explained at present. We have noted on the one hand the existence of great quantities of glassware in the Geto-Dacian territories and on the other hand that it was confined to a few important settlements and citadels. Some general information is necessary concerning the glass production and the workshops specialising in glassware situated in the Greek cities and in the Roman empire before we can estimate the quantity and the economic value of the trade in these products in the Dacian world.

This information comes from special studies and from 41

general works based upon the ancient literary sources and upon the archaeoThe archaeological finds in the Mediterranean lands and in the

logical finds.

other provinces of the Roman Empire supplement the information existing in the literary sources concerning the craft of glassmaking and its spread over the ancient world. 187 The use of glass, which was well known and manufactured in Egypt

188

and

in Syria from ancient times spread widely after the invention of glass-blowing in the second half of the Ist century B. C.

The ancient technique of moulding

glass was used until about the ist century A. D. when the use of the new technique became general, although the older technique was not entirely eclipsed.190 Blown glass is rare even in the East, the original region of this new technique, during the ist century B.C. 191 The production of the blown glass brought about the end of the Oriental monopoly (especially that of Sidon, Tyre and Alexandria) in glassware and great reductions in the prices of these products, which now competed with similar iron products, with only fine objects of glass continuing to keep a high price. 192 The Oriental cities like Alexandria, where the production and the selling of glassware was an imperial monopoly, 193 Tyre and Sidon, whose products sold widely 194 continue to be the principal centres of production of the ancient world.

Workshops specializing in glassware also existed in Italy, founded by

Oriental artisans 195 at Capua,

196

Italy, in the region of Aquileia. 197

at Rome, in Campania and in the

no r th of

Two facts concerning the activity of the

Italian workshops are important to the study of the Dacian finds, the production of millefiori vessels 198 and the great export of Italian polychrome products, even to Egypt.

199

Aquileia, which specialized in the trade with the Danubian

countries, imported a great quantity of vessels from Alexandria and Sidon until the Ist century A.D., when the local workshops from A9uileia and the surrounding countryside began to produce polychrome glass

00 The workshops of Dalmatia 201 and of Gallia 202 also began their production from the ist century A.D.; their product was very similar and sometimes even .

identical with those of the workshops of northern Italy. 203 The forms of moulded or blown vessels generally imitated similar pieces of pottery, of metal or of stone etc. 204 The Italian production of glassware, from its origins until the end of the Ist century A. D. had the following features: 205 luxury glassware, imitating the forms of metal and stone vessels, were produced from the Augustan period. They belong to the category of mono- or polychrome moulded glass (green, blue and mosaic glass were the most commonly used for these vessels). Blown glass is preponderant from the time of Claudius: green, greenblue and polychrome vessels are very numerous among the blown glass. Pottery and metal-work exerted a continuous influence on the glassware from this period.

The greatest expansion in production of the Italian workshops

in the Ist century is noticed in the Flavian period.

Shades of green, blue and

yellow are the preponderant colours of the vessels and colourless glass is very popular in this period. The Italian, Dalmatian and Gallic workshops produced simple forms of vessel in ordinary glassware, and the workshops situated in the western provinces of the Roman Empire also concentrated on millefiori vessels.

42

For these reasons the glassware discovered in Dacia is classified into two groups: polychrome glass and monochrome (or very pale coloured) glass. The quality of the glass paste of the pieces discovered in the CarpathianDanubian countries is inferior (with some exceptions) in comparison with that of the great centres of the Roman Empire. This situation is explicable, taking account of the fact that all glass was considered luxury products by the GetoDacians and the other populations living outside the Roman Empire and in consequence it was too expensive for these peoples to buy. We must take these facts into consideration because of their importance for the study of the glassware discovered in Dada, and especially for the chronological problems of these finds. For example, we cannot date some vessels to a later period simply on the basis of the presence of faults in execution such as the presence of air bubbles and streaks, which were rare in the vessels from the Ist century A.D., but more numerous in the pieces from the following century. The determination of the provenance of glassware is approximate owing to the above mentioned facts concerning the types of vessels and the quality of the glass produced in the Eastern and Western workshops of the Roman Empire. Products with stamps of officinae are absent from the finds of Dacia, and because of this, only the detailed analysis of the composition of the glass paste would enable us to determine the centres of production of the Dacian finds. In the absence of this analysis, we can only make a few observations and some hypothetical suggestions concerning the provenance of the vessels and glass objects discovered in Dacia. 206. Millefiori vessels (over 20 pieces) discovered in the Geto-Dacian settlements probably come from the well-known workshops situated in the North and North-West of Italy. Aquileia, which specialized in the trade with the Danubian territories, was situated in this area of Italy. In all probability other categories of vessels and objects of glass had the same provenance as the millefiori, but the determination of their centre of production, even approximately, is very difficult. The bottles coloured in tints of blue, with handles in the shape of an ?tM, 2 O7 some dishes ribbed or not and some -

-

vessels coloured in greenish and yellowish tints came from Italy. Possibly (we have no evidence) some glass vessels came from the Dalmatian workshops, which had begun their activity recently. We also have no evidence concerning the presence in Dacia of the products of the Gallic workshops which were situated far from the Lower Danubian territories, but we cannot distinguish the products of Gallic workshops from those of northern Italian workshops, because they were very similar during the ist century A. D. It'seems that the Oriental workshops of Syria and Egypt provided the majority of the glassware found in Dacia. The increased productivity of these workshops during the ist century B. C. -Ist century A. D., the large spread of their products over the ancient world and other facts (which will be presented below) lead to this assumption, but the products of these Oriental workshops were common and ordinary objects in the Graeco-Roman world. Even the degree of iridescence of the glass sometimes an important indication of Oriental or Western provenance is not a decisive indication here, owing to the fact that the iridescence is often caused by the medium in which the ves-

-

sels have been found. There is some evidence to suggest the presence of the Oriental products in Dacia: the scarab with hieroglyphs discovered at 43

Poiana, the amulet representing the god Men found at Popeti (both pieces came from Alexandria), the engraved bowl from Zimnicea and a bottle from Popeti. The last two pieces are Oriental products, and may be from Alexandria. Products of Oriental provenance have been discovered only in the settlements of intra-Carpathian Dacia.

Is this fact an indication of the trade of

Muntenia and Moldavia with the Mediterranean areas and of the trade of the intra-Carpathian Dacia with the West? It is possible, but we cannot draw general conclusions on the basis of a few discoveries. We can draw some conclusions concerning the chronological distribution of the glassware in the Geto-Dacian settlements in the light of our present evidence.

190 of the 200 pieces discovered in the Carpathian-Danubian terri-

tories are dated (fig. 7). They are dated to two periods: 17 pieces from the whole of the Ist century B. C. and the beginning of the following century (Augustan period) and 173 pieces from the beginning of the Ist century A. D. to the conquest of Dada by the Romans. We have established these periods taking into account the principal changes in glass production: the first period comprises some decades before and after the invention of glass-blowing and the second period includes the decades when the production of moulded glass is contemporaneous with that of blown glass, although the production of blown glass becomes preponderant from this time. The substantial increase in glassware finds in Dacia during the second period (there are 10 times more finds in this period than those from the first period) is significant, even if we take into account the development of glassware production and the increasing spread of its products over the GraecoRoman world and the neighbouring territories at this time. We notice again the substantial and progressive increase in the volume of imported goods in Dacia, as the date of the conquest of the province by the Romans approaches. This fact confirms the conclusion reached from the study of other imported products.

The glassware finds also confirm that Dada is the most important

of the lands neighbouring the Roman Empire with regard to the number and the wide distribution of Graeco-Roman products. 206 6.

Other Graeco-Roman products.

Other stray finds, in addition to the

Hellenistic and Roman products described in the previous sections have occurred in the Carpathian-Danubian countries: ornaments, toilet articles, objects of various uses and iron tools, 209 in one instance. The following ornaments have been discovered: a fragment of a gold ornament at Cet4eni (1), a gem from the settlement of Cernatu (2), glass and coimelian amulets, rings with gems (one of them with the inscription FAiIAOY )little boxes for paint discovered in the settlement of Poiana (B 3/c) and a little gold chain at Popeti (B 4). All these objects are luxury items which occur rarely in the finds from the Geto-Dacian territories. They have been discovered until now only in the localities mentioned (p1. 10). They are dated from the 2nd century B. C. to the ist century A. D. inclusive and came to Dacia from Graeco-Roman workshops by the intermediary of traders in various merchandise. The ornaments and toilet articles discovered in Dacia illustrate the diversity of the Graeco-Roman products imported into

44

the country.

There are also mirrors of white metal among the toilet articles

discovered in the north-Danubian territories.

They mainly occur in the Geto-

Dacian settlement and in form they belong to two types which are well known and numerous in the Graeco-Roman world and outside.

The mirrors with round

disc and of various dimensions, with handle or not, are the principal types. The type with handle occurs at Grditea Muncelului (C 3/b), at Poiana (C

7/ a -b)

and at Poeti (C 8/c-d) and the type in the shape of a flat disc, without handle and of small dimensions is found in the majority of the Geto-Dacian settlements where mirrors have been found. 211

They have been discovered in Moldavia,

in the settlement and the fortifications of Piatra Neamj (Bitca Doamnei), Piatra oimului,T1rgu Ocna (Tiseti) and Poiana, in Muntenia at Ceteni, Tinosu, Popeti, Zimnicea and in Transylvania at Brasov, Costeti, Gr,ditea Muncelului,Pecica and S.rtel. They are dated from the 2nd century B. C. to the Ist century A. D. but the majority are from the 2nd century B. C. to the following century. We can date ‚

these mirrors more exactly only on the basis of the chronology of other archaeological material which has been found with them. The determination of the provenance of the mirrors discovered in Romania is very difficult because of the fact that they are ordinary types and widespread throughout the ancient world.

All the important centres situated in the terri-

tories near to Dacia, such as the Greek cities, and in the Roman Empire, produced these types of mirrors.

We also point out, but without intending to

suggest that they come from the western areas of the Roman Empire, that mirrors were among the ordinary products of the Italian workshops.

They

came into Dacia from the centres of production either directly, or by the intermediary of other cities etc. .There are some objects of unknown use among the Graeco-Roman finds from Dacia:

the plate of alabaster discovered at Luncani-Piatra Roie (D3) and

the plates of marble found at Poiana (D 4b-c).

It is possible that the plates of

marble were used for the preparation and the mixture of paint and therapeutic substances. The base of a terracotta statuette from Poiana (D4/d), and the vessel and the mortar of marble from Poeti (D 5/a-b) are unique pieces in the north-Danubian countries.

Probably the marble mortar from Popeti had the

same function as the plates of marble from Poiana. Finally, the tweezers of bronze from Bra du (D 1)

an d f rom Po i ana (D 4 / a)

and the 'medical pouch" from Grditea Muncelului (D 2) are among the rare pieces occurring in Dacia.

All three finds are evidence of the practice of

medicine in Dacia, either by indigenous "quacks" or possibly by Greek "physicians".

From this point of view, the "medical pouch" of Gráditea

Muncelului

is the most conclusive proof among the finds mentioned above.

212

It consists of imported objects such as tweezers, a scalpel, a plate of pumice and five little vessels of local fabric which were used for ointments and therapeutic substances.

It is possible that this "medical pouch" belonged to a

Green "physician" established in the Dacian capital. The presence of some iron tools, discovered only in the Dacian capital, is unusual among the finds from the Geto-Dacian settlements. have been discovered at Grditea Muncelului (A

45

1/ a -b).

Two choppers

One of them, with

the stamp HERENNI enclosed in a cartouche, and which was produced in Aquileia, is very well known in the technical literature.

213

The other chop-

per, which is of the same form and size as the first, has only the stamp of the cartouche of the officina. workshop as the

Possibly this chopper was made in the same

chopper with the inscription Herenni, bearing in mind that

both objects are identical and are of similar size;

but only the decipherment

of the inscription on the stamp can confirm or refute this hypothesis. way, it is an imported product.

Either

The dating of these two pieces is certain,

for both were discovered in deposits burnt during the second Dacian war and they therefore date from the second half of the ist century A. D. and the first years of the following century. The presence of two big choppers at Grditea Muncelului, the first in a house in the civilian settlement, the second in a smithy situated on the Vlllth terrace, is explicable, bearing in mind the fact that the Dacian capital was the centre of numerous activities before the wars with Domitan and Trajan, and there was an increase of activity in the crafts, and an increase of the construction of civilian religious and military buildings.

These iron tools

were brought to the Dacian capital either by Roman traders or by the artisans attracted by Decebalus from the Roman Empire to his Court.

We cannot

exclude the possibility that some other pieces of northern-Italian provenance exist among the hundreds of iron tools discovered at Gr.ditea Muncelului; but the form and the features of Dacian tools, sometimes very similar to Roman tools, makes it impossible to distinguish the two without detailed observations on the basis of metallurgical analysis. Our study of the different objects which we have dealt with completes our present knowledge of the volume and theintensity of economic and commercial links between Dacia and the Graeco-Roman world.

The variety of the prod-

ucts discovered in Dacia, which were not limited to those famous in antiquity, such as wine, oil, pottery, metalwork and glassware, is evidence of the intensive trade between the Geto-Dacians and the classical world. 7.

Greek and Roman coins in Dacia. 214

The coin finds of Romania consti-

tute an important part of the evidence concerning pre-Roman Dacian history. Their value as evidence, appreciated by the first Romanian numismatists, has increased substantially with the publication of works analysing the coin finds, which produce an outline, according to the existing evidence, of the circulation of coins in Dacia before its conquest by the Romans. 215 The archaeological and numismatic evidence of pre-Roman Dacia, increasing continuously with the development of research and the extension of knowledge, reveals new aspects of Geto-Dacian history and produces new historical information with regard to the economic-social-political problems of Dacia. The conclusions and the general observations which follow, are based upon the coin finds of Dacia and concern the foreign coins which circulated to the North of the Danube during the last two and a half centuries before the conquest of the kingdom of Decebalus by the Romans.

The majority of coins are dated

from the 2nd century B. C. -Ist century A. D., while a few coins of the Greek cities 216 ,date from the 3rd century and even from the 4th century B. C.

46

The Greek issues came from Abdera. Amisus, Athens, Bithynia, Byllis, Byzantium, Callatis, Corcyra, Cyzicus, Erythrae, Egypt, Histria, Illyrcum, Issa, Maroneia, Mesambria, Thracian Mesambria, Nicaea, Odessus, Olbia, Paeonia, Panormus, Panticapaeum, Phams, Priene, Scodra, Thessalonica, Tomi and Valentia Hipponium. 217 Greek coins spread throughout the whole territory of Romania 218

(Pl.

11).

More numerous hoards and stray finds have occurred in Muntenia, Oltenia, Transylvania and in Banat.

Stray finds have occurred in Moldavia, especial-

ly in the southern half of the region.

Greek coins are rare or are missing in

Criana, western Oltenia, northern Moldavia, Maramure plain of Muntenia.

and in the Brigan

More important groups of finds are from the area between

the middle course of the Arge

and the Clri zone, in the basins of the lower

Siret and Birlad, on the middle Mure

and on the Tlrnave.

found in the principal Dacian settlements

219

Coins have been

such as Poiana (A VII/14, 42),

Zimnicea (A XIX/73), Popeti (A 11/3, XV/59, XVI/66, XIX/72), Cetjeni (A XIX/71), Sibiu-Guterija (A X/24),

Costeti (A XII/34), Moigrad (A Vii/

11, VIII/21), and we notice a string of the finds on the upper Danube, on the Prut, on the Siret, on the D1mbovija, on the Arge, on the Olt, on the Mure,, and on the Tirnava Mare. The widespread use of the tetradrachms of Macedonia Prima and Thasos throughout the north-Danubian territories had begun in the 2nd century B. C. Coins of Macedonia Prima have occurred in 25 hoards and 11 isolated finds in Dacia 22° (p1. 12); and 51 isolated finds

the coins of Thasos have occurred in about 70 hoards 221

(p1. 12).

The number of the coins of Macedonia

Prima and Thasos discovered in Dada reaches a total of over 3, 300 pieces (over 450 tetradrachms of Macedonia Prima and approximately 2 900 tetra,

drachms of Thasos). The circulation of these coins in Dacia is dated, by common consent of scholars, to the second half of the 2nd century B.C. and the first two decades of the following century.

First of all B. Mitrea 222 established this chrono-

logy in broad outline and it was rendered more exact with regard to the coins of Macedonia Prima by Oct. Floca 223 later.

Some Thasian and Macedonian

Prima tetradrachms occurred in hoards which are dated later than the period of maximum circulation of these coins, but their number diminished gradually until the Ist century B. C. 224 Roman denarii occur together with Macedonia Prima and Thasian tetradrachms in 15 hoards; 225

drachmas of Dyrrhachium and Apollonia 226 have

been found in two of these hoards.

Other hoards contain Thasian tetradrachms

together with the drachmas of Dyrrhachium and Apollonia.

227

The majority

of the hoards which contain tetradrachms of Macedonia Prima and of Thasos and whose composition is well-known end with issues of Roman Republican denarii dated from the ist half of the ist century B.C. Remetea Mare (128) and Tisa (142) followed them;

228

; the hoards from

the incomplete hoard of

Hunedoara (A XXX/I7) with a denarius of Vespasian is an exception. Isolated coins of Thasos and Macedonia Prima occur together with Roman Republican denarii, andpresent a similar situation to that of the hoards. 230 These coin-finds confirm the observation that the period of the maximum circulation of the coins of Thasos and Macedonia Prima comprised the second 47

half of the 2nd century B. C. and the beginning of the following century;

few

coins remained in circulation after this period and any way they were not the "current money" of Dacia; Macedonia

Roman Republican denaril took the place of the

Prima and Thasian tetradrachms in the currency of Dacia.

The

finds of Macedonia Prima and Thasian tetradrachms are numerous either as hoards or stray finds in the central and southern part of Muntenia and in Transylvania.

Numerous finds have occurred in Muntenia, in the areas of

the lower basin of the Vedea and of the Teleorman, in the basins of the Neajiov, the Arge, the D1mbovia and on the upper reaches of the Ialomia. There is a concentration of finds in Transylvania, in the great bend of the Transylvanian Olt (from the confluence with the Rlul Negru to the North) and in the area between the Someul Mare and the Someul Mic. Coin finds have occurred in the following Dacian settlements:

Zimnicea

(151), Popeti (124), Ceteni (69), Cerantu (68), Pianu de Sus (119), CimpuriSurduc (73), Cetea (70).

The hoard of Petroani (117) and the stray find of

Riul Sadul (129) have been discovered in areas where coin-finds of this type are very rare.

Tetradrachms of Macedonia Prima and of Thasos are very

scarce or are missing in Moldavia, in the north-western and eastern Muntenia, Oltenia, Banat, Criana and Maramure.

231

The coin finds are especially

dense in two areas of Romania, the area comprising the Muntenian plain (from the Mostistea to the West) and the region of hills and the sub-Carpathian area of Muntenia, and the other including the interior of the Carpathian arc.

232

We

have already noted that the number of tetradrachms of Macedonia Prima and Thasos discovered in Dacia reaches a total of 3,300 pieces.

It seems that

the distribution map shows a larger number of discoveries in extra-Carpathian Dacia, but in fact the coin finds are more numerous in the intra-Carpathian areas than in the extra-Carpathian territories. Earlier statistics 233 including the tetradrachms of Macedonia Prima and Thasos together with the drachmas of Dyrrhachium and Apollonia led to a similar conclusion to this.

The number

of coins of Macedonia Prima and of Thasos discovered in Dada reaches a total of about 2,000 pieces in intra-Carpathian Dacia 234 and a total of about 1, 300 pieces in Muntenia. The spread of the coins of Dyrrhachium and Apollonia, cities situated on the eastern shores of the Adriatic, over Dacia began in the 2nd century B. C. or at the end of the 3rd century B. C.

235

The coins of both cities have occur-

red in 77 hoards and in 35 stray finds from Dacia (p1.

13);236

their number

reaches a total of about 11,900 pieces. There are two different opinions concerning the period when these coins circulated in Dacia.

According to one, the coins circulated in the period

between the end of the 3rd century B. C. and the end of the ist century B. C. perhaps including the ist century A.D.

237

(with the proviso that the number

of coins diminished gradually from the Ist century B.C.)

238

The other opinion

suggests that the circulation of these coins dated from the end of the 2nd century B.C. to the middle of the following century.

239

The majority of the

hoards consisting of the drachmas of Dyrrhachium and Apollonia and Roman denarii and whose composition is partially or wholly known, end with issues dated from the middle of the Ist century B. C. the ist century B. C.

;241

240

or from the second half of

only two of them contain Imperial denarii.

242

If it

is accepted that the spread of Adriatic drachmas over Dacia began at the 48

end of the 3rd century B. C. (more probably they were issues from the 3rd century B. C. which spread over Dacia in the 2nd century B.C.), then we must admit that their period of maximum circulation was between the middle of the 2nd century B. C. and the middle of the ist century B. C.

The finds,

either as hoards or isolated coins are dense in intra-Carpathian Dacia and in Criana, especially on the middle Mure

and in the area along the courses

of the Barcäu, Criul Repede and the bend of the Some.

The accumulation

of finds in eastern Transylvania, in the valley of the Riul Negru, is particularly notable, owing to the existence of the commercial route between the intra-Carpathian territories and Moldavia, which was also the route by which the Adriatic coins spread over the territories situated to the East of the Carpathians. 243

A large number of drachmas of Dyrrhachium and Apollonia

have been discovered in the south-western Banat.

The presence of coins of

Dyrrhachium and Apollonia in this region is explained by the fact that the coins circulated from the Danube to Transylvania, across the Banat.

The

coins of both Adriatic cities occur more rarely in Muntenia (on the lower Arge, on the lower course of the Vedea, on the lower Dimbovia and on the middle Ialomia) and in Moldavia (in the south-western half of this region and on the middle course of the Bistria). Coins of Dyrrhachium and Apollonia have been discovered in the following Dacian settlements:244

Piatra Neam-Bitca Domanei (62), Poiana (63, 139),

Barboi (7), Bucharest (14, 116), Popeti (64,f40), Cernatu (16), Coste,ti (25), Gràditea Muncelului (41, f29), Cimpuri-Surduc (19, f19), Deva (30,123) and Moigrad (49, 134). The coin finds differ in number among the regions we have mentioned. 9,500 of a total of 11,900 pieces which have been found in Romania, have been discovered in the intra-Carpathian zone and in Crisana;

the rest of the coins

have been found in the south-western Banat, in Oltenia, in Muntenia and in Moldavia.

As a result, the concentration of coin finds of Apollonia and

Dyrrhachium in the intra-Carpathian area is more evident than that of the tetradrachms of Thasos and Macedonia Prima discovered in the same region. The final category of coin-finds include the Roman Republican and Imperial coins circulating in Dacia 245 until the Roman conquest of the country (p1. 14). The opinions of scholars differ little in the dating of the spread of Roman Republican coins over Dacia.

C. Moisil thought that the circulation of these

coins in Dacia had begun at the end of the 2nd century B.

C.

and I. Winkler 248 were of the same opinion as C. Moisil.

246 B. Mitrea 247 This dating seems

probable, but taking into account the chronology of E. A. Sydenham, 249 based generally upon late dating, we think that the date 100 B. C. is more acceptable. In any case, the widespread circulation or Roman Republican coins over Dacia began from the Ist century B.C. and more probably from the first half of this century. 250 Statistics based upon the chronology of the Roman Republican issues discovered in Dac ia, 251 show the following situation:

the coin finds of the 3rd

century B. C. occur sporadically while those of the 2nd century B. C. are more jiumerous; the majority of the coin finds date from the last two decades of the 2nd century and the first quarter of the Ist century B.C.; the number of later issues is reduced during the Ist century B. C. and the first half of the

49

ist century A. D. and increases in the second half of the ist century A. D. especially after the reform of Nero. 252 The dating of the Roman Republican issues does not always coincide with the chronology of their spread over Dada and their quantitative fluctuation after the middle of the Ist century B. C. was owing to reasons other than those concerning the instability of the internal situation of Dacia after the death of Burebista. We have noticed on the one hand, the presence in Dacia of a reduced number of Roman denarii dated from the second half of the Ist century B. C. and the beginning of the following century and on the other hand the burial of hoards which end with issues dated to about 44 B. C. The reform of Nero partially explains the reduced number of denarii issued from the second half of the ist century B. C. and the beginning of the ist century A. D. The burial of hoards in about 44 B. C. was not owing to some catastrophic interruption of Roman economic activity in Dacia at the news of the expedition of Caesar, as was once said. 253 The Geto-Dacians concealed these hoards during the period of trouble following the death of Burebista. 254 Further, the presence of Roman goods in the Dacian markets (dealt with in the previous sections) proves the continuous commercial activity of the Roman traders in the country during the second half of the ist century B. C. and the beginning of the following century. lt seems that the scarcity of Roman denarii of the issues dated to between about the middle of the Ist century B. C. and the middle of the following century and also the rarity of the Roman Imperial issues until the conquest of Dacia, can be explained by analogy with the situation existing in the other territories neighbouring the Roman Empire. According to Tacitus 255 the German tribes situated near the Roman Empire preferred for commercial use, the old Republican. currency, especially the silver coins, which had long been well known and appreciated by them The Roman coin finds of Dacia present the following principal features: Roman Republican denarii are preponderant compared with Roman Imperial denarii;

and there are also imitations of Roman Republican denarii, struck

in Dacia or in the Roman Empire, as well as moulds for making imitation Roman Republican denarii. 256 We know from the study of imported products, that the commercial contacts between Dacia and the Roman empire were not only constant, without any period of reduction or of stagnation, but on the contrary they were progressively developing in this period.

It seems very

probable that the Geto-Dacians had the same preference as the Germans for use of old Roman Republican coins in commercial transactions. It seems also, that most of the dates of the deposits of the Geto-Dacian sites, established on the basis of the coin finds, are very close to the dates of the original issue of the coins. If we take into consideration the chronology based upon the coin finds, to establish the date at which the sites ceased, then we drew the erroneous conclusion that only a few settlements existed in the period of Trajan's war with Decebalus. If we take into account the date of the latest coin 257 discovered on Dacian sites, then we have the following situation as to the final date of existence of these settlements, cemeteries or citadels: the ist century B.C. for the settlement of Bradu (38), the end of the ist century B. C. for the citadel of Breaza (42), the first half of the ist

50

century B. C. for the settlement situated in the region of present-day Buchar­ est (45), the 1st century A.D. for the settlement of Cetájeni (70), the period of Galba or imediately after him for the citadel of Coste�ti (86), the period of Augustus for the citadel of Craiva (89 ), the first half of the 1st century B. C. for the settlement of Cuciulata (95) and for the citadel of Piatra Ros,ie (168), the beginning of the 1st century A. D. for the settlement and cemetery of Moigrad (182), after A. D. 71 for the settlement of Ocni1a (192), the 1st cent­ ury B.C. for the citadel of Piatra Neam!-Bitca Doamnei (220), immediately after the reign of Galba for the settlement of Piatra Neamj-Cozla (220), the period of Vespasian or immedaitely after him for the settlement of Poiana (224), the beginning of the 1st century B. C. for the fortification of Polovragi (227), the end of the 1st century B. C. for the settlement of Racatau (237) and the middle of the 1st century A. D. for the settlement of Tinosu (319). How­ ever, it is accepted that the maj ority of these sites existed during the Roman­ Dacian wars of Trajan's time. The number of the Roman coins is greater than the total of the Macedonian Prima, Thasian, Dyrrhachium and Apollonian coins put together. This is true in the whole period until the conquest of Dacia. The 112 hoards which had been discovered until 1955 contained (according to an analysis from that year) 258 a total of 16,500 pieces; if we add the stray finds, then the number of the Roman coins reaches a total of 17,000 pieces. The number of the Roman coins (including about 1,200 pieces of Küi::QN type) 259 occurring in 228 hoards and 210 stray finds which were discovered before 1969 (inclusive) amount to 25 ,000 pieces. 260 It is very probable that the total of the Roman coins found is more than 2 5,000 pieces, bearing in mind that the analysis of hoards whose contents were partially or wholly scattered is only approximate. The large number of places where coins have been found and the large quantity of Roman coins discovered in Dacia confirms the earlier conclusion that the Roman currency was the principal, and possibly the only means of exchange in the markets of Dacia during the two centuries befare the Roman conquest. 261 The geographical distribution of Roman coins varies from one region to another. Roman coins occur either in hoards or as stray finds in the whole territory of Dacia. Concentrations of coin finds have been noted in intra-Carpathian Dacia in the following areas: the region of Hunedoara, on the middle Mure�, on the Tirnave, in the region between the lower course of the Hirtibaciul and the Sebe�, in the Transylvanian plain, in the great bend of the Transylvanian Olt (more exactly in the south of this bend), and in the region between the Olt and the Riul Negru. Numerous finds whose territorial distribution is almost uniform occur in the area of the bend of the Sorne�, the valley of Barca.u! and the course of the Trotu�. The number of Roman coins discovered in the whole area of intra-Carpathian Dacia reaches a total of about 17,000 pieces.

1

The concentrations of the extra-Carpathian finds are situated on the lower and middle Siret, on the Trotu§, on the middle Bistri!a, in the area from the middle Buzáu to the confluence of the Teleaj en with the Prahova and with the Ialomija, on the upper course of the Ialomi_!a and of the Dlmbovija, in the middle and partially in the lower basin of the Argeg and in the region between the lower course of the Teleorman and the Olt. The discoveries in Oltenia, 51

are more numerous in the region between the Jiul and the Olt. The number of Roman coins (exceeding 8000 pieces) discovered in the extra-Carpathian areas is smaller than that found in the intra-Carpathian territories. Coin finds have been discovered in the following settlements and fortifica­ tions: Piatra Neami-Bttca Doamnei (220/a), Cozla (22 0/b), Bradu (38), Ráclítau (237) and Poiana (22 4) in Moldavia, Calára§li-Gradis!ea (57), Crasani (90), Popesji (228), Bucharest (45), Snagov (2 91), Tinosu (319) and CetaJeni (70) in Muntenia, Ocni}a (198) and Polovragi (22 7) in Oltenia, Cernatu (6 9), Sf. Gheorghe (2 27), Ciciulata (95), Breaza (42 ), Sibiu-Gu�teriía (2 79),Cap'llna (61), Costesti (86), Gradi�tea Muncelului (142 ), Pecica (2 16), Cetea (71) and Moigrad (182) in Transylvania. The finds at Suseni (302 ), Pasul Vilcani (394), Bran (39), Brezoi (434) on the Riul Negru valley, and of Poiana Sarata (2 29) are important because of the peculiarities of the area where they have been discovered. The finds are scarce in the North and East of Moldavia, in the Baragan plain, in the West of Oltenia and in the northern and north-eastern areas of Romanía. The quantitative comparison between the Roman coin finds found in Dacia and those discovered in other countries neighbouring the Reman Empire, has led to surprising results. The comparison is possible only with regard to Roman Republican hoards. There are (according to the records of M. H. Crawford) 2 62 46 hoards in Spain, 37 in France, 10 in the German Democratic Republic and the Federal Republic of Germany together, 4 in Hungary, 2 in Czechoslovakia, 4 in Bulgaria and 22 in Yugoslavia. It is possible that M. H. Crawford did not have all the information concerning finds of Roman Republi­ can coins discovered in these countries, but the number given in his statistics is incomparably smaller than the number of Roman Republican hoards found in Dacia, which reaches the impressive total of at least 145. 263 There are also other hoards, but they have not been included in this total because their composition is not exactly determined. Two or even three hoards have been discovered in many places. The large number of Roman Republican hoards and the great quantity of Roman coins which have been found in pre-Roman Dacia clearly prove the importance of the commercial links between the country and the Roman Empire and indicate generally the great volume of Dacian goods bought by the traders in the Carpathian-Danubian territories. In fact the coin finds demonstrate active commercial relations between Dacia and the Roman Empire: Dacia received different products from the Empire and in return furnished it with large quantities of native goods. The coin finds give only partial evidence of the currency circulation and of the commercial links of antiquity, but this evidence, even incomplete, is indispensible to the study of the economic, political and social history of Dacia before the Roman conquest. The study of coin circulation and of the finds of southern Graeco-Roman products complete our knowledge of the trade of Dacia with the classical world during the last two and a half centur­ ies before the establishment of the Roman dominion north of the Danube. The circulation of foreign currency besides indigenous money in Dacia brought about many important consequences. The foreign and 1oca1 currencíes facilitated to a large extent the development of commercial relations, 52

although barter was not completely removed from the transactions. Their presence proves the existence of the Dacian market and shows that the southern merchants had a great interest in trading in local products. Geto-Dacians appreciated the foreign coins not only for their value as a means of exchange, but also for the value of their silver which they could use for ornaments. But, evidently, the majority of foreign coins were in use in Dacia for commerce, and for this reason, the density or the rarity of coin finds in particular regions of Dacia is significant from the economic point of view. The coins of Macedonia Prima, Thasos, Dyrrhachium, Apollonia and the the Roman issues discovered in Dacia dated from the middle of the 2nd century B. C. to the beginning of the 2nd century A. D. There were the following directions of diffusion of the majority of these coins towards Dacia (with the exception of the Greek coins included in the Catalogue A I-XXIX, spreading in association with other coins over Dacia, and which are less important): 1) the coins of Macedonia Prima and Thasos: from the South-West to Transylvania, across the Muntenian plain; 2) the coins of Dyrrhachium and Apollonia: from the South-West to the North-East up to the Danube; from here in two directions: across Banat and Transylvania to Moldavia (through the Oituz Pass) and on the lower Danube to Muntenia; 3) The Roman coins:

roughly same direction as the drachmas of Dyrrhachium and

Apollonia; Aquileia-Emona-sjscia (or Sirmium) and later from the South and the South-West from the lands gradually annexed to the Roman Empire. 265 The density of the finds of tetradrachms of Macedonia Prima and Thasos in Muntenia and in Transylvania indicate the principal areas of Dacia where coins were an important means of exchange. One of these regions comprised central and southern Muntenia where the coins played a more important role in commerce with the Greek world, than with neighbouring countries. The great number of finds in Muntenia is not explicable by the fact that the coins of Macedonia Prima and Thasos spread over the other territories of Dacia throughout this region. 266 There are many important and flourishing Dacian settlements in Muntenia, such as C.lrasi (Grdistea), Zimnicea, Popesti, Bucharest, Cet5±eni and others less investigated. This fact and the abundance of southern merchandise existing in Muntenia, prove that the region was an important and active commerëial partner with the classical world. The finds of Macedonia Prima and Thasian coins are also dense in Transylvania, their number exceeding that of the same issues discovered in Muntenia. Taking into consideration this fact, the intra-Carpathian areas played a more important part within the general economy of Dada, than that indicated by the finds of imported products. The coin finds prove the remarkable economic and commercial development of the intra-Carpathian territories from that time. In conclusion, the map of finds shows the existence of two large areas which differ from the other territories of Dacia in their economic importance. The coin finds are more numerous in intra-Carpathian Dacia than in the extraCarpathian areas, and this fact is clearer in the case of the discoveries of drachmas of Dyrrhachium and Apollonia.

53

The diffusion of Adriatic coins is constantly towards the intra-Carpathian regions. The presence of a great number of coins of Dyrrhachium and Apollonia in Transylvania and in Cri ) sana is not owing to their direction of diffusion towards Dacia (from the South-West to the North-East). The direction of their diffusion can explain neither the large number discovered in intraCarpathian Dada nor their scarcity in the extra-Carpathian territories. We have mentioned above that the majority of tetradrachms of Macedonia Prima and Thasos have been discovered in intra-Carpathian Dacia and not in the extraCarpathian territories;

this situation proves that the direction of diffusion did

not cause the density of the finds.

In any case, the number of drachmas of

Dyrrhachium and Apollonia is greater in the intra-Carpathian territories than in the extra-Carpathian areas. The coins of Macedonia Prima and Thasos circulated simultaneously with drachmas of Dyrrhachium and Apollonia during the second half of the 2nd century B. C. and at the beginning of the following century. 267 As a result, the density of the coin finds in intra-Carpathian Dacia appears greater from the middle of the 2nd century B. C. to the ist century B. C. 268 We would also point out the numerical increase in the drachmas of Dyrrhachium and Apollonia in the territories situated to the East of the Carpathians, where only a few tetradrachms of Thasos have been discovered. In contrast to the other coins discovered in Dacia, the Roman Republican and Imperial issues occur in the whole territory of the country during the period investigated by the present work. Their spread over Dacia proves the development of monetary exchange during the period of the Dacian state, the participation differing in importance from one region to the other of the -

-

whole territory of Dacia in trade with the Roman Empire and the fact that Roman coins were the principal perhaps the single means of exchange accepted and appreciated in the commercial transactions of the population of the northern-Danubian areas. 269 The possibility of th e parti ci pati on ofal-

-

most all the Geto-Dacian regions in the exchanges of material products with the Roman world is avery important fact.

The coin finds clearly reflect the

trade of Dacia with the Graeco-Roman world, which was only outlined by the discoveries of Hellenistic-Roman products in the northern-Danubian territories. Intra-Carpathian areas, most of Oltenia and Muntenia, and the West of Moldavia participated in the trade of Dacia with the Roman world. Both the quantity of imported products and the large number of coin finds (especially of Roman issues) demonstrate the development of the trade of Dacia. Two thirds of the total of the Roman coins discovered in Dada have occurred in the intra-Carpathian area. The coin finds confirm some conclusions made on the basis of the discoveries of Hellenistic and Roman imported products. Moldavia (with the exception of the settlement of Poiana and generally of its southern half) participated in the exchange of products with the Graeco-Roman world later than the other territories of Dacia. Is this a consequence of the troubles and of the destruction caused by the advance of the Bastarnae into Moldavia from the 2nd century B. C. ? Probably aperiod of economic reconstruction and of political restoration to the northern half of Dacia was necessary until the end of the 2nd century B. C., before its participation beside the other territories of Dada in trade with the Graeco-Roman world.

54

The problem concerning the part played by the Pontic Greek intermediaries in the commercial transactions of Dacia, cannot be resolved merely on the basis of coin finds. We notice the small number of Pontic coins and their reduced spread over Dacia in comparison with the issues of Thasos, Dyrrhachium and Apollonia.

We notice on the other hand the great number of Thasian,

Adriatic and Roman coins in Dacia, and their wide diffusion over the country. The spread of Thasian and Macedonian Prima coins over Dacia is probably due to the Roman merchants and not to the Pontic Greeks. We do not know if the diffusion of drachmas of Dyrrhachium and of Apollonia into Dacia is due to the traders of the two Adriatic cities or also to the Roman merchants, together with Roman coins. But obviously the Roman money, which had great prestige and was generally accepted in the ancient Mediterranean world was used in trade both by the Italian-Roman merchants and by the traders of other parts of the Roman Republic and Empire. In this case the small number of Pontic coins of the Greek cities on the shores of the Black Sea and their reduced diffusion into Dacia is not significant when we consider the role of the Greek traders in the commerce of Dacia. Iam inclined to think that the importance of the Pontic Greeks in the Dacian trade has been greatly exaggerated. The great number and the large spread of Roman coin-finds proves without doubt the definite orientation of the trade of the north-Danubian territories towards the western countries of the Roman Empire from the period of maximum penetration of the Italian traders into the Mediterranean world.

55

III.

DACIAN PRODUCTS DESTINED FOR TRADE

The last chapter dealt with Hellenistic and Roman imported products and also with Graeco-Roman coin-finds discovered in the Carpathian-Danubian territories. Both categories of finds are evidence of the diverse trade links between the Dacians and the Hellenistic and Roman world.

Dacia participated

actively in the exchange of materials with the classical world; its trade was not limited only to the importation of goods from the Greek cities and from the Roman Empire. The traders who carried merchandise from the Greek and Roman territories into Dacia bought Dacian products and sold them elsewhere. This results from the method of trading in use in antiquity, which was mentioned in the introductory chapter. The principal means of trading used was the selling of certain products in aparticular geographical area and the buying of local goods from the same area which would be sold either in the country of origin of the traders or elsewhere.

The great number of Greek

and Roman coins discovered in Dacia show that the country played an active part in trade with the ancient world. It is true that Roman money came into use as an ordinary means of exchange in the markets of Dacia, even in internal transactions, but it was especially used to pay for local products which were purchased by the traders coming from the Graeco-Roman South.

We

have already dealt with the large number of hoards, particularly of Roman Republican issues, discovered in Dacia, compared with those found in the other countries of Europe. This strongly suggests that Dacia participated actively in trade with the Roman Empire and allows us to assume that the volume of Geto-Dacian goods imported into the Greek cities and into the Roman Empire was larger than has been supposed. However, the ancient narrative sources contain few details about the quantity and range of Dacian products (and also the products of the other countries neighbouring the Roman world) destined for trade with the Graeco-Roman world. The ancient authors refer generally to countries which were larger than Dacia. Their information is vague and does not suggest that specific Dacian products were famous in the markets of the Greek cities or of the Roman Empire, as, for example, was the case with a lot of the products coming from the Hellenistic kingdoms and from the Graeco-Oriental and Eastern cities. It is presumed that Dacian products used for trade were the same as those generally furnished by the less developed countries situated in the neighbourhood of the Graeco-Roman world: cattle, leather, furs, honey, bees-wax and slaves. 271 Clearly the volume of goods bought from Dacia by the Roman and Greek traders cannot be estimated, even approximately. Dacian wood, especially that of a resinous nature (whose quality was appreciated in shipbuilding until the Middle Ages) was probably among the products traded. The transport of wood was not difficult in antiquity, for rafts were carried by the streams, whose volume of water was larger than is the case today. 56

Dacia was rich in grain, and probably furnished these products (without being the principal supplier) to the Greek cities and the neighbouring provinces of the Roman Empire, especially during periods of difficulty. 272

Romanian li-

terature has not emphasized suffieicntly the importance of salt production and its marketing in areas situated outside Dacia. Salt deposits, salt-marshes, and mineral salt springs are very numerous in the territory of present-day Romania, especially within the Carpathian arc and outside the eastern and southern Carpathians. The extraction of salt, that is to say the exploitation of the salt mines, in the territory of Romania and the supply of this product to regions south of the Danube existed from the Hallstatt period. 273 This continued to be the case, in general, during the period investigated in the present book. The exploitation of the salt deposits, generally underground, continued in Dacia and the rest of the Balkan Peninsula imported it. There is no doubt about this exploitation of salt in the Geto-Dacian countries. The existence of some important Dacian settlements and fortifications around the salt deposits, such as those of Ttrgu Ocna, Ocnia-VFlcea and Sritel (in Bistrita-Nsud) and the finding of coin-hoards and isolated coins in the areas where salt is found prove this. V. Prvan noted the lack of salt in the Balkans and included this product among thosepurchased from Dacia by the Greek traders for the purpose of selling them south of the Danube, 274 and B. Mitrea associated the coin-finds around the salt mines with salt trading. 275 The number of the coin finds discovered around the salt mines and the salt springs is at present very large. The following are the more important discoveries among the coin finds: Greek coins at Cisnidie, Jigodin and St'ngeorzu Nou, coins of Macedonia Prima at Jigodin, Ocnita (in Bistri1 ta-Nsàud) and Slnpetru (near Brasov )' Thasian coins at Adinca in Dimbovita, Gura Ocnitei, Ocna Sibiului, RTu Sadului, Stngeorzu Nou and the same type of hoard at Stnpetru, coins of Dyrrhachium at Apoldu de Sus, Deva, Ocna Sibiului, Odorheiu Secuiesc, Sacalasu, Stngeorzu Nou, coins of Apollonia at Derna and Sacalasu and Roman coins at Cluj-Someseni, Corund, Derna, Odorhei, SàrataTh Buzu, STngeorzu Nou, stnpauYtn Harghita, Tg. Ocna and Turda-Saline. The hoards and single coins are partially linked with selling of salt inside the Geto-Dacian territories at the time when foreign currencies circulated as a means of exchange in Dacia, but they are also associated with the supply of salt to the areas south of the Danube. The overland route was especially used for the transport of salt from Dacia to the Balkan countries, and horses carried salt in saddle-bags until the Middle Ages. The discoveries of hoards and other coin finds near the saline-wells and the saline-springs and at the same time in the vicinity of the commercial roads leads to this conclusion. 276 Taking into account the coin finds in the basin of the Cara, and in the Nerea and in the Metalici mountains 277 ,some scholars have mentioned gold among the Dacian products which were sent to other countries. We cannot exclude the possibility that the Graeco-Roman traders purchased some gold from Dacia, for it was famous in the Roman Empire for its wealth in gold and gold was obtained from mines or from the sand of the rivers. 279 But the conditions of gold marketing were partially different from those of other

57

Dacian products. The Graeco-Roman traders found gold in the areas where it was extracted, either in the possession of the Geto-Dacian chieftains or particularly stored in the treasuries of the kings. Very likely even the gold from the treasuries of the Dacian kings "was used for trade with neighbours, for the peaceful or military needs of the community". 28 ° The estimation both of the quantity of Geto-Dacian products exported and of the different degree of importance of these products in the trade of Dacia is a very difficult problem. In any case, it is an important fact that the economic development of the Carpathian-Danubian territories brought about a surplus of products over a long period and that the southern traders took a great interest in the Dacian trade.

The quantity of all the main categories

of Hellenistic and Roman products had increased in Dacia as the Roman conquest drew nearer. The survey of the foreign, Greek and Roman coin-finds in the Carpathian-Danubian territories leads to the same conclusion. We notice also the progressive development of the different branches of the GetoDacian economy and its considerable increase from the middle of the 2nd century B.C. and especially during the period of the existence of the Dacian State. All these reasons allow us to presume (even if we cannot produce direct documents in proof) that the volume of Geto-Dacian goods destined for the Graeco-Roman world was increasing continuously and that Dacia played a large part in the trade of the Graeco-Roman world with the different populations surrounding the Roman Empire, its contribution to this trade being more important and superior to that of other countries where it has been recognised for a long time. Taking into account the volume and the variety of Dacian trade, it is clear that the country was very much part of the economic and commercial life of the Greek cities, of the Hellenistic states and especially of the Roman Empire.

58

IV. 1.

COMMERCIAL ROUTES AND STATIONS

Maritime and river routes.

The centres of production of the different

Hellenistic and Roman merchandise imported in Dacia, the types of merchandise and the possibilities for carrying them are of a great importance for the study of the trade routes used by the Graeco-Roman traders travelling to Dacia. We have mentioned in the previous chapters that the centres of production of different Hellenistic and Roman products were situated in the eastern basin of the Mediterranean, in the Aegean basin, in the Black Sea, on the eastern shores of the Adriatic, and in southern and northern Italy.

The main

maritime and river routes and branches of the main roads led from these regions to Dacia. Some categories of products, such as wine, oil, dye, and resin were carried in amphorae, and transport by water had many advantages such as the increased safety of breakable packages of merchandise carried over long distances and the reduced cost of carriage. Amphorae with Greek oils and wines were carried by ships from Rhodes, Cnidos, Cos, Thasos, or from the Greek cities on the Black Sea, to the Dacian lands. The ships usually followed the coastal route. It is difficult to determine exactly the routes of the different ships from the centres of production of Greek oils and wines to Dacia.

The route for ships crossing

the Aegean (Pl. 1) was generally orientated from South to North and ports of call were situated on the islands or on the shores of Asia Minor; the direct and coastal routes were identical in the North of the Aegean and both the coastal and direct route (which was less sure owing to the numerous storms) were in use in the Black Sea. The direct route, used almost exclusively for the transport of amphorae of oils and wines, would become safer in time, especially after the eradication of piracy on the coasts of the Aegean and of the Black Sea by Pompey; this measure contributed to the development of trade between the Carpathian-Danubian areas and the Greek centres. 281 The traders of the eastern basin of the Mediterranean and of the Aegean and the Black Sea preferred the direct route because ships of small and middle tonnage282 could sail across the sea as well as up the main navigable rivers leading to the interior of the continent, so that they avoided the transshipment of amphorae of oils and wines and the sale of their products by means of the intermediary of the Greek cities situated in the vicinity of Dacia. The ships could sail from the Black Sea to the Danube and its main tributaries. 283 The finds of amphorae along the Danube, from its mouth at the Black Sea to the Cazane area, prove that this important route was used particularly by traders in southern oils and wines (Pl. 2). The merchant ships also sailed from the Danube up its principal tributaries according to their degree of navigability. The ancient sources relate that the main tributaries of the Danube were navigable for a greater or lesser part of their length. Pliny, referring to the Danube, noticed its considerably increasing volume from its

59

ingress in Il'Lyricum owing to its 60 tributaries, 30 of them being navigable. 284 Strabo alluding probably to the expedition of M. Vinicius, mentions that the Romans used the course of the Mures for the transport of military supplies. 285 Taking into account the finds of Hellenistic and Roman products in Dacia and especially the finds of amphorae and pottery, the following rivers among the tributaries of the Danube, were navigable: the lower course of the Prut, the Siret, 286 the lalomita, the Arge, and of the Mure s. From them overland routes followed the courses of the same rivers towards the interior of Dacia.

60

2. Roads from the Balkan Peninsula to Dacia. The maritime and river routes did not exclude overland routes; the roads almost invariably ran along the principal rivers and were used in regions which were lacking in navigable rivers. Overland roads, crossing mountainous terrain, made possible the development of trade between distant areas, since they linked territories situated at long distance from each other. It seems that commercial traffic between eastern Dacia and the centres of production on the northern shores of the Black Sea generally used sea transport. The existing roads were neither so long nor so important as those which ran through the Balkan Peninsula and generally linked the Greek cities with the areas situated not far off them. In any case traffic on the roads was more difficult than that by sea or by river. The main commercial highroads in the Balkan area joined the CarpathianDanubian territories to the northern shores of the Aegean, to the eastern coast of the Adriatic and to northern Italy. Three main commercial roads (which ran along the principal rivers) linked the northern coasts of the Aegean with the North of the Balkan Peninsula. Another road ran from the eastern coast of the Aegean, along the valley of the Hebrus and the course of the Isker to the Danube. 287

Two other commercial roads, which were partially paral-

lel at their beginning, started one from Amphipolis (running up along the valley of the Strymon), theother from Thessalonica (running along the course of the Axios): the two roads met in the valley of the Margus and ran down from hereto the Danube •288 The road which ran up from Thessalonica to the Axios was identical for some part of its length with the Via Egnatia, which was constructed from 148 B.C. in order to connect Apollonia, situated on the Adriatic, with Thessalonica; it had been prolonged as far as the Hebrus. 289 Apollonia, Dyrrhachium and Thessalonica, which were situated at the extremities of this road, made for very prosperous trade,

290

especially Thessalonica,

owing to the traffic in products from the Danubian countries to this city. 291 An important strategic road (especially from the 2nd century A.D.) in the Balkan area ran from Byzantium through Philippopolis and Serdica to Naissus and Viminacium.292 It seems that the roads from the Hebrus to the Danube and from the Strymon to the Danube were particularly used by Thasian traders. The Greek and Roman traders of Dyrrhachium and Apollonia, travelling from the coast of the Adriatic to the regions north of the Danube, used either the route from Apollonia to the valley of the Axios to the valley of the Margus, or the route 293 from Lissus to the valley of the Drilon to the valley of the Margus. Another main commercial highway linked the North of Italy (especially Aquileia which was well known for its trade with the Danubian countries) with Dacia. This road started from Aquileia 294 crossed the Alps through the Ocra Pass and ran down to Nauportus-.Emona; it forked here into two routes: one branch turned to the North, passed over the mountains and ran down to the valley of the Drave while the other used the navigable course of the Save until the Danube. This highway was used for the transport of merchandise from Campania, which travelled to the North of Italy on the Via Flaminia, repaired and organized by Augustus, 295 and from Aquileja to the East or the Danubian countries; the rivers Save and Drave, navigable for most of their length, 296 facilitated this traffic. The Italian traders (with the Roman coins discovered in Dacia) followed the same route to the Carpathian-Danubian lands. 61

3. Roads in Dacia. The Greek and Roman traders travelled in Dacia along the roads existing along the principal rivers. The overland roads of Dacia, followed, especially in the plain, the course of the rivers for their whole length, whether they were navigable or not.

The geographical distribution of the finds

of Hellenistic and Roman pi oducts and of Greek and Roman coins give an outline of the main roads of Dacia. The majority of the commercial routes started from the Danube, which was the main navigable artery of Dacia. The following were the principal highways crossing Dacia: In geographical order, from the East to the West of Dacia, the first commercial way ran up the Prut valley to the area of its confluence with the Jijia (p1. 2, 3, II); this route is indicated by the finds of amphorae, of pottery and of Greek coins. The rarity of other categories of finds leads to the conclusion that the traffic on this road was not very great, probably owing to the penetration of the Bastarnae and of the Sarmatians Roxolani into these regions. The Siret (which was navigable at least on its lower course) 297 was the most important commercial route in eastern Dacia. A large quantity of Greek and Roman products and coins have been discovered in the Geto-Dacian settlements of Barbosi, Poiana, R.cáth.0 and Bradu situated on the Siret and to the South of its mouth. The route on the Siret, indicated conclusively by the archaeological finds, (pls. 2-3, 8-9, 11, 14) forked into some important branches: one was orientated to the North-East, in the direction of the settlements of the Btrlad plateau and two other branches turned into the intraCarpathian lands. One branch ran up from Pol ana (pls. 2-3, 9, 12-14) to the Trotug valley, the areas situated near the settlements at Tg. Ocna, and through the Oituz Pass to eastern Transylvania; the traffic on this road was from East to West and vice versa. 298 Certainly, this road was the most important highway from the area of the mouth of the Siret to south-eastern Transylvania. The second branch ran up along the Bistria valley, past the Dacian fortifications situated near Piatra Neam (Cozla and Bitca Doamnei), through the Bicaz Pass and the Rodna Pass until it reached Transylvania. 299 This road was less used than that from the Trotu valley through the Oituz Pass to Transylvania. Less important roads ran up from the Siret to the Buzu valley and to the Dacian settlements of Vrancea. Commercial roads crossed the southern half of Dacia (the territories of present-day Muntenia and Oltenia) between them linking this area with the countries situated on the other side of the mountains,°° The first route in geographical order, -

not in importance

-

linked (pls. 2, 3, 8, 14), through the lalomita valley, (the

important settlement of Hirsova-Carsium was on the opposite side of the mouth of this river, on the Danube), the Danube and the Geto-Dacian settlements of the plain (Piscul Crsani) with the hills and the sub-Carpathian area of the eastern half of Muntenia. 301 Another commercial way, used more than that of the Ialomia valley, ran up from the mouth of the Arge (on the Danube) along the course of this river and forked at the confluence with the Drmbovia, one branch passing towards the Geto-Dacian settlements situated near Bucharest, the other running along the course of the Arges, to the settlement of Popesti and far to the north-west. The road along the Arge valley connecting the settlements of the Muntenia plain and the area of hills, 302 was very important during the period investigated in the present book; the density of the different categories of finds is conclusive proof of this, especially for the second half of the 2nd century B C. and the following century .

62

(pis. 2-3, 8-9, 11-14). The commercial road along the Drmbovita valley, passing from Cettteni through the Bran pass to the Tara rnrsei, 303 was very important, for it connected Muntenia with intra-Carpathian Dacia. The commercial importance of this road explains the large number of the Hellenistic products (especially amphorae) discovered at Cethteni and also the concentration of imported products in Tara Birsei, which is situated at the end of this route (pis. 2-3, 11-12, 14). The road Ceteni-Bran Pass-Tarn Btrsei was obviously, over a long period, the main trade route through the Carpathians between Muntenia and Transylvania.

There were two main

arteries of communication in eastern Dacia which linked the intra and extraCarpathian regions, the first in the valley of the Siret to the Oituz Pass, and the second in the valley of the Arges and of the Dtmbovita to the Bran Pass. The road along the Olt valley is well known in western Dacia, especially from a later period. According to the majority of the scholars this road passed through the defile of the Olt to Transylvania 304 However, we do not believe that the narrow and abrupt defile of the Olt 05 was used as a means of communication before the conquest of Dacia by the Romans, who constructed the road through the defile. It seems more probable, on the contrary, that this road ran up from the mouth of the Olt, along the course of this river, turned to westward at the confluence with the Lotru, followed the course of this river and with its continuation as a mountain road ran down into Transylvania near the source of the Sadu. This view is supported by the finds of Thasian tetradrachms, even at the sources of the Sadu, the discovery of a coin of KOEQi type at Brezoi, the finds of imported products and coins on the course of the Olt until it enters the defile, and from its exit from the defile to the Danube. At the same time there is a lack of finds in the defile (pis. 2-3, If, 14) while the use of this trackway during the whole of the Middle Ages and in the modern period is attested. Some roads crossing Muntenia, connected Mtnstirea, Piscul Coconilor, Tinosu, ments of Bucharest, Popesti and Tinosu. 11

306

or the settle-

The most important commercial route from the West of the Olt ran up from the confluence of the Jiul with the Danube, along the course of the Jiul and joining the other branch from the Turnu Severin, passed through the Vtican Pass into Transylvania. 307 Other roads, whose lines are not exactly determined owing to the changes in geography of south-western Romania, crossed the Bannt to Transylvania. Some of them probably have the same course as the Roman roads, as for example the road running up from the Danube (approximately from the place of the later city of Lederata) along the Cara valley, and passing through the Iron Gates to Transylvania. 308 We cannot exclude the possibility that another road crossed the Banat, and following the course of the Timi or the Beg,for some coin finds seems to show the existance of this road (pis. 11-14). The route up the Mureq valley (navigable until Alba Julia) which linked Dacia to the West with Pannonia, was amongst the most frequented in the intraCarpathian areas; it ran up the Mureq valley until the confluence with the Sebes and forked in two branches: one branch followed the course of the Murej and of the Ttrnave and another ran down to the Olt (pis. 2, 3, 8, 1114). There were also in Transylvania a route along the valley of the CibinTilisca-CàpTlna (approximately on the same line as the present local roads) 63

(pis. 3, 8, 14) and the very important route on the Riul Negru 309 running towards present-day Moldavia (pis. 2-3, 8, 13-14). The drachmas of Dyrrhachium and of Apollonia, and some the Roman denarii, circulated into Moldavia by this way up to the Riul Negru. 310 Other roads connected the Mures valley with the areas along the Some, or the territories of western Dacia with the area of Criana, and the great number of coins of Dyrrhachium, Apollonia, as well as Roman coins, discovered in the area of the Crisuri show the existence of this last). 311 Clearly, special improvements in the road system of Dacia to facilitate traffic were not made before the Roman conquest; but the track-ways avoided the danger of destruction by the flow of the rivers or by bad weather. In spite of the fact that these roads were inferior to Roman roads from the point of view of technical construction and of durability, they facilitated the development both of Dacian trade with the Graeco-Roman world and of the internal exchange of products. Greek and Roman traders or indigenous intermediaries carried imported products deep into Dacia, using the main river and overland routes mentioned above.

64

4. Commercial stations. The development, and in the end the transformation, of some Geto-Dacian settlements into market centres was directly connected with the natural resources of the country, either in agricultural products or in minerals such as salt, iron, and precious metals. The possibilities of marketing imported products, and geographical position either at the end of some important commercial artery (river or overland) or at the crossing of natural routes connecting the different regions of Dacia, were also of great importance in the development of the Geto-Dacian settlements. The gathering of the people of aparticular area of Dacia on some occasion, either sacred or secular, and often at a regular time of year, were opportunities for the sale of GraecoRoman and native products, as in other countries neighbouring the GraecoRoman world. The concentration of discoveries of different categories of Graeco-Roman products and of coin finds in certain Geto-Dacian settlements is not explicable simply by the supply of local needs, but rather by the existence of a largescale exchange of products in this period. The density of finds in certain settlements and fortifications which were mentioned in the chapter devoted to Hellenistic and Roman products discovered in Dacia led to the same conclusion. In the following section we will present some more details concerning the different aspects of this problem, in order to point out the progress of CarpathianDanubian trade before the conquest of Dacia by the Romans. Every Geto-Dacian settlement or fortification (more or less important) was a good market for Hellenistic and Roman products. The above-mentioned factors helped to bring about the development and transformation of these settlements into veritable centres of trade. The large majority of the GetoDacian settlements were no more than centres of exchange, which, according to their size and to their local needs, absorbed different quantities of Hellenistic and Roman products and in return furnished indigenous goods to the Greek and Roman merchants. It is certain, as can be seen in the maps of the distribution of imported products and of coins, that the settlements of the whole of Dacia took part in this trade. But some centres became veritable commercial stations owing to the economic possibilities of their surrounding regions, their geographical position and even to their political and religious importance. They acted as intermediaries between the surrounding areas and the Greek and Roman traders. We will deal with these plans in geographical order, from East to West and we will attempt to find out the principal causes of the transformation from centres of exchange into commercial stations. We will deal with two categories of settle ments;fi rst, cent re s which owed their importance to their geographical position, places through which Hellenistic and Roman traders and merchandise travelling to the Dacian lands had to pass, and then other centres which were in fact true market towns. The first category comprises the settlements whose size, importance and finds do not attract our attention; but they are settlements with imported finds

65

and they are also places through which products travelling to the interior of Dacia had to pass. They arouse our interest only owing to the fact that they show the direction of the diffusion of some categories of foreign products and coins into Dacia. The places of exchange of amphorae of southern oils and wines were probably situated at the mouth of the main tributaries of the Danube, such as the Prut, the Siret, the Ialomia, the Arges, the Olt, and the Jiul; the ships discharged their cargo at these places and the transport of the merchandise towards the interior continued by road. 312 rnrsova, Oltenia, Giurgiu were among these places of exchange. Hhrsova was at the same time a place where pottery was unloaded which was destined for both the Dobrudja and the regions situated on the other side of the Danube, where the transport of products used the route along the Talomita. Some localities on the Muntenia plain (p1. 12), with finds of tetradrachms of Thasos and of Macedonia Prima, and other localities in the south-eastern Banat and sometimes on the middle reaches of the Mures, with finds of drachmas of Dyrrhachium and of Apollonia (p1. 13) were only incidentally centres of exchange. The presence of finds in these localities is particularly connected with the direction of the traffic of Greek and Roman traders and coins and is less due to their importance market centres. The second category of Geto-Dacian settlements include the genuine market stations; the concentration of finds, their economic importance and the presence of different Hellenistic and Roman products and coins justifies the classification of these settlements into this category. When modern research in the Geto-Dacian La Tene began it was assumed that the systematic publication of coin finds would perhaps make it possible to identify the Roman emporia of Dada.313 At present, however, when we know more about the Hellenistic and Roman finds (both of products and of coins) dating from the last three centuries before the Roman conquest of Dacia, we cannot identify precisely the Roman emporia; on the other hand, it is possible to identify the more important commercial stations, which were not necessarily also Roman emporia. The concentration of certain categories of imported products at Bradu and Rcäth1u, both localities on the Siret, shows that these centres were commercial stations in which the Greek and Roman traders sold their merchandise and that this merchandise then circulated from these stations to the less important settlements situated in the neighbouring areas. It seems that the fortified settlement at Rctu was particularly concerned with the sale of pottery as mentioned in Chapter II. 2 above .The development of Bradu and Rctãu was due to their geographical position, both settlements being situated on the bank of the main artery of trade in eastern Dacia. The important settlement at Poiana was situated farther to the South. The importance of this commercial station has been noted by earlier scholars 15 Taking into account the abundance of all categories of finds of imported products and coins, Poiana would seem to be the most important Geto-Dacian commercial station in the eastern zone of Dacia. The development of Poiana was due to the wealth of agricultural products and of animals in the surrounding area and to its geographical position on the Siret, for the traffic from the mouth of the Danube to the North of Moldavia and to the intra-Carpathian territories passed through it.

The settlement at Barboi, situated not far from

66

the mouth of the Siret on the Danube, has been excavated, particularly in recent recent years. The excavator drew the conclusion from the evidence of the great number and variety of imported products discovered, that Barbosi was an important commercial centre. 316 The settlement of Barbosi played an important role in the development of Dacian trade even before the Roman domination when its commercial, military and strategic considerably.

importance increased

Other settlements in present-day Muntenia are well-known in the specialist literature. However, not all these settlements were commercial centres or stations in the sense in which we have used the term above for the Moldavian settlements. For example, the presence of imported products and of Greek and Roman coins at Crãsani, MTnstirea, Piscul Coconi, Radovanu etc. was mainly to supply local needs. On the other hand, some fortified settlements were without doubt commercial stations such as Zimnicea, Popesti (situated in the present-day territory of Bucharest), Tinosu and Ceteni. The settlement of Zimnicea benefited from the rich resources of the neighbouring area and from its advantageous geographical position. Zimnicea received and forwarded goods by the way of the most important navigable artery of Dacia, which directly connected this settlement with the Pontic Greek cities 317 and from there indirectly with the centres of production of the Black Sea, the Aegean and the Mediterranean. Zimnicea also played the important role of intermediary between the south-Danubian regions and the northDanubian territories. The abundance and variety of imported products discovered at Popeti (situated on the Arge and not far from the Danube) are comparable with those found at Poiana; other finds from Muntenia exceeded Popesti only in the number of amphorae. From the point of view of economic and commercial development no locality south of the Carpathians was comparable with the settlements at Popeti. 319 Commercially, Popesti was connected to the traffic on the Danube and played the role of intermediary with the sub-Carpathian and hilly regions of Muntenia. The settlements situated around Popeti in the actual territory of Bucharest are also remarkable for the abundance and for the variety of imported products and coins. The collection of the discoveries, and especially of the coin finds, suggests that the settlements of the territory of Bucharest played an important role in trade with the Graeco-Roman merchants travelling (as at Popeti) up the Danube to the confluence with the Arges and then far up the 13mbovita. The economic-commercial development of Tinosu, situated to the North, was facilitated by the existence of roads which linked this station with the Danube and by the existing possibilities of a market in foreign products in central-northern Muntenia. Finally, Cetteni (in Muscel) is the last on the list of commercial stations of Muntenia which have so far been discovered. The development of this settlement was entirely due to its geographical position, situated on the important route which joined the intra and extra-Carpathian territories through the Bran Pass. It was for four centuries the intermediary for trade between

67

the settlements of the Muntenia plain and those of Transylvania. 320

Cetteni

was the most important commercial station which linked the Transylvanian plateau with the Muntenian plain. Furthermore it seems that it played a special part in the spreading of southern wines and oils over the territories situated on the other side of the Carpathians. The fact that only a few Dacian settlements have been excavated in intraCarpathian Dacia explains the scarcity of finds of some categories of imported products in contrast with the large number of coins discovered in the same territories.

However, we cannot consider some Geto-Dacian settlements as

being commercial stations simply on the basis of the coin finds, for the majority of the coin finds are casual or occurred outside the settlements. For example, we know of over a dozen Dacian settlements and fortifications in western Dacia, in Crisana (with a great number of coins of Dyrrhachium, Apollonia and Roman coins) but none of them has been systematically investigated; the excavations were only in restricted areas or limited to trial soundings. 321 For these reasons, we will only deal with the settlements which have been investigated to such an extent that they have provided sufficient archaeological material to draw valid conclusions.

Pecica, on the Mures, was

the most important commercial station in western Dacia.

The abundance of

imported products discovered at Pecica 322 and its geographical position, both in a rich zone and on the most important route between intra-Carpathian Dacia and Pannonia, explain the prosperity of this settlement and its intermediary role in Dacian trade with the western areas both earlier and later in the Roman period. In the south-eastern corner of Transylvania, the settlements situated in the great bend of the Transylvanian Olt and on the course of the Piriul Negru (especially at Sf. Gheorghe and at Cernatu) were important from the point of view of trade relations.

These settlements were situated in a region rich in

agricultural products, cattle, wood, iron and they controlled the road to and from Moldavia which joined the commercial route on the Siret, at the mouth of the Trotus. The same settlements, and especially those around Brasov, received the commercial traffic between the intra-Carpathian zone and present-day Muntenia. The settlements round the Dacian citadels of Tilipca, and especially of Piatra Craivii,also had an important commercial role. Piatra Craivii, remarkable for the large number of imported products discovered there despite the destruction of centuries, had the rich resources of the Mures valley and controlled access to the Apuseni mountains. The zone of Dacian settlements and fortifications in the Orãstie mountains was somewhat unusual from the point of view of commercial traffic. The great number of the settlements and citadels in the southern region of the Orätie mountains and the existence there of the political, military and religious centre of the Dacian state, explain the importance of this market for the Greek and Roman traders.

The presence of the Dacian priesthood and

aristocracy and of the Dacian military leaders and kings favoured to a considerable extent the selling of Hellenistic and Roman luxury goods by the traders and the buying by the same merchants of large quantities of indigenous products from the fertile area of the Mures and from the gold

68

mines of the Apuseni mountains. The exchange of products was very active in the Dacian capital and it was not restricted only to consumer goods which were necessary for the numerous inhabitants of the area.

It is very likely

that a considerable number of indigenous merchants purchased valuable Graeco-Roman products in return for local merchandise; and that the indigenous merchants would then sell the purchased Graeco-Roman products in other regions of Dacia where traders from the Roman empire did not operate. It is possible that other Geto-Dacian settlements (some of them with imposing fortifications near to them), the excavation of which is beginning, were also commercial centres, but we cannot be certain of this until excavations are carried out. The existence of commercial stations in Dacia, demonstrate the intensity of trade, both indigenous and with the outside world, in the Carpathian-Danubian territories. The Graeco-Roman and southern traders and this merchandise were continuously in Dacia, and the country took part in the commercial traffic of the ancient world, developed its economy and participated to an increasing extent in trade with the classical world.

69

V.

THE MERCHANTS

Our present knowledge of the Greek and Roman traders travelling with their merchandise across the Carpathian-Danubian countries is mainly based upon indirect information given both by the finds of Hellenistic and Roman products in Dacia and by analogy with the situation in other regions adjacent to the Roman Empire, as demonstrated by the ancient literary and epigraphical sources. It is, however, useless to repeat all the information referring to the trade of different peoples either dispersed in the ancient literary sources and which has been collected in reference works or existing in the form of epigraphic texts from Italy and the provinces of the Roman Empire which is also well known in the specialist sources. But some reference, even generally, to the situation existing in other areas where Greek and especially Roman traders were active is absolutely indispensable to the objective appreciation of realities in Dacia, which are not known from other sources, but whose existence is proved by the large number of imported products and of Graeco-Roman coins discovered in the country. The traders, confronting all difficulties and dangers, travelled to the farthest countries known in the ancient world, in order to reap high profits. With regard to Roman merchants, Diodorus,323 Tacitus, 324 Caesar, 325 Ovid, 326 Seneca 327 and others speak of the enterprising spirit and the cupidity which were characteristic of those who wished to become rich through.trade. The high prices for which they sold their wares compensated the traders for the difficulties and dangers of their travel across lands situated outside the Roman Empire. For example, a slave was bought in return for a cask of wine in Gaul where Roman merchants travelled for a long time. 328 The numbers of these merchants was considerable in the territories of different barbarian peoples. For example, Roman merchants came to Gaul at the end of the 2nd century B.C , 329 and were numerous even during the period of Caesar's wars. The Marcomannic "king" Maroboduus, at the .

beginning of the Ist century A.D., permitted Roman traders to establish themselves in his Capital and to trade with the neighbouring countries . 331 The same, or even more massive, penetration of Italians also took place in the Orient.

We remember the massacre of 80000 Romans (the majority of

them must have been merchants) 332 by Mithridates in Asia and the murder of 20000 Romans by the order of the same king in Delos. 333 Trajan called the Romans, merchants and business-men who were in the country before the emperor's arrival, 334 to a meeting during his campaign against the Parthians. The merchants from all areas had excellent knowledge of the situation existing in the territories adjacent to the Roman Empire and could give valuable information, even of a military nature .335 This sort of information about Dacia is virtually non-existent. Only Dio Chrysostom alludes in one of his orations to traders who have travelled in

70

Dada and where he himself went for other purposes. 336

M. Secundinus

Genialis domo Claudia Agrippina Daciscus, who was active in the CarpathianDanubian territories, is one of the traders mentioned in the later inscriptions of Aquileja. 337 Bearing in mind that this north-Italian city specialized in trade with the Danubian regions, the trader who is attested epigraphically at Aquileia was probably one of the successors of the merchants active in northDanubian trade before the conquest of Dada by Trajan. The large majority of the Roman traders were residents and for this reason consistentes, qui consistunt, 01 %aT0LX 0 0VTEq are the formulae used for them in the inscriptions. They formed themselves into associations of citizens and not into professional associations, into conventus and not into collegia or corpora. 328 According to a French historian, 9 negotiatores appeared individually or within associations "as rich men, true representatives of the grandeur of Republican Rome in its more arrogant aspects Negotiatores specialized either in the trade in different categories of products (negotiatores frumentari i-vinarii -salsarii -importantes=importers) „.

or in business with a particular region at about the beginning of the ist century A.D. 340 A historian in a work devoted to merchants from the Roman Empire, 341 has suggested that the active conventus civium Romanorum negotiandi causa consistentum were not only to be found in the Orient "but also and especially in the neighbouring barbarian countries and even farther afield". There is no reason to doubt, even though there is no evidence, the existence of these associations of merchants in Dacia. The economic and political conditions existing in the north-Danubian territories, other than the conflicts with the Greek cities on the Black Sea and more particularly other than the more numerous conflicts with the Roman Empire, favoured the penetration of foreign merchants and the development of trade. The protectorates over the Pontic cities frequently established by the GetoDacian chieftains ensured the spread of Greek products 342 and the conquest of the same Pontic Greek cities by Burebista later "proves that the Greek cities of the Dobrudja were for a long period integrated in their production of merchandise into the economic-political structure of the Carpathian-Danubian area."

343

The finds of imported products and of coins in the settlements of

Dacia prove also that the numerous conflicts between the Dacians and the Roman Empire, especially during the Ist century B.C. -lst century A. D.344 did not interrupt the movement of merchants and of Roman products north of the Danube. The identification of the origin of the foreign merchants who traded in Dacia, is based, for the moment, upon the study of the categories of imported products and of the coins, upon the delimitation of the geographical areas of the centres of production and upon the methods of marketing of the products. In relation to the trade in Hellenistic products we should mention that the intermediaries of the Greek cities were not always responsible for transactions between the merchants of the centres of productions and merchants native to Dacia, but that amphorae of oil and wine could be sold directly to the consumer when the transaction took place in the centres of trade situated on the Danube. 345

71

According to the stamped amphorae discovered in Dacia, the Greek traders in southern wines and oils came firstly from Thasos and Rhodes and secondly from Cnidos

34 6 and

from the cities on the shores of the Black Sea.

Both the

Aegean and Pontic traders, especially the intermediaries from the cities on the western coasts of the Black Sea who knew the Carpathian-Danubian areas very well, sold other products from Greek centres as well, such as objects of metalwork, glassware, textiles, fabrics etc. The Thasian merchants also became commercially important in Dacia. The main reason of the disappearance of Thasian stamped amphorae in Dacia, in about the 3rd century B.C. was perhaps the unusually severe competition from similar Rhodian products. However, we do not believe that the trading activity of the Thasian traders was brought to a complete halt;

the numerous finds of Thasian tetradrachms 347

prove the active participation of these merchants in the economic-commercial life of Dacia. The Thasian merchants dominated trade with the countries of the Balkan Peninsula from the second half of the 2nd century B.C. and the beginning of the following century onwards; and the tetradrachms of Macedonia Prima probably penetrated into Dacia by their agency also. 348 These facts allow us to assume with reasonable certainty that the Thasian and Rhodian traders, probably always accompanied by those of the cities on the western shores of the Black Sea, dominated the "Greek" trade with the Carpathian Danubian territories at various periods before the arrival of traders from the eastern coasts of the Adriatic and of the Italian merchants. The merchants of Dyrrhachium, Apollonia and of Italy, of whom the Italian traders were soon to gain supremacy over the commercial business of Dacia, appear in the markets of Dacia from about the last decades of the 2nd century B.C. and especially from the first years of the Ist century B.0

It is very likely that the

drachmas of Apollonia and of Dyrrhachium show the direction of the penetration of Roman trade into Dacia rather than the real presence of the products of these Adriatic cities in the country. These two Adriatic cities were situated at the western end of the road named Via Egnatia and they took over both the traffic from Italy across the sea to the area of the western Aegean and that going in the opposite direction, from Thessalonica to Italy. This happened at the beginning of the period of the penetration of their coins into Dacia.

The

Italian merchants and their products destined for the areas to the north of the Balkan Peninsula followed the roads from Dyrrhachium and Apollonia to the Danube and as a result we can easily associate the Roman commercial penetration into Dacia with the coin finds of the Adriatic cities discovered in the country. From the period of Augustus Roman commercial penetration was made easier as a result of the increased security of the road between the Danubian countries and the North of Italy. In any case, the Roman products and coins discovered in Dacia demonstrate without doubt the absolute supremacy of the Italian merchants over the country during the last two centuries before its conquest by the Romans. The same finds show that this supremacy was more evident in intra-Carpathian Dacia and in Oltenia than in the rest of the extraCarpathian territories, a fact which has been noted in the earlier literature. 350 The Roman commercial penetration into Dada a was decisive for the orientation of Dacian commerce towards the West. We mention once more that the clear orientation of Western Dacian trade to the West took place at an earlier period than that of Muntenia and of Moldavia. The Roman economic penetra-

72

tion into these two areas took place from the lower Danube to the North, after the extension of the boundaries of the empire up to the Danube 351 and did not eclipse entirely the role of the Greek cities in their trade, which had long existed in extra-Carpathian Dacia. The period of absolute supremacy of the Italian merchants in the trade of Dacia with the Graeco-Roman world comprised in fact the two last centuries of the free existence of the country. The activity of the foreign merchants (either Greek or Roman) could not, however, do away with the place of the indigenous intermediaries in Dacian trade. The whole economic development of Dacia, and especially the existence of trading based upon money prove the existence of a developing internal trade, which presumes the appearance of indigenous merchants as a distinct social group, even in the Ist century B.C. 352 We cannot imagine that Greek merchants took part in trading ventures to the distant area of the northern half of Dacia even from the beginning of the commercial relations between the country and the classical world; the safety ensured by the good-will of the local chieftains and knowledge of the routes were necessary for such travels. As indigenous intermediaries, the Geto-Dacians were indispensable to the development of active trade in the Dacian markets. Internal economic development, the remarkable progress in production, and the continuously increasing surplus of goods destined for trade, brought about

-

the evolution of a middle class of merchants, which was able to supply the needs of internal trade. The presence of Greek and Roman merchants and their products in Dacia and the continuous increase in the volume of these products gave a new impulse to internal commerce and implicitly contributed to strengthen the class of indigenous traders.

The indigenous traders played

an intermediary role between the principal Geto-Dacian markets (where the Greek and Roman traders arrived) and a lot of settlements scattered in the Dcian plains and mountains. The same indigenous traders carried Roman products and coins to the farthest areas of the Carpathian-Danubian territories and propagated the concept of "money" as a universal means of exchange accepted by all in the markets of Dacia. The favourable influence of the intense circulation of Graeco-Roman goods on the economic development of Dacia and at the same time the influences of Graeco-Roman civilization on the Geto-Dacian material and spiritual culture are clearly to be seen from the study of the local products based on models coming from the classical world, and from the aspects of Dacian culture which will be dealt with in the next chapter.

73

VI.

THE CONSEQUENCES OF THE RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN DAdA AND THE HE LLENIS'rIC AND ROMAN WORLD. INFLUENCES OF GRAECO-ROMAN CIVILIZATION ON GETO-DACIAN CIVILIZATION

1.

The occurrence and the diffusion of local amphorae in the trade in wine.

Fragments of amphorae which clearly differ from the Greek originals in fabric and technical execution have been discovered in some Geto-Dacian settlements, ever since archaeological research began.

Furthermore, some of them have

stamps on the handles with different geometrical forms in place of the usual writing on the imported stamped amphorae. The extension and the intensification of archaeological research has brought about a substantial numerical increase in the finds of local amphorae 353 and in consequence of this the local amphorae have now been treated in the specialist literature. The local amphorae did not imitate all the forms of the types of Greek amphorae existing in Dacia, the majority of them being more or less exact copies of the originals from Rhodes, Cnidos,

354

and Cos.

The majority of

the imitations have a similar shape to that of Rhodian amphorae, 355 which at least from the point of view of stamped amphorae were the most numerous and the most well-known in Dacia.

Taking this into account, (for the evidence

for this see above the chapter on wines and oil), the similarity of the forms of body and handles, between the majority of the local amphorae and the Rhodian amphorae can be explained. The number of local amphorae so far discovered in the Geto-Dacian territories is very small in comparison with that of imported amphorae;

at the

same time the distribution map shows that the imitative amphorae covered a large geographical area.

Taking into account the technical features, the

local amphorae can be classified into two main categories: stamped.

unstamped and

There are 100 unstamped amphorae which have been discovered

at Cetteni, Grdistea Muncelului, Ozum (Pl. 20, 46), Pecica, Poiana, Poian, Popesti, Sighioara and Tinosu. The majority of these amphorae were found in the settlement at Popesti, in which about half of the total have been discovered.356

The stamped amphorae (pls. 18-20, 46), over 100 in number,

have been found at Cscioare1e, Cozia, Crsani, Giurgiu, Popeti and Zinuiicea.

There are rectangular stamps which have in their field longitud-

inal and transverse or winding lines and angles in relief, circular stamps, the majority in the shape of a rosette with a number of spokes, and stamps in the shape of a palmette.

oval

Rectangular stamps have been discovered

at Csicoarele (1), Cethteni (29), Crsani (1), Giurgiu (1), Popesti (38) and at Zimnicea (4). are rarer;

The other stamps, the majority in the shape of a palmette,

they have until now been found only at Cozia (3) near Deva, and

at Popepti (2).

Two rectangular stamp s from Ceteni 3 S7 have a few Greek

letters besides the geometrical patterns and two stamps from Popesti 358 have human images.

There are different explanations concerning the stamp-

ing of the local amphorae.

According to D. V. Rosetti

359

the main reason

of the stamping of amphorae with geometrical marks was the fact that the imitators of the original stamps did not know Greek writing and they did it to make it easier to distinguish between the different kinds of amphorae

74

preferred by customers.

V. Eftimie

360

does not rule out completely the pos-

sibility that the stamps marked the different types of the same product, but she is inclined to believe that these stamps were rather marks of potters; in support of her opinion she cites the fact that the existing stamps on other types of Geto-Dacian pottery can be interpreted in a similar way to the stamped amphorae. The diversity of these anepigraphic stamps and the variety of their marks contradict the interpretation of the local amphorae put forward by D. V. Rosetti.

We can hardly accept that the Geto-Dacians from other centres than

the centres producing wines and implicitly making stamped amphorae knew of the numerous variety of wines, each having a distinct mark on the amphorae, and according to these marks chose a particular type. At first sight, the hypothesis of V. Eftimie seems more probable. But in this case, the practice of the Geto-Dacian potters was used particularly in the making of amphorae. It is true that there are a number of marks on the pottery which can be interpreted as marks of potters, but they are found on other categories of pottery as well and in any case the stamping of these products was not a usual and general practice, as in the case of the local amphorae. Furthermore, taking into account the diversity of marks, the number both of workshops and of artisans producing these products would appear to be very large in comparison with the total number of stamped amphorae discovered in Romania. In my opinion the act of stamping the local amphorae had nothing to do with the marks of the potters involved and even less to do with the variety of wine being carried in amphorae bearing the same stamp. We must explain the presence of anepigraphic marks on the amphorae as an imitation of the Greek originals. The indigenous potters imitated both the stamped and unstamped amphorae; the writing on the Greek stamped amphorae had no sense for the local potters who could not read; but the imitation by these artisans of the foreign forms with all their details resulted in amphorae which were copies as exact as possible of the originals. The indigenous artisans in their attempt to imitate very exactly the Greek amphorae, copied also the marks on the handles, which were important and significant on the originals; the local potters copied them only in order to produce amphorae in a similar shape and as near as possible in detail to that of the Greek amphorae. The fact that these potters did not know Greek writing explains the use of different geometrical signs on the local stamps in place of Greek letters. The existence of some Greek letters in the field of two stamps discovered at Cetteni seems to reinforce this explanation.

We believe that the stamps from Cet-

Jeni were also local imitations of the original marks; the indigenous artisans being successful in their attempt to copy exactly a few Greek letters. Local amphorae, stamped or not, have been discovered in the settlements (Pl. 2) of the central and southern part of present-day Muntenia, at Cetàjeni, in the southern half of Transylvania and in a settlement of Moldavia •361 We notice that all the stamped amphorae have been found only in Muntenia, with a single exception:

two handles from amphorae have been discovered in the

settlement of Cozia, situated on a height to the left of the Mure, over the present-day village of Vejel. One of them seems to have a mark in the shape of apalmette;

the other is with a stamped decoration.

75

Fragments of local amphorae occur very rarely in the whole territory of intra-Carpathian Dada and they are completely missing in Oltenia and in the northern half of Moldavia.

It is possible that new finds will occur in

these territories in the future, but certainly until now the great majority have been discovered in the settlements situated in the Muntenian plain and at Cet'teni. The amphorae of Cetäteni are associated rather with trade in wine produced on the other side of the Carpathians, than with local production of wine, for the local climate is not favourable to viticulture. On the other hand, nothing impeded viticulture and wine-production in the area of the settlements of Popesti, Giurgiu, Cscioarele, Crsani and Zimnicea. The largest number of amphorae has been discovered at Popesti with about 100 pieces, half of them being stamped amphorae. This fact is important for the identification of possible centres of production. It is interesting that the finds of imitative amphorae are very rare in the countries adjacent to the present-day territory of Romania. Up to now, we know about the existence of only one fragment of an imitative amphora, in the Ruse museum (with unknown findspot), and of another fragment from Histria 363 and the publication of two stamped handles one with a mark in the shape of a rosette with 12 spokes and another with a rectangular mark with transverse -

lines

-

from Olbia. 364

It seems, taking this into consideration, that the imi-

tative amphorae characterized only certain areas of north-Danubian Dacia, the few finds from the other areas being inconclusive. In consequence, the centres of production of imitative amphorae discovered in Romania were situated in the Muntenia plain. 365 However, local wineproduction was not restricted only to areas surrounding settlements where local amphorae have been discovered. Taking into account the geographical distribution of the uninscribed stamps discovered in Dacia, we notice the presenceof the same, or very similar marks from the point of view of the forms, dimensions and signs, in different settlements. For example, the same mark occurs at Cseiaorele (a), Cràsani, Cetteni (27) and Popesti (17); other examples of the same marks from different sites are at Popesti (20) and Cetht 1eni (25); no. 21 from Popesti and no. 23 from Cetheni are identical and Popesti 33=rCetãteni 7-8. Similar marks appear at Zimnicea (C) and at Cetàteni (5) and one in the shape of a palmette occur at Popesti (42) and at Cozia (b). Identical rectangular stamps have been discovered within the same settlement at Cetteni and at Popesti and identical circular stamps have been found within the same settlement at Popesti and at Zimnicea. Taking into consideration the number of uninscribed stamps discovered in different settlements we have no doubt that Popeti was one of the centres of production of local amphorae. One Dacian settlement among those situated in the actual territory of Bucharest, in which a die-stamp with an anthropomorphic design has been discovered, is presumed to also be a centre of production. It is possible that this die was destined for a use other than for the stamping of amphorae; the manner of the drawing of one of the human figures was inspired by the representation of the Rhodian circular stamps. 366 The diffusion and the presence of the same stamps in different settlements are explained by trade and by the transport of wine to different places. In Muntenia, Cetteni is, after Popeti, the settlement with the largest number of finds of local amphorae, but the presence

76

of these products here must be connected with the commercial activity of this place;

Cethteni played the role of intermediary between the two sides of

the Carpathians. It also seems that the stray finds from Transylvania (Cozia and Sighisoara) and the amphorae discovered at Poiana are associated with the trade rather than with the local production. The local amphorae are dated according to the chronology of the archaeological assemblages with which they are found. V. Eftimie 367 proposed the 2nd-Ist centuries B.C.,D.V. Rosetti

368

the 2nd-the beginning of the Ist cen-

tury A.D. and D. Tudor 369 believed that the local amphorae dated either from the same period as that of the imported Rhodian amphorae or not long after the end of their import. It is true that the period of the maximum production and intensive use of local amphorae comprised the 2nd -Ist centuries B.C. or rather the last quarter of the 2nd century B C. and the first decades of the following century, but the local production of amphorae had not ceased through.

out the whole of Dacia at the beginning of the Ist century A.D.

There is no

reason to establish the lower limit of the pieces discovered at Cozia and at Grditea Muncelului to the beginning of the Ist century A.D.; they can be dated (especially those from Grditea Muncelului) equally well during the whole of that century. -

The production and the use of local amphorae in the north-Danubian lands cannot be interpreted, as has been suggested, as an attempt to deceive by selling indigenous products with the label of Greek southern wines. 370 Local demand, which could not be supplied by the import of southern wines, brought about the production of imitative amphorae which existed and were used simultaneously with the original pieces •371 The local amphorae demonstrate also the existence of local wine production and marketing. 372 The local amphorae prove the extension of the wine-trade and the demand for wine in the intraCarpathian territories of Dacia, already indicated by the geographical distribution of Greek amphorae in Romania.

The existence of a few pieces in southern

Transylvania and the large number discovered at Cetãeni are obviously connected with the trade in wine on the other side of the Carpathians. The majority of the wines marketed in the territories situated on the other side of the Carpathians were carried in receptacles and under conditions which have been mentioned in the chapter devoted to imported amphorae. Finally, the local amphorae imitating southern originals and especially those with anepigraphic stamps prove the influence of Greek products upon Geto-Dacian material culture; the Geto-Dacians imitated and interpretated in their own manner specifically Greek forms belonging to a branch of production which was not of great economic importance and whose products were not necessarily carried or kept only in amphorae. The new pottery forms adopted by the Geto-Dacians in some respects spread over a larger geographical area than the Greek originals. This is the best argument to suggest that Geto-Dacian civilisation assimilated new forms and that an active internal trade existed in the Carpathian-Danubian territories. The idea of the occurrence of new pottery forms in GetoDacian material culture and its spreading over the north-Danubian territories after its assimilation by the tribes situated to the south of the Carpathians is of a great importance as evidence of the penetration of the influences of classical civilisation beyond the territories in which the presence of imported products facilitated its development. 77

2. Ceramic imitations of Graeco-Roman products. This section deals with both Geto-Dacian pottery imitating Graeco-Roman models and the local ceramic imitations of products of Hellenistic and Roman metalwork. Geto-Dacian imitations of Hellenistic and Roman pottery have been discovered in nearly all Geto-Dacian settlements which have so far been excavated systematically. On the other hand local imitations of metal products especially of bronze coming from the Hellenistic and Roman world are entirely -

-

sporadic, a few pieces having been discovered in few Geto-Dacian settlements. We cannot study these products in detail before the publication of material discovered in Dacia, owing to both the existence of a large quantity of GetoDacian pottery inspired from Graeco-Roman forms and the constant repetition of the same forms. We do not, however, intend to record systematically and exhaustively all local pottery influenced by similar Graeco-Roman products but to select to the extent of the written information existing in the specialised -

literature, the verbal information given by Directors of excavations and the study of the archaeological material (thanks to the good-will of the specialist) in the mudeums the main forms which were integrated into Geto-Dacian material culture. We have payed particular attention to the pieces discovered in -

those areas where the southern originals are rare or missing. By this we mean the Geto-Dacian settlements and cemeteries from the north of presentday Moldavia, Crisana, the Bannt, northern Transylvania and from Oltenia, where archaeological research is missing or at an early stage. As a result the majority of the ceramic material is still unknown in these areas. The publication of a work 373 devoted to Geto-Dacian pottery discovered in intra-Carpathian Dacia has been useful to our study and we have used almost entirelythe finds recorded on that occasion. But it is true that pieces inspired from similar Graeco-Roman products have been discovered in all the Geto-Dacian settlements where archaeological excavations have been carried out; very probably their number will increase substantially with the extension of investigations in future, especially in areas which have so far been neglected. It will then be possible to make an attempt to define precisely the peculiarities of detail of each area, depending on the direction from whence the Hellenistic and Roman world exerted their influences on these areas. We pay attention to two main categories of pottery: painted and ordinary pottery. For both categories we take into account the principal forms of vessels which were adopted from the Graeco-Roman world: jugs and pitchers, dishes, storage jars, different forms of pots of medium size, kantharoi, bowls, unguentaria, lamps and imitations in ceramic of some products in metal-work. Almost all the pieces, regardless of their forms, were wheel-made, from a fine and well-baked paste; hand-made pottery occurs incidentally and in rare forms, such as multi-branched candelabra. Painted pottery, 374 regardless of the forms and of the size of the vessels occurs in Geto-Dacian culture relatively late; so far it has not been discovered in settlements or levels datable before the Ist century B. C. -Ist century A. D. There are in the main two categories of painted pottery: pottery decorated with

78

geometrical patterns, datable from the ist century B .C . -ist century A .D. (Pl. 36) and pottery decorated with geometrical, floral and zoomorphic patterns, discovered only in the area of the settlements and fortifications of the Orastie mountains and datable from the Ist century A.D. Greek models mainly, and possibly also Celtic models, were the prototypes of pottery painted with geometrical patterns, regardless of whether the brown or brown-red paint was applied directly onto the clay or over a yellowish-white slip. We would add that the design of thin lines applied directly on the paste could be adopted from Roman pottery which existed both before and after Geto-Dacian painted pottery was being produced. It is not necessary to dwell further on this category of pottery since it is very well-known. The origins of another category of painted pottery which is decorated with floral and zoomorphic patterns, remain obscure, since the possible analogies are too far removed chronologically. However, we can notice the resemblance not in stylistic details but in general patterns with Hellenistic pottery with floral decoration dated from the 2nd century -Ist century B.C. which, also being well-known, it is not necessary to dwell on. If it is not accepted that the Geto-Dacian pottery painted with floral patterns was a local creation and it is very difficult to admit this assumption then, according to our -

-

present knowledge, the only possible prototypes are some forms of Hellenistic pottery especially lagynoi (decorated with stylized floral patterns on their upper part, but also with harps, lyres etc.), lids, and vessels of small size either with handles or without, which have been discovered in the centres of -

production in Greece, in the cities of the Black Sea basin (including those situated on its western shores) and even in the Geto-Dacian settlements of Romania. The inspiration of Hellenistic models did not mean that, in the case of indigenous pottery painted with floral patterns as well as of other imitative products, the copying of the original models was slavish, without the normal addition of some elements depending on the taste, technical abilities and skill of the local artisans. It is the case that „. . .in the painted pottery.. .we must see a local artistic style inspired by models coming from the South regardless of the route by which they arrived" .3''5 We have mentioned earlier that the pottery painted with floral and zoomorphic patterns has until now been discovered in the area of Gradistea Muncelului and it was most probably produced in a workshop in the civilian settlement situated on the Grädistea hill. 376 On the other hand, the pottery painted with geometrical patterns, almost invariably with lines and bands of different width on the sides of the vessels and more rarely with dots, especially on vessels of relatively small size, have been discovered in nearly all the moreimportant settlements of Moldavia, Muntenia and Transylvania. 377 The pottery painted with geometric patterns was a common feature of the Geto-Dacian culture and possibly its occurrence was not linked with a particular centre from which it diffused to the other areas of Dacia. The diffusion of the different local vessels imitating Hellenistic and Roman models roughly covers the whole territory of Dada; 378 their absence in some areas is reasonably explained by the absence or by the scarcity of archaeological excavations in those places. The material listed below is intended as an informative guide and not as a complete catalogue of the finds of these vessels.

79

The local imitative pitchers and jugs (p1. 5) have been discovered in Moldavia in the settlements situated on the Siret and on the middle Bistrita (Poiana, Rcàtu, Bradu, Piatre Neamt-Cozla), in central and southern

'

Muntenia (Crsani, Sultana, Bucharest, Popesti, Mosteni), at Celei, in the southern half of Transylvania (Rotbav, Sighioara, Tilisca, Cpflna, Grdistea Muncelului), while single finds have occured in the northern Banat, at Crpinis, at Pecica and at Simleul Silvaniei.

The chronology of these pieces

depends on the dating both of the imitated original forms and more importantly upon the dating of the deposits in which they were found. The double handled cups (p1. 28-30, 49-50) imitating the form of Kantharos type, have been found

(Pl.

6) particularly in Moldavia, in the settlements on

the Siret (Bradu, Râc.tu, Poiana), on the middle Bistrija (Piatra NeamjBitca Doamnei, Piatra Neam-Cozla, Piatra at Tg. Ocna.

oimului) and as isolated finds

There are a few pieces found in Muntenia (Ceteni, Tinosu,

Popesti) and in Transylvania (Sighisoara, Cetea, CpT1na, Grditea Muncelului).

The number and the variety of the finds shows that the settlements at

Poiana and at Rãctâu were the most active centres of production.

Taking

into account the finds in Moldavia and especially those from the above-mentioned sites, we can affirm, quite certainly, that the Geto-Dacians of the areas situated to the East of the Carpathians had a preference for the Kantharos form and its imitations. The presence of an impressive quantity of the originals in these territories and the fact that the products of certain Greek Pontic centres were marketed particularly in the eastern part of Dacia (which was in close commercial contact with these centres of production) can explain this preference.

The imitations, more or less similar to the original forms,

of the different types of Kantharoi are dated, like the pitchers and jugs, according to both the chronology of the genuine forms and of the archaeological deposits in which they have been discovered. The bowls (p1. 37, 51) constitute a distinct category in form, execution and decoration.

They are of conical or hemi-spherical forms and they usually

have a varied and rich decoration which is unusual. 379

They occur in small

numbers in the Geto-Dacian settlements of Moldavia which are situated along and north of the Siret.

(Botoana, Bradu, Poiana and Barbosi).

The

number of find-spots and of pieces found is very large in Muntenia, especially in the central part of the Muntenian plain (Crsani, Sultana, Câscioarele, Chirnogi, Radovanu, Vasilai, Bucharest, Pope sti, Br.nitari, Giurgiu, Zimnicea, Cuciei) and there isolated finds in the North of Muntenia (Ctndeti, Ceteni). Gruii,

In Oltenia the finds occur particularly in the South-West (Poiana

imian, Tr. Severin), with isolated finds in the central zone (Craiova)

and in the North (Polovragi).

In Transylvania these vessels have been dis-

covered on the middle Mure s (C raiva,Geoagiü), in the central zone of the Ttrnave (Sighisoara, Tigmandru) and at Sibiu -Guterita.

In spite of the fact

that the local bowls are evidently inspired by Greek models, they are clearly different from the originals.

They are usually of grey or grey-black paste

and they are wheel-made by means of moulds having in negative the imprints of the ornamental patterns.380

(Pl. 37, 51).

It is certain that the local

decorated bowls were inspired by Greek pottery originals. We could, perhaps, discuss the undecorated vessels, like a piece from Botosana and those from Bucharest, Popesti and Geoagiu, which imitated 80

Greek bowls of the so-called tD eli an

type, but we would not gain conclusive

results. The absence of decoration was due to the inability of the local artisans to make moulds or to the fact that they were copies of Hellenistic silver vessels of hemi-spherical forms. 381 But, notwithstanding the hypotheses of scholars, which (so far) cannot be conclusively proved, the local production of the decorated bowls discovered in Dacia is certain. The finding of moulds at Poiana, Cr.sani and at Popeti are significant in this respect. Further, the bowls are decorated both with Greek patterns such as palmettes, rosettes, groups of leaves in the shape of scales, and also with other patterns introduced into the decoration by the local artisans, such as impressions of coins, spurs and anthropomorphic figures. 382 The centres of production of the decorated bowls were certainly the GetoDacians settlements where moulds have been found; the undecorated bowls could be made elsewhere in Dacia. The decorated bowls spread by the agency of the same trade-links which also diffused other products. Their utilization was directly linked to their form:

pretentious drinking cups had no use in

religious ritual as has been suggested on the basis of a cup with an anthropomorphic representation discovered at Popeti and of another with a hand image found at Zimnicea. 383 Clearly, we cannot exclude the possibility that these drinking cups were also used for ritual ceremonies, but certainly ritual necessities did not determine their production. The chronology of the local decorated bowls is identical with that of the settlements or of the strata in which they have been discovered, that is to say, 2nd century B.C. -ist century A.D. ;384 with regard to other bowls, there is no obstacle in theory to bringing down the lower chronological limit to the following century, but in this case also each piece can only be dated according to the archaeological milieu of the discovery. Other forms of pottery, such as storage jars inspired by similar Greek vessels, lids of Hellenistic and especially of Roman influence, vessels very similar to Roman situlae, vessels of medium size also imitating Greek and Roman products, vessels with tubular spouts or spouts formed by flattening the rim of the vessel, paterae, and vessels of rhyton type are all also well-known among the finds of GetoDacian settlements (Pl. 31-35, 50). A large number of some of these forms such as storage jars and lids, have been discovered in different settlements and fortifications, and it would take many pages to catalogue them. The storage jars particularly (p1. 50) show a great variety of size and they occur in almost all the main settlements so far excavated. 385 They derive from Greek vessels of the same type dolia and pithoi and, like the lids imitating Hellenistic and Roman forms they became permanently included in the repor-

-

tory of forms of Geto-Dacian pottery. 387 With relation to the storage jars it is out of the question that some Greek originals were imported which were then copied by the native Dacian artisans. The adoption of these forms could only take place as the result of commercial contacts owing to the impossibility of the transport over long distance of vessels of such a size as dolia or pithoi. Taking into account the fact that this form not only existed but was very common in the repertory of local pottery, we cannot exclude the possibility that it was mode]ledin Dacia by potters coming from the Pontic cities.

81

The local lamps (pl. 50) inspired by imported similar forms are rarer among the finds. They have so far been found only in the settlements of Bucharest, Popesti and of Grdistea Muncelului (p1. 5) Vessels of rhyton type have been discovered at Cetäjeni and at Sighisoara. Small vessels of .

an elaborate form, intended for perfume and ointment and imitating Greek and Roman originals, are also scarce (Poiana, Minatirea, Popesti). The final category of pottery inspired by Hellenistic and Roman imported products include those vessels copying the forms of glass and especially bronze receptacles, such as the vessel from Poiana inspired by a glass form and the imitations of bronze products discovered at Rcàtáu in Moldavia, at Bucharest and Popeti in Muntenia and at Costesti, Gràditea Muncelului (Feje1e Albe) in Transylvania (Pl. 31, 50-51). In summary, a large quantity of vessels inspired by Graeco-Roman models, though not a large variety of forms considering their number, existed in GetoDacian pottery. It is also clear that the spread of pottery imitating GraecoRoman models was very wide and stray finds prove the diffusion of these products into areas where archaeological excavation is either missing or, being less developed, has not provided these materials. Some of the forms of vessels adopted by the Geto-Dacians from Hellenistic and Roman pottery, such as storage jars and lids, became a permanent part of local material culture. In this respect there is considerable doubt as to the origin of the dishes which have so far been discovered in large numbers in all settlements.

Their form

(Pl.

27) was not merely character-

istic of the local Geto-Dacian culture, but was also wide-spread in other countries. For this reason only the pieces which are very similar to Hellenistic and Roman forms can be considered as imitative vessels, the others resulting from the evolution of the traditional hand-made pottery. 388 Hellenistic and Roman pottery exerted influences in many ways on the native pottery during the whole period from the 2nd century B.C. to ist century A.D. It is not always easy to distinguish the influence of Hellenistic pottery from that of Roman pottery. Further, with regard to certain centres of production situated in continental Greece, Asia Minor and on the shores of the Black Sea, which fell under Roman political, military and finally economic domination, it is difficult, even with traditionally based crafts like pottery, to pin-point exactly the end of the period of strictly speaking "Greek" pottery, that is to say Greek in form, decoration, potters, traders and owners of workshops, and the beginning of "Roman" pottery in the same Greek centres of production. The distinction between them is easier in the 2nd century B.C. than later, when only the area of diffusion and the technical and ornamental details of different forms of pottery help us to identify places or regions of production. All these centres were eventually, though gradually, included in the Roman Empire. For these reasons we will deal with the main factors influencing Greek and Roman pottery, and we will only try to distinguish between them when there is certain evidence. We have already mentioned the forms inspired from Graeco-Roman models and we have listed the nearest parallels of every piece in the catalogue. With regard to the technical details, we notice that the slip was applied before the painting of different ornamental patterns on the body 82

of the vessels;

this technique is evidently of Hellenistic origin. 389

If painting

on top of the slip is due to the same Hellenistic influences (although we cannot exclude completely some western influences) 390 then painting directly on the paste could be due to the influence of Roman painted pottery. Some elements of the decoration, such as the ornaments in relief on the base of the handles of GetoDacian pitchers and the twisted handle of the same vessels, were inspired from Greek models 391 as well as the ornamental patterns on local bowls which imitated the original decoration. It is impossible to be certain whether stamped decoration with rosettes (Pl. 31, 50) and with impressions of different forms 392 was a Greek or Roman technique. Some of the impressed patterns, especially those applied on parts out of sight or those without ornamental role, can he interpreted, because of their individuality, as marks of potters. 393 However, marks which can be considered as marks of potters are scarce and incidental on Geto-Dacian pottery and stamping of the vessels was not used to a great extent. It is clear that Roman pottery influenced the local forms and contributed to the adoption by native potters of the technique of stamped decoration. It is also possible that Roman influence brought about the transition, during the first century, to the oxidation process, giving colouring from pale yellow to dark red. 394 Graeco-Roman pottery exerted influences on Geto-Dacian pottery in the whole period from the 2nd century B C. to the ist century A. D. These influences came mainly from the Greek centres of production in the second .

century B C., when they were accompanied by Roman influence. .

Both in-

fluences (according to the possibilities of distinguishing one influence from the other) are exerted together during the ist century B.C. and finally the Roman influence became predominant from the ist century A.D. 395 Areas of diffusion of these two influences are partially distinguishable; the Greek influence was exerted directly and especially on extra-Carpathian Dacia, while Roman influence was more pronounced in the intra-Carpathian territories. Taking into consideration the fact that, on the whole, indigenous products imitating the forms of Graeco-Roman pottery are more numerous and varied than the imported originals discovered in Dacia we may presume that the variety of imported forms was originally larger than has so far been found. At the same time the chronological distribution is the same in both cases. The local imitations confirm what we noted in the case of the originals for there is a continuous increase in number and in variety up to the period of the Geto-Dacian wars. The fact of the adoption of complex forms and techniques of pottery production proves on the one hand the highly developed state of Geto-Dacian society and the existence of those conditions which are indispensable for the borrowing by one culture from another 396 and on the other hand it demonstrates that Geto-Dacian society was not static but on the contrary was open wide to the influencesof the superior civilisation of the Graeco-Roman world and was more and more able to assimilate them. Owing to the fact that a lot of Geto-Dacian forms of pottery, evidently of Graeco-Roman inspiration, circulated in the Carpathian-Danubian territories as products assimilated into the indigenous civilisation, it is difficult to distinguish between pieces

83

directly imitating the initial imitative products. This explains the larger area of diffusion of the local imitations compared with that of the imported products. Graeco-Roman influences, as in the case of amphorae, were exerted to different degrees of intensity on the whole geographical area inhabited by the Geto-Dacians and not only on those regions where imported products had penetrated in large numbers. These various, profound and extensive influences from a superior Greek or Roman civilisation were grafted on to the local vigorous background and favoured internal development, accelerated the increase of material wealth of Geto-Dacian society and blended the characteristic forms of Graeco-Roman civilisation into the physical manifestations of the local culture.

84

3.

Local imitations of imported bronze vessels.

Some vessels, differing

in form and in technical details from similar products, have been discovered in Dacia as well as the well-known Hellenistic and especially Italian vessels and bronze objects. The existence of bronze-working workshops, proved by the finds of crucibles, fused bronze and bullion, demonstrates that the natives had certainly acquired the special technical knowledge of this craft, even if, as the finds made so far suggest, concentrated on the manufacture of personal omamentsj-Iowever, we cannot exclude a priori the possibility that the local bronze-workshops also produced vessels and objects copied from similar Greek and Roman products. On the other hand, from our present knowledge of the local craft of metal-work in bronze, we have very little evidence to support the existence of an appreciable production of local vessels of bronze. The few finds of such products have occurred only in the area of the Dacian settlements and fortifications of the 0rá9tie mountains and they are placed in the catalogue after the imported vessels and objects of bronze. 397 There are afew pieces of bronze which were certainly intended for such vessels, and more pieces of iron (Pl. 47, 48) for the same use as those of bronze, which were evidently inspired by Graeco-Roman originals in bronze. Pieces of copper and tin, ingots of bronze and crucibles have been found at Grdistea Muncelului on the terrace which contains workshops. 398 Recently, R. Florescii 399 argued, on the basis of the finds from the Dacian settlements and fortifications of the Ortie mountains, that the Dacians imitated Graeco-Roman vessels and objects of bronze considerably. Certain peculiarities of some objects of bronze, the majority of them being accessories and component parts of bronze vessels, led him to the conclusion that there existed developing local industry in bronze-working producing numerous articles in an obviously Graeco-Roman style.

H. Daicoviöiu, 40 °taking into

account the opinion of R. Florescu and based on the finds discovered in the workshops of Gradistea Muncelului, concluded that these discoveries show "a local production, and even the imitation of some Italian products by the Dacian smiths" 401 Ibelieve that it is necessary to record the main differences existing between Graeco-Roman and indigenous bronze products (especially in the field of the vessels) before reaching a conclusion as to Geto-Dacian activity in this field. There are two main categories among those recorded in the Catalogue of vessels and objects of bronze: pieces with perfect analogies in GraecoRoman metal-work and pieces similar to, but sometimes without exact analogies to Graeco-Roman metal-work. Firstly, there is no doubt that all bronze pieces, whether they are component parts or complete vessels, which have exact analogies, generally of size as well as of form, to similar Graeco-Roman products discovered either inside or outside the Roman Empire, were imported and are not native products. Secondly, the quality of the bronze and of the figured decoration are decisive for determining the provenance of the pieces belonging to the second category, and this includes pieces without parallels known by us. There is no need to dwell on the clear cut qualitative difference between Graeco-Roman bronzes from the centres of production which specialized in this craft and the

85

local bronze products. There are so far no chemical analyses, but the quality of the patina is conclusive evidence of the composition of the bronze, and by this it is possible to make some distinctions between the pieces. The figured decoration of these pieces is entirely made up of Graeco-Roman patterns such as dolphins, aquatic birds, etc., more or less stylized. It is true that the Dacians were capable in other areas of adopting the forms and ornamental details of Graeco-Roman products, but it is difficult to accept that they acquired the necessary knowledge of bronze production of the same quality as that of the imported products and this is proved by the inferior quality of the bronze in ornaments certainly made in Dacia. Furthermore, if we admit the possibility that the Geto-Dacians could make imitations which were nearly perfect from the point of view of the technique and of the figured decoration, then so much the more we must accept the same fact for the centres of production situated in the Graeco-Roman world and whose prestige for bronze manufacturing was not comparable to that of the Alexandrian, Campanian and, for the the later period, the Gallo-Roman workshops. For these reasons we cannot at present distinguish the provenance of objects of bronze which have no exact parallels with similar Graeco-Roman products made in the well-known workshops. They could be, and the majority probably are, the products of Graeco-Roman workshops situated in the less known centres or, in the case of others, made in the workshops of Dacia. On the other hand, there is no doubt about the existence of a local production of bronze vessels inspired from Graeco-Roman models, at least in the workshops of Grdistea Muncelului and furthermore it is clear, on the basis of the finds mentioned in the Catalogue, that the Dacians certainly imitated in iron Graeco-Roman vessels of bronze. We cannot, however, distinguish exactly the provenance of these products discovered in Dacia. In conclusion, with regard to local imitations of Graeco-Roman bronze vessels we do not exclude, but rather support the possibility that they were made in those Geto-Dacian settlements which were notable for their activity in other branches of production. Furthermore, the presence of crucibles shows that casting of bronze was widespread in Dacia. There are, however, only a few scattered imitation bronze vessels, and we believe that the contribution of indigenous artisans was largely confined to the repair of vessels, which, from the finds discovered up to now, was widespread. In any case, few imitations of Graeco-Roman bronze vessels have been discovered in Dacia until now, and as a result they have no special significance as a factor by which influence was exerted by the Graeco-Roman civilisation on the Geto-Dacian.

86

4.

Imitations of Graeco-Roman coins.

Imitations, more or less exact copies

of the originals, have been discovered in Dacia circulating beside the coins struck in the different Greek centres and in the Roman Empire.

However,

the problem of the imitations of issues of Macedonia Prima, Thasos,

Dyr-

rhachium and of the Roman coins is far from having been solved in the specialist literature.

We know that even the traditional Geto-Dacian coinage 402

whose first issues are dated to the end of the 4th century B.C., imitated Macedonian coins;

these imitative coins circulated together with the originals

in an area corresponding more or less to that of the later Dacia.

In conse-

quence, the presence of imitations amongst the Greek and Roman coins is not unusual in the period from the middle of the 2nd century B C. to the beginning .

of the 2nd century A.D., the time of the conquest of Dacia by the Romans. At present, we know particularly the imitations of those Greek coins which circulated in large numbers in Dacia and which have been discovered in great quantities in this country;

the imitations of the rarer issues of different Greek

cities included in the Catalogue of coin finds A I-XXIX are

missing, and they

will probably remain rare in future discoveries. As a result we will mention only the imitations of coin of Macedonia Prima, Thasos, Dyrrhachium, Apollonia and of Roman coins and will try to summarise the conclusions resulting from the intensive researches of Romanian numismatists. Coins imitating 403 the tetradrachms of Macedonia Prima have been discovered in 9 localities of Romania (5 in the extra-Carpathian arc and 4 in the intra-Carpathian) and in other uncertain places in Oltenia and Transylvania. In the light of present evidence it is not possible to be certain as to whether these imitations were struck in Dacia or arrived together with the originals from elsewhere.

The imitations of Thasian tetradrachms are more numerous;

they occur in 49 localities (25 from South of the Carpathians, 2 from the East and 22 within the Carpathian arc), in 3 unknown sites outside the Carpathians and in 2 places of Transylvania.

C.Moisil 404 and V. Prvan 405 were inclined

to believe that some imitations discovered in Dacia were struck by the GetoDacians. A recent study 406 concluded that they came from the Balkan Peninsula citing as evidence their higher silver-content compared with that of the contemporaneous Geto-Dacian traditional coins.

The problem of the imita-

tion of Thasian tetradrachms by the Geto-Dacians can only be solved satisfactorily in future by the discovery in Dacia of coin-dies used for these issues; until then we are inclined to believe that the imitation

tetradrachms found to

the North of the Danube were struck in the Balkan Peninsula.

However, it

must be remembered that the presence of tetradrachms of Macedonia Prima and Thasos in Dacia brought about a flattening in the fabric of the traditional Dacian coins. 407 • Imitations of drachmas of Dyrrhachium and of Apollonia are also scarce finds in Dacia. The imitations of coins of Dyrrhachium have been discovered in 9 localities (3 from South of the Carpathians, I in Moldavia and 5 in Transylvania) and those imitating the issues of Apollonia in 5 localities (2 in Muntenia, and 3 in Transylvania) and in an unknown spot in Muntenia.

The

rarity of the imitative coin finds, their small number and the lack of coin-

dies are arguments in favour of their having been struck outside Dada, from whence they circulated together with the originals into the Carpathian-Danubian territories. A local coin, which has been considered to be an isolated issue, which is of about the same weight and size as a drachma, has been discovered in Dada, and we may ask whether the appearance of a local coin of this type, certainly produced as a result of local necessities, was not simply owing to the influence of the drachmas of the two Adriatic cities. The last category of imitative coins discovered in the Carpathian-Danubian countries consists of imitations of Roman coins, the majority imitating Roman Republican issues.

They have occurred in 54 finds (19 from the South of the

Carpathians, 6 in Moldavia and 29 in Transylvania) and in some other unrecorded localities.

We should note the reduced number of imitations in contrast

to the relatively large number of find spots. 17 coin-dies have been discovered in Dacia (single examples at Bra sov, Ludesti in Hunedoara, Poiana in Moldavia and 14 in the Dacian citadel at Tili9ca near Sibiu); one unstamped blank coin of silver has been discovered at Poiana. These finds prove without doubt the imitation of Roman Republican denarii in Dacia before the Roman conquest, and this opinion is now generally accepted. 409 An attempt to classify the imitations of Roman coins discovered in Dacia, produces the following categories: silver coins with stylized types and legends, silver coins copying exactly the originals and plated coins also imitating perfectly the original. 410 If it is easy to distinguish between the coins belonging to the first and the last categories and the imitated originals, in contrast the coins struck by using coin-dies such as those discovered at Tilica, provided that their alloy contains the same quantity of silver as the originals, cannot be distinguished from genuine coins of the Roman Empire. As a result of this, the large number of Roman coins discovered in Dacia has been explained by the existence of perfect imitative coins which are not distinguishable from the originals. 411 Clearly, the striking of such imitative coins brought about an increase in the number of coins which are now accepted as Roman issues; and it could be caused by local necessities, as a result of a highly active money-using economy. It is difficult to admit that the imitative coins were struck by the central government authority; rather, they were minted in other centres, possibly of tribal origin, under the authority of the local chieftains. 412 However, these imitations could not increase the number of Roman coins circulating to such an extent as to explain the great quantitative difference of the finds between Dacian and the other regions in the vicinity of the Roman Empire, which was mentioned in the chapter devoted to coin circulation. The coin-dies are important, regardless of whether they were made in Dacia or were more probably brought from the Empire to the northernDar.ubian regions by moneyers attracted by the local chieftains, for they demonstrate on the one hand the minting of exact copies of Roman coins in the Geto-Dacian territories and on the other the increasing demand for currency for internal trade. The Roman Republican and Early Imperial coin-finds demonstrate the supremacy of Roman money as a universal and generally accepted means of exchange in Dacia. The renunciation by the Geto-Dacians, as a result of 88

changes in the economic-commercial life of Dacia during the two centuries before the Roman conquest, of the traditional coinage and still more the imitation of Roman coins, are among the most clear indications of the depth and profundity of Roman commercial penetration into Dacia. The CarpathianDanubian territories were not only integrated for ever into the general system of the trade of the ancient world, but they used Roman coins and local imitations of them as an internal means of exchange. This fact, which has been recognised before, demonstrates in the currency, and in consequence in the field of commercial-economic life generally, the force of Roman influences on Dacia, long before the period of the Dacian-Roman wars.

89

5.

Other Graeco-Roman influences on the material and spiritual culture of

the Geto-Dacians. It is not always easy to recognize and demonstrate those aspects of the material and spiritual culture of the Geto-Dacians which were influenced by the Graeco-Roman world.

Some remarkable progress in

certain branches of manufacture and certain technical innovations

were a

normal consequence of the favourable conditions created by the development of Geto-Dacian society; in return some others resulted from the permanent contact with the Graeco-Roman civilisation, whose influences were assimilated and interpreted in their own manner by the natives. Furthermore, it is not always easy to distinguish between Graeco-Roman influences which affected the local material culture and those exerted in the realm of Geto-Dacian thinking. For example, for archaeologists and modern historians, the walls of Dacian fortifications conform to the principles and general rules of Hellenistic wall-building and this is part of the local material culture; but it is no less true that the manner of conception of plans of the citadels and also the technical and engineering knowledge which were indispensable for the construction of the towers and of the walls, were elements of the intellectual development of the people.

For this reason, this chapter deals with Graeco-

Roman influences exerting both on the material culture and on the non-material culture, although the latter often result from the former. We will survey in the following pages some of the most important and significant archaeological finds which are known and have been interpreted in numerous detailed studies and in general works in the Romanian archaeological-historical literature. We will only emphasise these finds which are necessary to outline the general picture of the variety and of the profundity of Hellenistic and Roman influences on the internal development of GetoDacian society. With regard to the field of material production, we should mention that the remarkable progress made in the basic branch of the Dacian economy, namely agriculture, from about the middle of the 2nd century B.C. was for the most part due to the introduction of the iron plough-share (p1. 55/1) the form of which was probably adopted from the southern Thracians by the native Geto-Dacians. 413 Other tools such as smith's tongs, different types of hammers and anvils were also of Greek origin; they were adopted directly or through other populations and some of the Dacian iron implements found at Gràditea Muncelului were probably made by foreign artisans on the spot in the Dacian capital. Greek influence was exerted even on the ornamental patterns of various objects. For example, decoration with rosettes on the heads of iron nails, some of them of great size, from the area of the Dacian citadels of the Orâstie mountains, 414 and decoration with running waves on the hearth of the great building discovered at Popeti may be mentioned. 415 Hellenistic influence was more important in the conception and the component elements of Dacian fortifications built of squared stones. "The plan of the Dacian fortification is evidence of Graeco-Roman influence, as is shown by the building system at Piatra Roie and at Blidaru: the square form adapting to the configuration of the earth's surface, the square and rectangular towers built ...

inside or outside the corners of the walls, the entrances to the citadel through a corner-tower (Piatra Roie) sometimes with the 'trap' device achicanne" (Blidaru). 416 It seems that even the plan of the citadel at Grditea Muncelului 90

was conceived according to the recommendation of Vitruvius:

"The fortress

must be planned neither in rectangular form nor with acute angles, but with sinous outlines, so that the enemy can be seen from many side stl.417 The Dacian wall was also of Hellenistic inspiration:

it had a thickness of

2-4 m and it was built from fashioned stones, sometimes "en bosse", with two faces which were linked by timber beams dovetailing into sockets carved in the blocks;

•

earth and rubble of rock and the bits of broken stones result-

ing from the fitting of the lime-stone blocks during the building of the faces filled the core of the wall between the two faces. 48

This type of wall has been

discovered not only in the Dacian citadels of the Orstie mountains but also in those at Breaza 419 near Fägras, Tilisca Sebe

420

near Sibiu C,ptlna 421 in the

valley, Bnija 422 not far from Petoani and piatra

North of Alba Julia.

ra i v ii

423 to the

The models for this type of wall were found in all the

Greek cities on the western shores of the Black Sea,

424

but the Dacians

adapted the Hellenistic system to the local possibilities, using timber beams 425 instead of the cramp-irons which were used for holding together the blocks in the Greek walls.

But cramp-irons of Greek model were used in the struc-

ture of some supporting walls of terraces, for example terrace X of the sacred precinct at Gr,ditea Munelului. 426 Other Greek elements were also used in Dacian stone buildings, for example the monumental staircase leading to one of the tower-houses discovered at Costesti, the arch-way at the entrance to the citadel at Piatra Roie, the small towers built of wood and resting on 'stone bases at Coste ) sti and at other places, the terrace-walls with drains, especially in the sacred precinct at at Grditea Muncelului 427 and on one terrace among those of the civil settlement at Fejele Albe 428 situated near

Grditea Muncelului.

A building with two rooms built of fashioned blocks, one of them with dovetailing socket, has been discovered in a burial tumulus in the territory of the village Ograda. 429

It dates from the same period, the ist century B.C., as

the beginning of the building of stone walls in the area of the Dacian citadels on the Orätie mountains.

The southern, Hellenistic, influences are less evi-

dent in Geto-Dacian architecture, in which it is perhaps discernible in the surface-houses with apse-rooms. 43 ° This type of dwelling-house has been found in the Orstie mountains 43 ' and at Popeti

432

in Muntenia.

The extent

of Hellenistic influences on Geto-Dacian sacred architecture still remains to be settled in the future. 433 The Geto-Dacians adopted from the same Pontic Greeks the system of walls with the lower part built of stone and a brick superstructure. 434 Furthermore, the bricks used for the Dacian buildings had the same dimensions as Greek bricks:

48 x 48 x 8.5 cm at Cpflna, 48 x 26 x 8/9 cm at Tilica. 435

Small

baked bricks have been discovered in the buildings at Piatra Roie, the citadel at Costeti and its neighbouring civil settlement, 436 at Breaza, Capflna,

438

437

at

at Tilisca 439 and at Grdi9tea Muncelului •440

The Dacians used tiles of Greek type (p1. 55/4) for covering the roofs of some pretentious buildings in their settlements and fortifications. 44' These tiles had two longitudinal edges and a rib in the upper part and were 50/52 x 69/70 x 2.5/3 cm in size. 442 These types of bricks and hollow tiles covered

91

the roofs of the tower-houses in the citadels of Costeti, Blidaru and of Piatra Ro9ie,

443

the roofs of the dwelling-houses in the civil settlement at Costesti 444

and at Grdistea Muncelului,

445

the roofs of the buildings in the citadel of

Piatra C raiv'ii446 and in the fortified settlements at Barbosi ti. 448

447

and at Pope-

Certainly these products were modelled and baked in the Dacian settle-

ments, as is proved by the finding of a kiln for the production of tiles in the civil settlement of Costesti in Coman. 449 The cistern built near the citadel of Blidaru (p1. 45/1) near the Orstie mountains discovered in 1953,

4 50

was a remarkable technical achievement.

It was of quadrilateral form measuring (inside dimensions) 8 in in length, 6.2 m in breadth and a depth of 4 in from the turn of the vault.

The outside

wall, built of stones held together by mortar, was doubled in width on the long sides by two other walls joined to it, 30-35 cm in thickness, also built of stones and mortar, which supported the vault of the roof of the cistern, made of limestone.

The inner walls on the long sides and the outer wall on the short

sides were coated with a special mortar (opus siginum) made of ground tiles which was impervious

to the water in the cistern.

The inner coat of mortar

deteriorated after a time and the walls of the cistern were lined with another wall (about 25 cm in thickness) made of stones, bits of tiles and terracotta held together by a mortar coatingof many layers. The floor of the cistern was double:

a layer of mortar and of tile-powder (the same opus signinum) over

a layer of stones and bits of tiles held together by mortar covered another floor made of a mixture of mortar, ashes and of charcoal.

The cistern was

used to store water which was necessary to supply the citadel of Blidaru. Open limestone channels for water and numerous water-pipes of connected terra cotta pipes (p1. 55/5 )with many branches, both Graeco-Roman systems by inspiration, have been found in the area of the Dacian settlements on the Ortie mountains, within the sacred precinct of Grdistea Muncelului •451 The water-pipes discovered in the region of the Orstie mountains were nearly similar in size and in form to those of the Pontic cities. 452 It seems that even the dimensions of the sacred buildings within the sacred precinct of Grdistea Muncelului were based on Roman measurements;

there

are few arguments in support of this hypothesis at present,but a detailed investigation of all Dacian stone buildings may give conclusive results in future. The existence of so many areas of Geto-Dacian architecture which were certainly influenced by the Graeco-Roman world raises the question of the manner in which these influences were exerted, either directly or by the agency of other neighbouring populations, some of them even having ethnicallinguistic affinities with the Geto-Dacians.

However, it is necessary to de-

termine exactly the geographical area in which Graeco-Roman influences can be noticed in architecture, before answering this question.

As can be

seen above, it is clear that the majority of the technical-architectural influences were exerted in the area of the Dacian capital in the Ortie mountains, and in the neighbouring region, for citadels and elements of fortification were conceived and built in this manner in these areas.

Such discoveries

are rare in the rest of Dacia at present, but the building principles and the manner of execution of buildings in other areas belong to the same category of local architecture which is clearly inspired by the Graeco-Roman world. For 92

example, if the making of small baked bricks and tiles was also known among the southern Thracians, then the presence of tiles on the Muntenian plain (Popesti) could be explained by influences coming from the other side of the Danube; it is, however, also true that even the dimensions of such materials and also the uniform manner of execution in all find-spots leads us to consider the possibility that the technique was borrowed directly from the Pontic Greeks without the agency of other intermediaries. So much the more the construction of the Dacian citadels and fortifications situated on the south of the Carpathians must be borrowed directly. The construction with limestone blocks of either some elements of the fortification of the whole citadel begins in the period of King Burebista; on the whole, the conception of the system of fortifications in the area of the Dacian capital is attributed to him. 454 Burebista at one time conquered and ruled over the Greek cities on the western shores of the Black Sea; he brought from these cities the artisans and the technicians for the construction of numerous planned buildings and these artisans would also be found at the Court of the later Dacian kings, being attracted there by the possibilities of profit. 455 It is obviously the presence and the effective use of Greek artisans in the building of the fortifications constructed of stone from the Ortie mountains and in other buildings in the same region (for example the cistern at Blidaru) which made their construction possible •456 The technical-engineering knowledge which were necessary for the military and civil buildings could not be acquired by the Dacian artisans if they were not apprenticed directly and for a long period to specialists coming from the Greek cities, since these buildings could not be "imitated" and constructed without the knowledge of calculi and solid technical-constructive principles. The activities of Greek artisans in other areas of Dacia must also be presumed, even if the Hellenistic elements in the buildings were less numerous. We refer in this case to the settlements of Popeti and Poiana 457 in addition to the Dacian stone citadels. With regard to the Dacian settlements and fortifications in the Orstie mountains we should mention that the presence of Roman artisans, technicians and even military instructors in the region of the Dacian capital during the period of Decebalus is also attested by the single ancient narrative source remaining which deals with the Roman-Dacian wars. One condition among those included in the peace-treaty which was concluded at the end of the wars between Decebalus and Domitian stipulated that the Emperor would provide the Dacian king with "all kinds of craftsmen during both peace and war, promising to give him more in future" 458 and one stipulation of the peace-treaty between Decebalus and Trajan, after the war from 101-102, obliged the Dacian king "to return the weapons, war-machines and the engineers, to hand over the deserters to receive no deserter and not to use soldiers from the Roman Empire (because ...

he tempted and attracted to him a large number of soldiers, even the most brave" .59 Decebalus had need of artisans, engineers and soldiers for his civil and military buildings, the construction of which had begun or continued during his rule, for the building of war-machines and to train his troops according to the principles of the Roman army.

93

It is not universally easy to discern in the Geto-Dacian civilisation the elements created under Hellenistic or Roman influences, the buildings constructed with the participation of artisans and technicians coming from either the Greek cities on the shores of the Black Sea or from the Roman Empire; but Iconsider that more important than this distinction is the recognition of the presence and of the activity of Greek and Roman specialists, and of the large and varied domains on which the Graeco-Roman world exerted its fertile influences. Permanent contacts with the same Graeco-Roman world also brought about the use of the Greek, and later of the Latin, alphabet. 46 ° We have recorded in the chapter devoted to local imitations of Hellenistic-Roman pottery the existence of different stamps, without ornamental role, impressed on certain vessels, some of them being interpreted as possible potters'-marks. We should remember that some of the stamps on the pottery reproduced letters of the Greek alphabet. A small grey pitcher with a stamp in the shape of the Greek A on its neck has been discovered besides other finds in the Tara Fgraului at the settlement of Cuciulata. 461 Copies of Greek lette rs in local stamps on amphorae imitating Greek stamps have been discovered in the settlement at Cetteni •462 An attempt has even been made to read the name

EPOAXOE

on a local

stamped amphora also found at Cetteni; thç " etically it is not impossible, but it is difficult to explain this occtt'rrence.Other signs occurred on the bases of some vessels found at Grdistea Muncelului: H In, it is easy to see that some of them are Greek letters. 464

Finally, the same

sort of signs were scratched on three lids of vessels among the goods discovered in abuilding on the Meleia mountain, near Grditea Muncelului: X, Y, ri and on the side of a storage jar (a clumsy K) found in the "block-house" on the northern side of citadel IV at Blidaru. 466 Obviously, it is difficult to know exactly the sense of the above-mentioned signs (potters'-marks or indications of capacity?) and all speculations concerning this problem can only be more or less plausible hypotheses. The most revealing discoveries concerning the use of the writing by the Dacians occurred in the citadels on the Sebes mountains •467 Signs in the shape of the letter C have been engraved on a block in the wall of the tower-house discovered in the citadel of Cptlna 468 and on the bricks of the similar tower of the citadel of Blidaru. 469 Recently, on the basis of recent or older finds, it was calculated that the number of blocks with Greek letters or groups of letters (Pl. 55/3) discovered or coming from the supporting terrace-walls of the sacred precinct at Grditea Muncelului reaches a total of 80 pieces. 47 ° We can add to those already published471 8 such letters or groups of letters, copied at the beginning of the last century and kept in the archives of Vienna; 472 IT (carved on an andesite tambour), UQ,A

‚Z ‚N,

‚BA,MIL

Single letters on the blocks of the tower-houses of Capilna and of Blidaru and on Dacian walls can be interpreted as stone-masons' marks, 473 signs made in order to mark certain constructive indications on the walls. On the other hand, the groups of letters carved on the terrace-wall of the sacred precinct

94

at Grdistea Muncelului have been recently interpreted as being connected with mathematical and astronomical calculi which were necessary for the building of some of the sanctuaries situated in the vicinity of the terracewall. 474 Personally Ibelieve that the explanation given by C. Daicoviciu is more probable, namely that the groups of letters express personal names, which cannot now be read owing to the fact that the wall is ruined and because it is impossible to restore the original order of the blocks in the wall. The inscriptions probably represent a catalogue of Dacian kings, priests and dignitaries. 475 The existence of blocks with Greek letters in the sacred precinct of Grditea Muncelului provide "sure proof that writing with Greek letters was in use for religious and political inscriptions in Dacian society, at least in its highest circles, from the Ist century B.C." 476 The resolute orientation of the commercial relationships of Dacia towards the West and the even more numerous economic, and finally political, links with the Roman Empire, result in the replacement of the Greek alphabet with the Latin. 477 The evidence in support of the use of the Latin alphabet by the Dacians is provided by Cassius Dio who refers to "a great mushroom on which was written with Latin letters a message to the effect that the Buri and the other allies advised Trajan to go back and to make peace" ‚478 which was brought to Trajan at the beginning of the first Dacian war and especially by the finding of the famous vessel with the inscription DECEBALVS PER SCORILO (p1. 55/2) applied on the unbaked paste of the vessel by means of two juxtaposed stamps. This was discovered at Grditea Muncelului in a house which was burnt during the Dacian war. 479 There is no doubt that the Greek and later the Latin languages were known at the Court of the Kings and among the ranks of the Dacian aristocracy, the priests and the dignitaries. The arguments which can be produced in support of the knowledge of the Greek language are based upon the employment of the Greek,Acornion of Dionysopolis,by Burebista for the negotiations which were carried on by the great Dacian king with Pompey before the battle of Pharsalus, 48 ° upon the information of Cassius Dio that during the siege of the Getian Daphyx, who was besieged in a fort by the Roman M. Licinius Crassus, somebody on the wall greeted the Roman general in Greek and arranged to surrender the citadel to him, 481 and upon the fact that the Greek language was used in diplomatic negotiations in this period. Finally, knowledge of the Latin language at the Court of the Dacian king, and in the ranks of the aristocracy, priests and dignitaries resulted from the negotiations carried on by Dacian heralds with Domitian and the Roman senate, and from negotiations with Trajan later. Furthermore, other persons besides the numbers of the aristocracy had to have an elementary knowledge of Latin in order to communicate with "the mass of artisans, technicians, officers, and soldiers who had fled to the Court of king Decebalus" •483 At the end of this catalogue of the regions of Geto-Dacian life influenced the Graeco-Roman world, we should mention that these influences even penetrated into the organization of some of the institutions concerned with the central rule of the Dacian state. The investiture of some high officials in command of citadels and of the organisation of agriculture during the wars between Decebalus and Trajan was of Hellenistic model, with parallels with

95

those Hellenistic kingdoms which had relations with the Dacian kings in an earlier period. 484 At the end of this chapter, which has mainly been devoted to a survey of some of the conclusions which are almost unanimously accepted in Romanian specialist literature, it is necessary to formulate some precise conclusions in order to appreciate objectively the role and geographical and cultural extent of the Graeco-Roman influences which have been mentioned. The economic relations, as well as those of a political and military nature, which existed directly and permanently between Dacia and the Greek cities on the shores of the Black Sea and the Roman Empire, as well as the presence of specialists coming from the Graeco-Roman world into certain areas of the Dacian state, did not mean that influence was exerted upon the whole of Dacian architecture or that the country adopted all the technical principles and conceptions of Graeco-Roman architecture. In the same way, the -use of writing with Greek and Latin letters and of the Greek and Latin languages did not mean the extension and diffusion of this knowledge to all the Dacian countries. Graeco-Roman influences in the field of complex technical knowledge was exerted particularly in the field of Dacian military architecture, particularly in the area of the Dacian capital. Civil architecture in the rest of Dacia, and even in the Orstie mountains, remained faithful to the ancestral traditions handed down through the centuries; dwelling-houses and adjacent buildings were sunk slightly into the earth on the plain or were erected on the surface of the ground both on the plain and in the mountains, with wooden walls coated on the inner face with clay and roofed with straw, reeds or shingles according to the locally existing possibilities. Not even the use of a mixture of clay with water as a binder in the construction of buildings can be attributed to influences coming from the Graeco-Roman South. This discovery (if we can call it such) evolved from the long practice of the construction of the most modest dwellinghouses in the Geto-Dacian settlements. Furthermore, certain conceptions and technical solutions to problems coming from the Graeco-Roman world were adapted to suit local possibilities; and this is true even in the domain of military architecture, where it is certain that Hellenistic influences were exerted directly by Greek artisans and technicians •485 Even less is it possible to assert that Greek or Latin became generally known among the various strata of the population. In Dacia Greek first and then Latin were understood only by a relatively limited circle consisting of dignitaries recruited from the ranks of the aristocracy, of military chiefs who collaborated with the instructors from the Empire, of all those who, owing to their employment, were in permanent contact with Greek and Roman technicians, or those called upon the accomplish difficult diplomatic missions in the Roman Empire and in all probability of a number of local merchants for whom travel to the Greek cities of the Empire and even to Italy was a source of profit.

96

VII.

CONCLUSION

The interpretation of and the conclusions drawn from the study of Hellenistic and Roman imported products and from an examination of Graeco-Roman influences which were exerted upon the Dacian civilisation during a period of more than two and a half centuries before the conquest of Dacia by the Romans 486 have, for every category of materials, been dealt with in the previous chapters. They concern particularly the economic, and partially the social, life of the Carpathian-Danubian countries. We traced the development of commercial relationships between the northern-Danubian countries and the Graeco-Roman world and also the fertile influences of Graeco-Roman civilisation upon the indigenous civilisation during the period of the existence of the Dacian state and during the time before its foundation, in other words during the time of evolution, creation and activity of this state, which united the Geto-Dacian tribes of the Carpathians with those of the Lower Danube. The study of the commercial relationships of the Geto-Dacians with the Hellenistic world must deal with two aspects, firstly the purchase of GraecoRoman craft or other products by the Carpathian-Danubian territories and secondly the sale, either in return for these products or using money as means of exchange, of indigenous goods solicited by merchants coming from the Pontic-Aegean area or from the western regions of the Roman Empire. The evidence for the existence of Hellenistic-Roman products in the markets of Dacia is supplied by the finds of such products in Geto-Dacian settlements and fortifications. The quantity and variety of southern merchandise, which has been discovered in the intensive archaeological investigations of the last decades, will be still further increased in future, as excavation continues and increases both in the areas investigated until now and in other regions where there have so far been few excavations. Even if, at the present stage of research, we can speculate rather than prove the nature and the quantity of indigenous products which passed to the Hellenistic and Roman world, the Greek and Roman coin-finds in Dacia demonstrate the sale in appreciable quantities of indigenous goods such as salt, raw materials, agricultural products and slaves etc. The intensive exchange of products with the Hellenistic kingdoms and with the Roman Empire and also the intensive circulation of merchandise within Dacia determined the location of the major economic-commercial centres in different parts of the country, some of them almost "specialising" (though the term is too comprehensive and too pretentious for Geto-Dacian realities) in selling particular categories of products. We must not understand by such "specialization" that particular products only, whether wines, oils, pottery or others, were sold in the market, but in the sense that some products were

97

given priority although of course without the exclusion of others.

The term

also emphasises that southern merchandise was not sold in large quantities in every Geto-Dacian settlement but only in some of the more important centres, from whence they circulated to the whole of Dacia.

The occurrence of these

economic centres was not principally due to the exchange of products with the Hellenistic and Roman world, although this without doubt contributed to the development of these centres, but was determined by the development of the main branches of the Geto-Dacian economy, including internal trade. This was düe to the activity of indigenous traders, who during this period first appear and then become more numerous. Also, by the agency of the indigenous traders, Roman merchandise and coins penetrated into the farthest areas of Dacia, in settlements which were scattered throughout the whole territory of the country. This internal trade contributed to the diffusion of GraecoRoman products in the Carpathian-Danubian countries and at the same time was an important factor in the achievement of cultural unity in Dacia as it appears from the period of the establishment of the Dacian state and especially during the ist century A D. The occurrence and consolidation of the class of .

indigenous traders is telling evidence of the important progress made in the economic-social development of Dacia during the period of nearly three centuries of its free existence. We must not exclude the possibility, which indeed seems very probable, that the trade routes which connected the Carpathian-Danubian countries with the Greek cities on the shores of the Black Sea and with other regions of the Roman Empire were well-known and much frequented by some of these indigenous traders; but trade in Hellenistic and Roman or Geto-Dacian products outside Dacia remained in the hands of the Greek and Italian-Roman merchants.

The Greeks of the Aegean basin and on

the shores of the Black Sea brought to Dacia southern wines and oils, various products of craftsmanships, from pottery to expensive ornaments, still rare in the finds from North of the lower Danube. These merchants were first supplemented, and then more and more intensively rivalled,by traders coming from the eastern shores of the Adriatic (particularly from Dyrrhachium and Apollonia) and especially by Roman merchants. The general orientation of Dacian trade from the 2nd century B C. to the beginning of the 2nd century A.D. demonstrates this. .

Taking into consideration the orientation of trade, this period can be divided into two distinct periods. We should add that this division is not precise and that it is impossible to determine exactly the point in time when this change in the direction of the orientation of trade took place.

At present we can say

with certainty that the Greeks were the first merchants who penetrated North of the Danube. Their sphere of activity encompassed first and foremost the countries situated near the Danube and in the southern half of Moldavia, extending gradually to the West of the region between the Carpathians and the Danube, to the northern half of Moldavia and to southern Transylvania. The period of the clear-cut, even if not exclusive, predominance of Greek merchants from the Black Sea basin or from the Aegean ceased at about the end of the 2nd century B.C. and at the beginning of the following century. From then on their sphere of activity was much reduced, even if this decline was not equally felt in all countries of Dacia. The Greek merchants continued to carry their merchandise into Dacia but their trade was, compared with

98

the previous period, mue reduced in both volume and geographical area of distribution. The Greek merchants only kept their supremacy in the trade in wines, oils and pottery until the end of the 1 st century A. D. Merchants from the eastern shores of the Adriatic and from Italy appear in the Carpathian­ Danubian countriE:s from the second half of the 2nd century B.C. and espe­ cially �t the end of that century. Their penetration took place first in the Banat, western Oltenia and in Transylvania and then spread gradually over all regions of Dacia. The penetration of these traders and especially of Roman-Italians was so massive and strong that in a short period of time it became predomin­ ant over all the regions of Dacia and nearly exclusive in the regions of its first occurrence. Roman commercial penetration quite clearly exceeded all that which took place in previous periods and was facilitated and supported by the continuous and systematic advance of the Roman Empire in the Balkan Península, by the conquest of Pannonia in the West, by the extension of Roman domination over the Greek cities on the Dobroudjan shores of the Black Sea and by the establishment of the boundaries of the empire on the Danube. From then on Roman merchants travelled to the North of the Danube not only from the west but also from the South and supplied with products and coins most of the necessities traded with _Dacia. Furthermore, as has been said, the only money which was present ani accepted in the whole of Dacia during the 1 st century A.D., was Roman money which was to domínate entirely and for a long period the whole of the Mediterranean basin and deep into the regions free of Roman rule. The diffusion of Greek coins, and especially of Roman coins, allows us to presume that money had not eliminated barter, the previous form of exchange, entirely, but at the same time these coin-finds prove that Geto­ Dacian society enthusiastically adopted the use of coins as a means of exchange, which facilitated and developed considerably both internal trade and trade with the Graeco-Roman world. From the point of view of the volume of trade in Hellenistic and Roman imported products, the quantity, the variety and diffusion of these products demonstrates on the one hand the substantial increase in the quantity of goods traded with Dacia in comparison with the previous period (the 4th-3rd century B.C.) and on the other, their progressive increase from the 2nd century B. C.. to the Roman conquest. The development from all points of view of the economic and social position of Dacia determined the increase in the volume and richness of these trading relationships. It is not accidental that the in­ crease in trade took place in the period (the 2nd century B.C .) when the plough with iron share and blade was introduced into the Carpathian-Danubian countries, furnaces for reducing iron ore increased, iron metallurgy was de­ veloped and the number of settlements increased. In conclusion these all demonstrate the boom in production, the quantitative increase in products intended for trade and even a substantial increase in the population of Dacia. The progressive increase in the volume and variety of products intended for trade during the 1 st century B.C. -1 st century A. D. was the direct and im­ mediate result of the rapid development of the material production of the Geto-Dacian economy. The boom in productive forces and the corresponding changes made in the region of relations of production determined the occur­ rence of the Dacian state and constituted a firm basis for the consolidation of this state which, by the unification of the Geto-Dacian tribes, created new

99

and favourable conditions for the development of the same productive forces and extended considerably the sources and the area of diffusion of trade both inside Dada and with the outside world.

This is the explanation for the pro-

gressive increase of Graeco-Roman economic penetration and influence from the 2nd century B.C. -lst century A.D., of the changes made in Dacian architecture and of the use of the Greek and Latin alphabet. We point out here that the character of the Hellenistic and Roman penetration into the CarpathianDanubian countries was first of all of an economic, and not of a political, nature.

In spite of the political-military conflicts, first with the Pontic Greeks

and then with the Roman Empire, trade was not interrupted and not even reduced in intensity. On the contrary, all the finds demonstrate the increase in trade and a continuous diversification both in volume of products and in geographical area during this period. This statement, based on the study of the Hellenistic and Roman imported materials, which show no noticeable break in the trade of Dacia with the classical world,is a conclusive argument in support of the opinion that the numerous military conflicts with the Greeks from the shores of the Black Sea and with the Romans only affected commercial relations for short periods, probably only for the period of hostilities and in any case not after their end. The economic development of the Greek cities and of the areas of the Roman Empire which had commercial relations with the Geto-Dacians and the economic development of the Carpathian-Danubian countries, were, from one point of view, complementary to one another. The Graeco-Romans furnished the products of craftsmanship, tools, weapons, textiles, pottery, products of metal-work etc. and the well-known products of specialist agriculture such as wines and oils. In return they needed raw materials, agricultural products, cattle, salt and wood, which existed in abundance in Dacia. The commercial relations of Dacia with the Hellenistic ki ngdoms

were no t

unique in antiquity; they belonged to the multiple links of this sort, some occasional but the majority intensive and of long duration, which existed between the Greeks or the Romans and the populations situated beyond the boundaries of the Graeco-Roman world. The comparative study of the categories of products and the study of coin-finds led to the conclusion that Dacia was integrated early and permanently into the material and cultural sphere of influence of the Graeco-Roman classical world and that it held a place among those territories which had the most numerous and fertile relations of this sort. In some respects it is clear that Dacia had closer links than other areas situated in the vicinity first of the Greek states and then of the Roman Empire. The intensive commercial relations and various other ties between Dacia and the Graeco-Roman world during the 2nd century B C. -1 st century A. D. brought about, as it had done earlier, the introduction of numerous technical .

methods and techniques, drawn from many elements of Graeco-Roman civilisation, which were adapted to local possibilities, determined by the stage of development of Geto-Dacian society. Local imitations of Graeco-Roman products such as tools, pottery or even coins, were not produced from a desire to falsify or to make more or less accurate and exact copies of foreign imported products so that they could be sold to the unwary. The objective necessities of the economic development of the Carpathian-Danubian countries and the custom of the natives, acquired 100

over a long period of time, to purchase and use such products determined their production. Influences coming from the Graeco-Roman South together with the merchandise, the merchants, the artisans and the experts from those regions brought about a new and important impulse in the development and progress of Geto-Dacian society in all fields. Fertile Graeco-Roman influences are noticed in the increased activity and development of material productions in all the different areas of Dacia, while other areas where southern influence was felt and techniques were adopted, such as in the field of stone construction in military architecture had a more reduced geographical area. It is also certainly not the case that writing with Greek and Latin letters and knowledge of Greek and Latin were known in all the settlements scattered throughout Dacia, but there is no doubt about the existence of such knowledge in sorne circles of Dacian society, sup­ ported by the archaeological finds from sorne fortifications and settlements, before the conquest of the countries north of the lower Danube by the Romans. In the territories inhabited by the Geto-Dacians, the diffusion of Graeco­ Roman influences, especially in the field of material production, was both directly, by continuous contacts with superior southern products and indirectly by the spreading of local or southern Danubian adaptations and assimilations of Graeco-Roman products and influences. Elements of Graeco-Roman culture penetrated, as has been noted 487 rather directly than by the agency of the Thracians from South of the Danube, during the last two centuries before the Roman conquest. This is because there were always direct contacts with Graeco-Roman civilisation. Furthermore, the diffusion of Graeco-Roman influences in the whole territory inhabited by the Geto-Dacians took place in the most part by the agency both of local imitations of southern products and imitations of foreign products which were integrated into tlie culture of Geto­ Dacian civilisation. Their scarcity in sorne areas is rather owing to the lack of research than to their limited spread. It is true that the direction of pene­ tration, the supply sources for the traders and also the regions in which these products were especially ma.rketed determined the geographical variations in details concerning the forms and the manner of the local imitations. Sorne of these imitations, such as those of pottery, were inspired from Greek models from the centres of production situated in the Black Sea basin. This is par­ ticularly true far the settlements of the Muntenia plain and Moldavfa. Others were inspired from Roman models coming from Pannonia and from the area of the south-western Banat, especially far the settlements of the intra­ Carpathian region. They are not, however, important to the problem which interests us now, namely the existence and spread of imitations of Graeco­ Roman products over a large geographical area encompassing nearly the whole of Dacia, demonstrating the increasing ability of the Geto-Dacians to assimilate elements of Graeco-Roman civilization. The geographical varia­ tions have no profound significance, far they were not able to affect the unity of Geto-Dacian culture as it is seen during the period of the Dacian state. Foreign, southern influences grafted onto the vigorous native background contributed so much to the intensification of progress in the general develop­ ment of Geto-Dacian society during the 2nd century B.C.-1st century A.D. that Geto-Dacian culture from the 1st century B.C.-1st century A.D. "can be considered as a culture of a superior type to the primitive-rural stage of 101

the patriarchal tribes and having the character of a civilization with obvious tendencies to reach the agrarian-urban stage" 488 The stage reached by Geto-Dacian civilization during the different phases of its development determined the continuously increasing possibilities of assimilating elements of Graeco-Roman civilization which on the whole were parallel to the progressive Greek and Roman penetration into the North of the lower Danube. The economic and cultural orientation of Dacia during the Ist century B.C.-Ist century A.D. is towards Rome and the western areas of the Empire, from whence important elements of material and spiritual culture constantly penetrated. The new orientation of Dacia during this period was not in contradiction to the earlier orientation towards the Hellenistic world of the Aegean basin or the Black Sea. The elements of the superior classical civilization, either Roman or Greek, were by their essence of the same nature; both the Greek and Roman elements familiarized and habituated the indigenous Geto-Dacians to the products and technical, economic and spiritual knowledge which prepared and created favourable conditions for Romanization during the following centuries. Even the elements of non-material culture and especially the utilization of writing with first the Greek alphabet and then with Latin letters are important indications of the great possibilities of GetoDacian society to assimilate and demonstrates that this society was permanently open and receptive to influences, including those of a non-material nature, coming from the Graeco-Roman world. The Romans occupying the greater part of Dacia after the wars of Trajan did not arrive in an unknown territory. The army of Trajan, the conqueror of Dacia, was preceded by the products, merchants, business-men and specialists who brought the first elements of their civilization into the GetoDacian world during a period of two centuries. The Geto-Dacian civilization, by its original and particular development and by the elements of GraecoRoman civilization which were received and assimilated before the Roman conquest, was the basis of Geto-Dacian culture in the province of Trajan and constituted the particular, local background onto which Romanisation was grafted during the following centuries.

102

REFERENCES

1.

La penetration hellnique et helldnistique dans la vallee du Danube, in Acad. Roum. Bull. de la Sect. Hist., t. X, Bu cares t, 1923, pp. 27-47.

2.

Amfore elenistice descoperite in adincul teritori u l u iR.P.R., i n StRefistRom, I, 1954, pp. 81-88.

3.

Rspindirea amforelor stampilate greceti

In

Moldova, Muntenia

i

Oltenia, inArhMold, V, 1967, pp. 37-79. 4.

Importul aniforelor stampilate la Istria, 1957.

5.

Imports of stamped amphorae in the lower Danubi an draft Rumanian c01pus of amphora stamps, in

reg i ons an d a

Dacia, N. S., III,

pp. 195 -215. 6.

E.Bujor, Depozitul de amfore de la Islam Geaferca, in SCIV, MI, 1, 1961, pp. 85-92; Al. Popeea, Clteva toarte de amfor tampilat. descoperite la Medgidia, in SCIV, 18, 3, 1967, pp. 509-512.

7.

Un depozit de unelte, cfteva

-

doua virst 8.

StampilA pe o amforà de producie local inSCIV, 18, 3, 1967,

9.

10.

Ceramica daco-getic 1969, passim.

pp.

io monet. din a

pp.

cu imitarea literelor greceti,

401-421.

cu speciaM privire la Transilvania, Bucharest,

Depozitul de vase dacice de la Guteria VI, 3-4, 1955,

11.

tampile anepigrafice

a fierului, in SCIV, Xl, 2, 1960, pp. 392-400.

-

Sibiu, in SCCluj, Ser. HI,

79-96.

Contribuii cu privire la cunoaterea ceramicii geto-dacice. Cupele t'deliene" getice de pe teritoriul Romniei, in ArhMold, V, 1967, pp. 7-35.

12.

Reprezentri umane pe cupele getice de la Popeti, in SCIV, 16, 2, 1965, pp. 341-351.

13.

Kampanisches Bronzegeschirr von Costeti, in AISC, H, 1933-35, pp. 164-168.

14.

Un depozit dacic de vase de metal de la Guteria-Sibiu, in StComSibiu, 12, 1965, pp. 35-45.

15.

Le trsor dace de SIncrieni, in Dacia, N.S., II, 1958, pp. 158-206.

16.

Ein in SUden Daciens gefundenes hellenistisch-rbmisches Silbergeffiss, in Germania, 37, 1959,

pp.

232-242.

103

17.

Un import roman dintr-o-aezare geto-daca din Clmpia Munteniei, in Apulum, X, 1972, pp. 661-668.

18.

in

I. Glodarlu, Importuri romane in Apulum, Vu/I,

pp.

353-367;

cetile dacice din Munii Orsiei,

I. Glodariu-t. Dnil, Depozitul de

vase romane de bronz de la Dips9, in Marmaia, If, 1971, 19.

pp.

93-99.

Sistemi e tecnica di costruzione militare e civile presso iDaci nella Transilvania, in Atti del sett. Congr. Intern. di Arch. Class., III, Roma, 1961 (extras).

20.

La penetration helle'nistique dans les plaines g'etes, in Ber. über den V. Intern. Kongr. fUr Vor- und Frtlhgeschichte, Hamburg, 1958.

21.

Rspindirea produselor greceti

in

Dacia extracarpatic

(sec. VI-I

I.e.n.), inAnUnivB, XV, 1966, pp. 15-34. 22.

in Dacia, N.S., ifi, 1959, pp. 217-234;

Relations entre les Grecs et

la population du Bas-Danube a la lumière des dernières dcouvertes archologiques, in Die Kultur Südosteuropas, ihre Geschichte und ihre Ausdruksformen, München, 1965, pp. 26-49; Influences grecques et romaines dans les Balkans, en Hongrie et en Pologne, in VIne Congr.

I nt.

d'Arch. class. (Paris 1963).

Le rayonnement des civilisation

grecque et romaine sur les cultures priphriques, Paris, 1965, pp. 317-332. 23.

Penetrazione commerciale e circolazione monetaria nella Dacia prima della conqui sta, in EDR, X, 1945,

24.

Moneda romana republicanã IstRom, Bucharest, 1966,

25.

pp.

1-154.

iunitatea lumii geto-dace, in UnitCont

pp.

53-64.

Contribuii numismatice la istoria Daciei, in SCCluj, VI, 1-2, 1955, pp. 13-180;

Schatzfunde rtSmischer Silbermünzen in Dakien bis zum

Beginn der Dakerkriege, inJNG, 17, 1967, 26.

E. Chiril

-

pp.

123-156.

G. Mihescu, Der Mttnzhort von Cãprioru.

Beitrilge zu

Chronologie und Umlauf der Tatradrachmen von Macedonia Prima und der Insel Thasos, 1969. 27.

I. Andrieescu, PisculCrsani, inMem. Acad. Rom., Sect. Ist., S. ifi, Tom III, mem. 1, Bucharest, 1924.

28.

Din istoria Dobrogei, I, Bucharest, 1965, passim;

Rumania before

Burebista, London, 1966, passim. 29.

La Transylvanie dans l'antiquit, Bucarest, 1945, passim; dacicdelaPiatraRoie, Bucharest, 1954; 255-316.

30.

DacH, Bucharest, 1965;

IstRom, I,

Cetatea

1960, pp.

Dacia de la Burebista la cucerirea roman,

Cluj 1972.

104

31.

Der Stand der Vorgeschichtsforschung in Rumlinien, in Ber. der Rtsm. Germ. Komm., 22, 1932, pp. 152-175.

32.

Getica. O protoistorie a Daciei, Bucharest, 1926; Dacia. Civilizatiile stravechi carpato-danubiene, Bucharest, 1957.

33.

Din istoria Dobrogei, I, Bucharest, 1965, passim;

34.

Histoire ancienne de la Dobroudja, in La Dobroudja, Bucharest, 1938, passim; IstRom, I, 1960, pp. 216-231, 237-248; Din istoria Dob rogei, II, 1968, pp. 13-116.

35.

They are published in SCIV, Mat and in the periodical publications of the different museums.

36.

Histria, I, [1954];

37.

Pliny, Nat. Hist., XIV, 2: "Puterea romana a dat unitatea lumii; toti trebuie sa recunoasca serviciile pe care le -a adus oamenilor facilitindule relaj:iile §i permij:indu-le sa se bucure, 'in comun, de bineface rile pacii" (cf. M. P. Charlesworth, p. 238).

38.

M. P. Charle swortli, p. 90.

39.

Details in M. P. Charlesworth, pp. 19-20, 24-27.

40.

M. P. Cha rle sworth, p. 124; T. Frank, pp. 201-202, 207, 213; the we stern coast of the Black Sea and the Cilician, Dalmatian and Ligu rian shores were among the most dangerous areas of piracy from the 1st century A.D. (J. Rougé, p. 37).

41.

M. Rostovtzeff, Die hellenistische We lt, II, 1955; pp. 962-994; idem, The Social and Economic History, pp. 73-74.

42.

M. P. Charlesworth, pp. 107-108; T. Frank, p. 229; The Social and Economic History, pp. 73-74.

43.

M. P. Charle sworth, pp. 55, 67; T. Frank, pp. 229-230; M. Rostovtzeff, Die hellenistische Welt, II, p. 971; ídem, The Social and Economic History, pp. 73-74.

44.

M. P. Charlesworth, pp. 42-44; T. F rank, p. 230; M. Rostovtzeff, Die h ellenistische W e lt, II, p. 971; idem, The Social and Economic History, p. 73.

45.

M. P. Char lesworth, p. 45.

46.

J. Hatzfeld, pp. 213, 215; M. P. Charlesworth, pp. 22-23; T. Frank, pp. 156-175, 225-228; M. Rostovtzeff, The Social and Economic History, pp. 68-71, 161, 166.

II, 1968, passim.

II, 19G6.

M. Rostovtzeff,

7.

M. P. Charle sworth, pp. 201-203;

8.

As regards the dev elopment of the crafts at Histria during the Hellenistic period, M. Coja, L'artisanat a Histria du vr e au ¡ er siecle avant notr e ere, in Dacia, N.S.• VI, 1962, pp. 115-138.

9.

J. Rougé, pp. 79, 67-78 (sorn e details concerning the dimensions of the ships, tonnage and cargo; cf. the same author, the tonnage of the 105

M. Rostovtzeff, �.cit., p. 163.

ships from the 17th century was not more than that of the Roman commercial ships. 50.

Idem,

pp.

38-39, 81, 85.

Vide also Ovid,

Trist., I, 10, as regards

the coastal navigation. 51.

J. Roug,

52.

Idem,

p.

91.

53.

Idem,

p.

93.

54.

85-86.

pp.

The extant information is later than the period investigated by this book. Vide also M. P. Charlesworth, 101-104.

55.

M. P. Charlesworth,

pp.

233-234;

pp.

219-224;

cf. J. Rouge',

J. Rouge', pp.

361-366 (with

pp.

some details concerning the rent of ships). 56.

M. Rostovtzeff, Die hellenistische Welt, II, Social and Economic History, p. 161;

57.

J. Hatzfeld,

58.

Idem,

pp.

60.

J. Hatzfeld,

idem, The

272-273, 415-419.

as regards Illyricum, C. Daicoviciu, Gli Italici

nella Provincia Dalmatia, in EDR, V, 1932, J. Hatzfeld, passim.

pp.

17.

p.

17, 21-29;

59.

999-1027;

pp.

J. Rouge',

pp.

31-51;

pp.

54-142;

.cit., passim:

pp.

60-64.

M. Rostovtzeff, Die hellenistishe Welt, II,

M. P. Charlesworth,

C. Daicoviciu, loc.cit.

p.

90;

M. Rostovtzeff,

See also V. Parvan Die

NationaliWt der Kaufleute im thmischen Kaiserreiche, Breslau, 1909, p. 33 for the penetration of Italian merchants into the provinces, especially in the second half of the ist century B. C. 61.

For the great number of Italians in the Orient see the information in connection with the massacres of Mithridates in Asia and the destruction of Delos (J. Hatzfeld, p. 101; p. 215 and footnote 1).

62.

J. Hatzfeld,

63.

J. Rouge',

64.

V. Prvan, Qp.cit., p. 19 and 22.

65.

J. Hatzfeld,

pp.

pp.

238-256;

M. P. Charlesworth,

T. Frank,

pp.

p.

90;

T. Frank,

213-214, 236-238.

25, 397-413.

pp.

17, 149-157, 160-177;

M. Rostovtzeff, The Social

and Economic History, p.158. 66.

Ibid.

67.

J. Rouge

68.

J. Hatzfeld,

69.

M. P. Charlesworth, pp. 70-71, 108, 170, 204-2O;

pp. p.

279-280. 187.

226-227, 231-232; 70.

T. Frank, pp.

M. Rostovteif, op.eit., pp. 158-160.

M. P. Charlesworth,

p.

227.

06

71.

J. Hatzfeld,

72.

M. P. Charlesworth,

pp.

185, 188. p.

22;

M. Rostovtzeff,

.cit.,

pp.

71, 145-6;

A. Calderini, AquileiaRomana, Milan, [1930], pp. 297-298. 73.

M. Florescu and V. Cpitanu, Cercetri arheologice de suprafa. in jud. Bacu, inArhMold, VI, 1959, p. 256.

74.

R. Vulpe and collaborators, Evoluia asezãrilor omeneti in Moldova de Jos, in SCIV, I, 1950,

48.

p.

75.

We offer our particular thanks to Al. Vulpe for his information.

76.

M. Petrescu -Dimbovia, S.pturile arheologice din jud. Covurlui, in Studii, II, 1, 1949,

p.

106;

idem, Descoperirea arheologica de la

Frumuita (r. Galari), in SCIai, IV, 1-4,

pp.

497, 502-503;

idem,

Cercetãri arheologice in aezarea din prima epocã a fierului de la T?rnoani (raionul Galai), in SCIV, IV, 3-4, 1953, 77.

Gh.

p.

765.

tefan, Nouvelles dcouvertes dans le "Castellum" romain de

Barboi (prs de Galaji), in Dacia, V-VI, 1935-36, p. 347; HistDob, 78.

p.

68;

N 2 Gostar, Cetäi,

pp.

R. Vulpe,

29-34.

I. T. Dragomir, Descoperiri arheologice pe actualul teritoriu al Galaiului din cele mai vechi timpuri pinä la intemeierea oraului, in Danubius, I,

1967,

p.

183.

79.

N. A. Ha4uche and F. Anastasiu, Brãi1ia,

80.

N. A. Haruche and F. Anastasiu, op.ct., p.53.

81.

I. Nestor, Stand,

82.

M. Constantiniu and V. Leahu, Mormlnt getic din preajma Bucuretilor,

p.

in SCIV, 19, 1968,

pp.

32-33.

162.

p.

207.

83.

Ibid.

84.

I. Nestor, Spãturile arheologice de la Zimnicea.

Jud. Teleorman, in

Studii, II, 1, 1949, pp. 118-119. 85.

Idem, Stand, p1. 20, 8, 11, 13-14.

86.

In the O1tenia museum (information B. lonescu).

87.

The discoveries of Alexandria have been much discussed in the technical literature.

See C. Preda, Sâpturile de la Alexandria (reg.

Bucureti), in Mat, VI, 1959,

pp.

251-263;

idem, New aspect of early

La Tene epoch in Dacia discovered at Alexandria, in Dacia, N.S., Ill, 1959,

pp.

179-194;

cf. Em. Condurachi, Problema apariiei ceramicii

La TneIn regiunea Dunärii de Jos, in SCIV, 16, 1965,

pp.

43-50.

88.

I. H. Crian, Ceramica,

89.

Ibid.

90.

Our thanks to Vi. Zirra for his information.

91.

M. Rusu, Depozitul de vase dacice de la Guterita-Sibiu, in SCCluj,

pp.

89, 284.

VI, 3-4, 1955, p.91, note 20;

107

I. H. Crian, loc.cit., and p. 136.

The vessels are in the museum of History of Transylvania at Cluj.

The

vessels come from an antiquary. 92.

M. Constantiniu and V. Leahu, 22.cit., pp. 195-208 and fig. 5.

93.

1. Nestor, Sâpturile arheologice de la Zimnicea jud. Teleorman, in Studii, II, 1, 1949, P. 122.

94.

D. Berciu, Le casque gréco-illyrien de Gostavt (Oltnie), in Dacia, N.S., II, 1958,

pp.

437-450.

95.

B. Milleker, Dlmagyarorszg rgisgleletei...., II, Timioara, 1899, p. 92 and figs. 90-91.

96.

B. Schrtider, Thrakische Helme, in Jahrb. d. kais. D. Arch. Inst., XXVII, 1912, Beilage 16, 4; A. Mozsolics, in Acta Archaeologica, Budapest, 1954/55, pp. 49-50.

97.

Supra, notes 56, 57.

98.

Supra, notes 58-60.

99.

Fl. Anastasiu, Descoperiri geto-dace pe teritoriul judeju1ui Brila, in Zilele culturii brilene. p. 47.

Communicri §i referate.

100.

V. Parvan, Lapntration,

101.

C. N. Mateescu and M. Babe, Cercetäri arheologice si

p.

40;

idem, Getica,

Braila, 1969,

pp.

17-18, 417. spturi

de

salvare la Flntinele, in SCIV, 19, 2, 1968, pp. 283-284, 288, 291. 102.

D. Berciu, Arta traco-getic, Bucharest, 1969, pp. 39-59 (with bibliography).

103.

Idem, .22.cit., pp. 77-82.

104.

Idem,

.cit., pp. 83-88.

105.

Idem,

89-93.

106.

Idem,

107.

I. Nestor,

108.

For the settlements from the plain of Muntenia, cf. R. Vulpe, Les Getes

pp. 153-160. .cit.,

p.

124.

de la rive gauche du Bas-Danube et les Romains, in Dacia, N.S., IV, 1960, P. 312. 109.

All the statistical data or other information which will be related henceforward without bibliographical references, come from the section of the catalogue this book).

devoted to the imported amphorae (see the 2nd part of

110.

Strabo, VII, 3, 11.

111.

D. Tudor, Rtspindirea amforelor Muntenia

112.

tampilate grecesti In Moldova

iOltenia, in ArhMold, V, 1967, p. 38.

Idem, 2p.cit., pp.. 52-74 (catalogue) and the map at p. 77, fig. 10 (not one locality in the intra-Carpathian area of Dada).

108

i

The data come from the studies of D. Tudor, V. Eftimie etc. and from the verbal information of Eugenia Popescu of the museum of Piteti (see the references in the catalogue under Ceteni).

114.

Also V. Eftimie agrees as to this explanation concerning the great number of amphorae discovered at Cetä,çeni (Imports of stamped amphorae in the lower Danubian regions and a draft Rumanian corpus of amphorae stamps, in Dacia, N.S., ifi, 1959,

p.

206, note. 44.

115.

Details in the catalogue of amphorae, no. 46 (with bibliography).

116.

D. Tudor, .22.cit., p. 43.

117.

V. Eftimie, op.cit.,

118.

J. Rouge,

119.

Idem, p. 368.

120.

V. Prvan, La penetration,

121.

D. Tudor, op.cit.,

122.

Idem, op.cit., p. 46.

123.

V. Eftimie, loc.cit.

124.

p.

p.

207.

367.

p.

p.

20;

idem, Getica,

p.

205.

44.

Em. Condurachi, Contribuia spãturilor arheologice organizate de Academia R.P.R. la Histria la cunoasterea perioadei elenistice in Dobrogea, in StRefistRom, I, 1954, p. 76.

125.

V. Eftimie, 2j.cit., pp. 198-201.

126.

Idem,

127.

p. 202.

M. Gramatopol-Gh. Poenaru-Bordea, Amphora stamps from Callatis and South Dobrudja, in Dacia, N.S., XIII, 1969, table on p. 137.

128.

D. Tudor,op-cit.,

129.

B. Mitrea,

pp.

p.

45.

78, 139-140;

E. Chirila-I. Pop, Tezaurul monetar de

la Sinpetru (or. Braov), inApulum, WI, 1, 1968, pp. 157-160. Details see the chapter devoted to the coins of Macedonia Prima and Thasos. 130.

The continuance of the trade with Thasos in the 2nd century B.C., (suggested by V. Eftimie,

131.

For example:

.cit., P. 199, n. 10.

the weakness of the Rhodian trade in the 2nd century

B C. as a result of Roman interference with the economic development .

of Rhodes (D. Tudor, 2p. cit. , p. 44) and the great number of amphorae from Sinope (dated from the middle of the 2nd century to 70 B.C.) discovered at Histria is the consequence of the development of

Pontic

trade favoured by the policy of Mithridates (V. Eftimie, 2J.cit., p. 199). 132.

See the section of the catalogue which is devoted to the imported pottery. The principal types of imported pottery discovered in Dacia are presented without description of their technical details, because these are known in the Romanian technical literature.

1. H. Crian (see Ceramica, pp. 136,

196-197, 213) mentioned the Hellenistic and Roman pottery which had

109

been found in Transylvania before the publication of his study.

The

other references concerning the finds from extra-.Carpathian Dacia have been mentioned in the catalogue, for every locality of discovery. 133.

The preliminary study of the archaeological material discovered in the site mentioned by I. H. Crisan, suggests such a possibility.

It seems

that the settlement of Pecica can provide a much greater quantity of imported pottery than that which is known in the whole of extra-Carpathian Dacia until now.

It was not possible to use the information from

Pecica received from I. H. Crisan (Head of the excavations) for the catalogue of this work. 134.

Details and bibliography in C. Daicoviciu, SCIV, IV, 1-2, 1953, pp. 182-187;

I. H. Crisan, Ceramica, chapter IV, passim and especially

pp. 201-202, 215-216. 135.

Catalogue, Imported pottery, no. 34/35.

136.

The mentioned catalogue, no. 37/82.

M.

Idem, no. 31/e.

138.

Idem, no. 34/35.

139.

We have to thank S. Sanie for his information.

140.

V. Pârvan thought that the pottery discovered in Dacia came from the Greek South, the Pontic cities being only intermediaries.

141.

The finds from Pecica which have been mentioned above, will partially confirm or refute this statement.

142.

See the distribution of the chronology of the "Delian" bowls discovered in Romania, in Casan-Franga, Contributii ceramicii geto-dacice.

Cupele "deliene" getice de pe teritoriul

României, inArhMold, V, 1967, 143.

cu privire la cunoaterea

I. H. Crian(Ceramica,

pp.

7-35.

196-197) arrived at this conclusion

pp.

concerning the presence in not very great quantity of Roman pottery in Dacia, some years ago. 144.

See, with regard to the finds from the 4th-2nd centuries B.C. the work of N. A. Onaiko,Anticinii import v Pridneprov'e iPobuj 'e v IV -il vv. do n.e., Moskva, 1970, and to those from the 2nd century B.C.-5th century A.D., the work of V. V. Kropotkin, Rimskie importnie izdelija v vostocinoi Evrope (II v. do n.e.-V v. n.e.), Moskva, 1970.

145.

N. A. Onaiko,op.cit.,

pp.

14-19;

V. V. Kropotkin,

.cit., pp.

14-20. 146.

I. Andriesecu, Piscul Crsani, 1924, Getica,

pp.

211-212, 618, 717;

de Tinosu, in Dacia, I, 1924,

pp.

32, 85-87;

V. Prvan,

R. Vulpe and Ec. Vulpe, Les fouilles

pp.

Poiana, inDacia, 111-1V, 1927-32,

215-218; pp.

idem, Les Fouilles de

332, 336;

J. Werner,

Kampanisches Bronzegeschirr von Costeti, in AISC, 11, 1933-35, pp. 164-8. 147.

I. Andriesecu, bc cit.; pp. 215-218;

R. Vulpe and Ec. Vulpe, in Dacia, I, 1924,

V. Parvan, loc.cit. 110

148.

K. Horedt, Un depozit dacic cu vase de metal de la Guterita-Sibiu, in StComSibiu, 12, 1965,

35-45;

pp.

I. Glodariu-t. Dnil, Depozitul

de vase romane de bronz de la Dipa, in Marmaia, II, Baia Mare, 1971, 149.

pp.

93-99.

I. Glodariu, Importuri romane in ceth4ile dacice din Munjii Orsiei ? inApulum, WI/I, 1968,

150.

pp.

354-362.

See the section of the catalogue devoted to the vessels and objects of bronze.

151.

For the simplification and the reduction of the references, we will put in parenthesis after every type of vessel the indication of its numerical order in the catalogue of vessels and objects of bronze (the first number representing the numerical order of the locality of discovery, the second number or letter indicating the numerical order of the piece within the finds).

152.

All the pieces discovered in Romania are fragmentary (for example, no. 10/1); the complete form, Eggers, type 91, pl. 9.

153.

Only fragmentary in Romania (10/5); type 100, p1. 10.

the complete form, Eggers,

-

154.

Eggers, type 125, pl. II.

155.

They are not always mentioned in the catalogue, to save space in this book.

156.

R. Florescu, L'art des Daces, Bucarest, 1968,

157.

There are more numerous finds than those mentioned in our information. Verbal communication I. Berciu.

158.

V. V. Kropotkin,

.cit.,

theist century inclusive).

pp.

pp.

23-24, 51-54.

21-27 (only the products datable until

The discoveries published in the work of

N. A. Onaiko (Anticinii import...) are dated from a later period than that studied in the present book. 159.

A. Radn6ti, Die rtimischen Bronzegefttsse von Pannonien, in DissPann, Ser. II, no. 6, Budapest, 1938 (comparison concerning only the bronze vessels which are datable until the Roman conquest of Pannonia).

160.

H. J. Eggers, Der RUmische Import in freien Germanien, 1951, pp. 159-176 (only the bronze vessels from the periods A, Bi and B2); idem, Zur absoluten Chronologie der römischen Kaiserzeit im freien Germanien, in JahrbMainz, 2, 1955, pp. 196-244 (take in consideration only the bronze vessels datable until the beginning of the 2nd century A.D.).

161.

Pliny, NatHist, XXXIII, 139; XXXIII, 157; XXXIV, 95; XXXVI, 13; Cato, De agric., 135; Horatius, Sat., I, 6, 116; Sat., II, 3, 142; Suetonius, Caesar, 81.

162.

See the information of Pliny, NatHist, XXXIV, 3, 6 (quoted by R. Vulpe and Ec. Vulpe on the occasion of the publication of the fragmentary candelabrum from Tinosu in Dacia, I, 1924,

p.

217, ref 3) concerning

the place of manufacture of different parts of candelabra. lii

163.

V. Parvan, Getica, p. 618;

164.

Cf. the comments of the catalogue, the section on bronzes.

165.

cf. p. 718.

See e.g. Catalogue bronzes, no. 27/e, f.

See also the observation

of V. Prvan with regard to this problem. 166.

See the works of M. H. P. Boesterd, H. J. Eggers, V. V. Kropotkin, K. Majewski, H. Mentzel, N. A. Onaiko, V. Ondrouch, A. Radnti, P. J. Rtls mentioned at the beginning of the section of the catalogue of finds devoted to the Vessels and objects of bronze.

167.

See the Catalogue of silver pieces, no. 3.

168.

The indication of the numerical order of the finds contained in the Catalogue of silver pieces is given in parenthesis after every locality.

169.

The first variant in the mentioned Catalogue, no. 4/i (without twisting bars), 4/j-n (with twisting bars); the second variant, no. 4/h,

170.

C. Cichorius, Die Reliefs der Trajanassifule, Berlin, 1896,

0.

the figures

WVIII-XXXEX. 171.

Idem, 22.cit., 1900, the figure CXXXVIII.

172.

See D. Popescu, Le tresor dace de Sincraieni, in Dacia, N.S., II,

I

1958,

pp.

I.

158-206, who deals again with the discussion of the provenance

of the silver hoards discovered in Romania, datable to the end of the La Tène Age, answering the observations of N. Fettich, E. Patek and I. Paulovics;

bibliography in this study;

pp. 204-206, the argu-

ments for the attribution of the silver hoards of Dacia to the GetoDacians. 173.

See the bibliographical references in the Catalogue of silver pieces no. 2, especially D. E. Strong, Greek and Roman gold and silver plate, London, [1966], p. 140.

174. 175.

See in the same Catalogue, no. 6, the mentioned study of D. Popescu. The bronze form is known in the South of the USSR (see ref. of Catalogue no. 6, to V. V. Kropotkin) and in Dacia (the gilded bronze pitcher from Bitca Doanmei the Catalogue of vessels and bronze objects no. 24/b for the pitcher of bronze of Pescari the mentioned catalogue, no. 23). -

-

176.

See especially II, 1958,

177. 178.

p.

-

the mentioned study of D. Popescu, in Dacia, N.S.,

158.

Cf. the analogies mentioned in the catalogue. Cf. the analogies mentioned in the catalogue and the goblets discovered in Spain which have been published together with the silver hoards (found in the same country) by I. Raddatz, Die Schatzfunde der Iberischen Halbinsel vom Ende des 3 bis zur Mitte des 1. Jahrhunderts Geb., in Madrider Forschungen, 5, 1969, attention by K. Horedt, whom we thank.

112

p.

vor Chr.

60, 1 A, I B (drawn to our

179.

The discovery of the workshop belonging to ajeweller in the Dacian settlement of Pecica proves the existence of locally made silver objects in Dacia (I. H. Crisan, Contributii la problema lucrrii podoabelor dacice, inActaMN, VI, 1969,

180.

pp.

93-114).

C. Daicoviciu in IstRom, I, 1960, p. 325 favoured the local production of some objects from the silver hoards, made by Dacian artisans (but he did not exclude the possibility that some Pontic workshops worked for the Dacians).

K. Horedt assumed the presence of some itinerant

artisans and also the import of silver vessels from Greek workshops (on the basis of analogies between the specific problem of the silver vessels of Dacia, from the end of the La Tène Age, and bronze-work and silver from the period of the migrations). (K. Horedt, The Dacian silver hoards and their Mediterranean relations, Dissertation in the session of the Museum of Archaeology of Constana, Oct. 1972). 181.

See the statements concerning the discovery of Stncuja (C. Preda, Contribuii la problema provenientei argintului din tezaurele geto-dace, in lumina descoperirii de la Stncuja (r. Clmui, reg. Galari), in SCIV, VIII, 1-4, 1957,

182.

pp.

113-124).

Cf.H. J. Eggers, Der rtimische Import imfreien Germanien, 1951, p. 177 (only the pieces from the periods BI and B2); V. V. Kropotkin, .cit., pp. 21-22 (only the vessels from the ist century B.C. -ist century A.D.).

183.

See for example, C. Isings who did not study the finds from the Balkans owing to the reasons related in the text. The glassware finds of Dacia are also missing in the general studies devoted to ancient glassware mentioned in the introduction to the Catalogue of vessels and objects of glass.

184.

See ref. in the mentioned catalogue, concerning every discovery.

185.

V. Parvan, Getica, passim (concerning the discoveries especially from Crsani and Tinosu);

186. 187.

general observations,

pp.

472, 646.

The indications for the catalogue, in text between the parenthesis. Seethe studies of A. Kisa, I, Leipzig, 1908,

pp.

172-175, 177 and

C. Isings, pp. 4-5, 8, forthe ref to Pliny the elder, Lucretius, Virgil, Horace, Ovid, Columella, Strabo etc. 188.

M. Rostovtzeff, Die hellenistische Welt, I, 1955, M. P. Charlesworth, p. 44.

189.

J. Morin, pp. 13, 20-21; M. Rostovtzeff, .cit., U, p. 971; idem, The Social and Economic History, p. 73, 166; A. M. Berryer, La verrerie ancienne aux Muses Royaux dtArt et d'Histoire, Bruxelles,

pp.

292-293 and

1957, pp. 7-8. 190.

C. Isings,

191.

Ibid.

192.

J. Morin,

p.

pp.

14.

18-19;

M. P. Char]esworth,

113

pp.

45, 67.

193.

M. P. Charlesworth,

194.

M. P. Charlesworth, loc.cit.;

p.

42, 44. J. Morin, p. 13;

A. M. Berryer,

P. 8. 195.

F. W. de Bissing, Sur l'histoire du verre en 1gypte, in Revue archeologique, Xl, 1908, P. 219; C. Isings, op. Lit., pp. 8-9; T. Frank, p. 160.

p.

3;

A. M. Berryer,

196.

M. P. Charlesworth,

197.

Idem, p. 67; T. Frank, pp. 160-162; M. Rostovtzeff, The Social and Economic History, p. 161; C. Isings, 4-7.

198.

C. Isings, loc.cit.

199.

F. W. de Bissing,

200.

C. Isings,

201.

Idem,

202.

J. Morrin, pp. 10-11.

203.

C. Isings,

204.

J. Morin,

205.

C. Isings,

206.

V. Prvan considered that their centres of provenance were situated in the Orient (Egypt )(.cit., pp. 558, 646).

207.

See for example the bottle of Grditea Muncelului in the Catalogue of vessels and objects of glass, no. 8/a.

208.

Cf. the finds of vessels and objects of glass with regard to their number and spread in the territories inhabited by the German popula-

p.

p.

22.

loc.ci t.

7-8.

pp.

8. 4, 13;

pp.

pp.

202-203;

C. Isings,

10.

p. p.

M. P. Charlesworth,

3.

pp.

163-164.

-

-

tions (Eggers, p. 178, vessels only from the periods Bi and B2) and those discovered in the South of the USSR (V.V. Kropotkin, pp. 2732, the vessels only from the Ist century B.C. -lst century A. D.). 209.

See, the Catalogue, Varia. parenthesis

210.

The dating of every piece is mentioned in the section of the Catalogue devoted to these objects.

211.

Catalogue, Varia, no. C 1-12 (excepting the pieces mentioned above).

212.

With regard to this discovery, also I. H. Crian, 0 Trusa medical descoperit Cercetri,

213.

The indications in text, between the

la Grditea Muncelului, in Istoria Medicinii. Bucureti, 1957, pp. 45-56.

Studii si

See, in addition to the bibliography of the catalogue, C. Daicoviciu, in IstRom, I, 1960,

p.

269 and fig. 60/1;

H. Daicoviciu, Dacia de la

Burebista la cucerirea roman, Cluj, 1972, pp. 194-195 and fig. 48; I. Glodariu, Importuri romane in cetile dacice din Munjii Orsiei, inApulum, Vu/I, 1968,

p.

363, no. 1.

114

214.

The chapter devoted to the coin-finds reproduces to a great extent, the article of I. Glodariu, Consideraii asupra circulaiei monedei strine /in Dacia (sec. llte.n.-sec. I e. n.), inActaMN, VIII, 1971, pp. 71-90.

215.

B. Mitrea, Penetrazione commerciale e circolazione monetaria nella Dacia prima della conquista, in EDR, X, 1945,

pp.

1-154;

I. Winkler,

Contribuii numismatice la istoria Daciei, in SCCluj, VI, 1-2, 1955, pp. 13-180. 216.

See the Catalogue of coin-finds.

The information existing in the

Archaeological Repertory of Transylvania work in manuscript of the Institute of history and archaeology of Cluj (whose bibliography ends in 1952-1953) have been used in the Catalogue (the new information included in the Repertory after 1971, has not been used in the present Catalogue).

Some information from this Repertory which concerns

Banat, Criana, Marmaure

and Transylvania came from the work of

B. Mitrea (note no. 215) and more has been published by authors who have not always mentioned the original source.

The Greek coins

from the 3rd and even 4th century B C. have been included in the .

Catalogue, owing to both the imprecise dating of some of them and lack of information concerning others.

The bibliographical references

deal only with the principal works containing information about the discoveries. 217.

The issues of Thasos, Macedonia Prima, Dyrrhachium and Apollonia are treated especially in the next pages.

218.

The Catalogue of coin-finds, A 1-XXIX.

219..

The indication for Catalogue, is given in the text, between parenthesis.

220.

Idem, no. A XXX.

221.

Idem, no. A XXXI.

222.

B. Mitrea,

223.

0. Floca, Tezaumi monetar de la Cugir (reg. Hunedoara), inSCN, II, 1958, pp. 103-104.

224.

B. Mitrea, Legturi comerciale ale geto-dacilor din Muntenia cu re-

.cit., 78, 139-140.

publica roman, reflectatein descoperirile monetare (Tezaurul de la Strimba, r. Tirgov-ite), inSCN, II, 1958, p. 190. 225.

Catalogue of the coins, A. XXX/4, 12, 17, 32; 82, 94, 101, 114, 126, 128, 136, 142.

A XXXI/60, 63, 66,

226.

Idem, no. AXXX/12;

AXXXI/142.

227.

Idem, no. A)

228.

Idem, no. A XXXI, in chronological order, no. 101, 60, 126, 63, 136.

229.

The indication number of all discoveries i n the catalogue is A XXXI.

XI/71, 80, 87-88, 119, 133, 149.

The numerical order of the locality is given in parenthesis.

115

230.

Idem, no. AXXX/14;

AXXXI/81, 83, 108.

231.

In the region of the Dacian citadels of the Orastie mountains there have been discovered until now in hoards or stray finds only imitations of the Thasian tetradrachms (information H. Daicoviciu).

232.

Cf. E. Chiril5-G. Mihäescu, Der MttnzhortvnCpriom. Chronologie und Umlauf der der Insel Thasos, 1969

233.

I. Winkler, .op.cit.,

234.

Without spread over Banat, Criana, Maramure

p.

42.

coin-finds, no. A/XX/i; B. Mitrea,

236.

The

237.

B. Mitrea, loc.cit., and p. 124.

238.

Idem,

239.

92, 98-99, 139.

Catalogue of coin-finds, no. A

p.

(The Catalogue of

A XXXJ/49, 77, 90, 128, 131-132).

235.

pp.

BeitrUgezu

Tetradrachmen von Macedonia Prima und

II-XXXflI.

139.

M. Macrea and M. Rusu, Der dakische Friedhof von Porolissum und das Problem der dakischen Bestattungsbruche in der Splitlathnezeit, in Dacia, N.S., VI, 1960,

240.

p.

222, footnote 23.

The Catalogue of coin-finds, in chronological order, no. A XXXII/24, 44, 9, 76.

241.

Idem, no. AXXX[I/16, 35, 68;

242.

Idem, no. A XXXtI/83;

A

AXXXIII/122.

XIII/141 (the drachmas of Apollonia are

not significant, owing to the fact that they circulated for a long time). 243.

B. Mitrea, Monedele oraelor Dyrrhachium

iApollonia in Moldovia

(TezauruldelaViioara, r. Tg.Ocna), inSCN, 11, 1958, p.89. 244.

The indicative number in the catalogue is A XXXII and A XXXIII, continuing the numeration of the localities in Arabic numerals.

The

indicatives will not be repeated in the text. 245.

Idem, no. B XXXIV.

246.

C. Moisil, Cele mai vechi legturi dintre daci §i romani, in Arhivele Olteniei, II, 6, 1926, pp. 83-85.

247.

B. Mitrea,

p.

Moneda roman

140;

idem, inSCN, II, 1958,

pp.

180-181, 193;

idem

republicana si unitatea lumii geto-dace, in Unitate gi

continuitate in istoria poporului roman, Bucharest, 1966, p. 31. 248.

I. Winkler,

249.

The Coinage of the Roman Republic, London, 1952.

250.

B. Mitrea, Le tr6sor de Frcaele (Dip. de Romanaji).

p.

46.

La penetration

du commerce romain dans la Petite Valachie avant la conqute de la Dacie, in Dacia, IX-X, 1941-44, p.329; 180-181;

I. Winkler,

p.

53;

idem, inSCN, 11, 1958, pp.

idem, Schatzfunde rtimischer Silbermtinzen

in Dacien bis zum Beginn der Dakerkriege, in JNG, 17, 1967, C. Preda, Probleme de numismatic 116

p.

133

geto-dac, in SCN, III, 1960,

p.

71.

251.

B. Mitrea, in SCN, II, 1958,

P.

179, and following

icontinuitate "In istoria poporului roman, 252.

pp.

idem, in Unitate

61-62.

The explanation of the retention in circulation of ancient Republican coins

after the reform of Nero in M. Macrea-I. Berciu, Douâ tezaure

de monede romane din Dacia Superioar, in Apulum, I, 1939-42, p. 192, footnote 14;

D. Protase, Problema continuithtiiin Dacialn lumina

arheologiei pi numismaticii, Bucharest, 1966,

p.

93, footnote 189.

253.

V. Parvan, Getica, pp. 612-613, 718;

254.

C. Daicoviciu, Problema continuitàii in Dacia, in AISC, III, 1936-40, pp. 18-19.

idem, Dacia,

p.

134.

The disturbance of relations with the Italian merchants

as a consequence of the wars of Augustus against the Illyrians is another reason for the reduction of coin circulation after Burebista. 255.

Tacitus, De origine et situ Germanorum, V, 3.

256.

The Catalogue of coin-finds, no. B =V/a.

257.

B

xxxiv

is the indicative of catalogue used for all Roman coin-finds,

their imitations and, the dies used in coinage. 258.

259.

I. Winkler, P. 46; cf. B. Mitrea, in Unitate icontinuitatein istoria poporului roman, pp. 55-56, who adds the finds until 1967 (over 2500 pieces). The question concerning the coins of

:OLcj;

(see the bibliography

of I. Winkler, Considerajii despre moneda "KOSON", in SCIV, 23, 2, 1972,

p.

)is

173 and following

still under discussion.

The opinion of

ludita Winkler revealed in the study mentioned above, does not seem to be acceptable.

It is more probable that these coins struck to the

South of the Danube arrived in Dacia in payment for some possible military favour from a Dacian dynast, either as plunder or by inheritance C. Daicoviciu, Noi contribujii la problema statului dac, in SCIV, VI, 1-2, 1955, p. 56, footnote 1;

idem, in IstRom, I, 1960, p. 276;

E. Chirilä, Relaii1e dintre daci

i romani pin

Vinicius, in ActaMN, I, 1964, p. 132; inActaMN, II, 1965, pp. 109-110). 260.

la expedijia lui M.

H. Daicoviciu, Coson sau Cotiso?,

B. Mitrea admits as valid the number of over 25000 pieces (Romanii au fost in Dacia cu 200 de ani tnainte de cucerirea ei?, in Magazin, an. XVI, no. 771, 15 July 1972, p.2).

261.

M. Macrea-I. Berciu, 2.cit., p. 202; B. Mitrea, p. 140; idem, in SCN, II, 1958, p. 183 and following, idem, in Unitate si continuitatein istoria poporului roman,

p.

62;

geto-dac, in SCN, III, 1960, 262.

p.

C. Preda, Probleme de numismatic 71;

E. Chiri1,

p. 127.

Roman republican coin hoards (quoted from B. Mitrea, "Romans were in Dacia from 200 years before its conquest"?).

263.

The Catalogue of coin-finds, no. B XXXIV/1, 3, 7-11, 15-16, 18-22, 27-31, 33, 35-36, 39, 43, 48, 50-52, 57-58, 62, 64, 66, 68-70, 73, 75-76, 84, 93, 97-99, 108-109, 111, 114, 120-121, 123-124, 126, 138, 140, 144, 147-150, 152-154, 156-159, 165-167, 170a, 173-174, 176,

117

179, 181-183, 185, 188, 190-191, 194, 197, 199, 204b, 209, 214, 217, 219, 222-223, 226, 228-229, 232-234, 236-238, 244, 248, 250-252, 256257, 261, 264-265, 267, 275-277, 282-283, 293-295, 297-298, 300, 303, 306-307, 310-311, 313, 323, 326, 330-331, 333, 336, 343, 352, 357358, 363, 365, 367, 371-372, 264.

More detailed in C. Preda, Contribujii la problema provenienjei argintului din tezaurele geto-dace, in lumina descoperirii de la Stáncua (r. Clmiu, reg. Galaji), in SCIV, VIII, 1957,

265.

P.

113-

See more detailed and with bibliographical references in the chapter Commercial roads.

266.

E. Chirila and I. Pop, op.cit., p.168;

267.

E. Chirilã and I. Pop,

268.

It

.cit.,

E. Chiri1-G. Mihescu, p.40.

167-168,

pp.

seems that the distribution of Dacian coins from the second half of

the 2nd century B.C. to the first two decades of the following century (the last phase of the indigenous "traditional" coinage) also favours the intra-Carpathian areas at least, this fact is indicated by the older I i n Numismaticky

statistics (I. Winkler, 0 mincich Dacu a Getu, ‚'.

Sbornik, V. Praha, 1958, 269.

p.

20, table I).

The presence of Roman coins in the Dacian settlements does not signify implicitly the direct participation of all settlements in the exchanges of goods with Roman traders, considering that even internal transactions used the same coins, which took the place of the Dacian "traditional" coins.

270.

See the introductory part;

cf. V. Prvan, Die NationalitJtt der Kaufleute

im rtimischen Kaiserreiche, Breslau, 1909, 271.

V. Parvan, Getica,

pp.

609, 717;

StRefistRom, I, 1954, pp. 85-86;

p.

B. Mitrea,

33. p.

151;

D. Tudor, in

idem, inArhMold, V, 1967, p. 47;

Fl. Preda, Rspindirea produselor greceti in Dacia extracarpatic (sec. VI-I t.e.n.), in AnUnivB, Ser. §tiinje Sociale-Istorie, XV, 1966, p. 17;

H. Daicoviciu, Dacia de la Burebista la cucerirea romana,

1972, p. 195.

Concerning slaves coming from Dacia, see the opinion

of N. Lascu in Daos, Davos (Davus) 1970, 272.

pp.

-

sclavi daci?, in ActaMN, VII,

79-91.

See the references in the previous footnote, especially the conclusions based on the account of Arrian (I, 4) and on the information of Hunt papyrus (R. 0. Fink, Hunt's pridianum: 2851, inJES, XLVIII, 1958, 1959, pp. 26-33;

pp.

102-116;

cf. R. Syrne, inJRS, XLIX,

R. Vulpe, in Dacia, N.S., IV, 1960, pp. 324-325;

idem, inStCls, II, 1960, p.343; 273.

British Museum Papyrus

E. Chirilã, loc.cit.).

M. Rusu, Metalurgia bronzului in Transilvania la Inceputul Hallstattulul (thesis for doctorate, in manuscript, pp. 292-299). map no. 6 from the same work.

274.

V. parvan, Getica,

pp.

609, 717.

118

See also the

275.

B. Mitrea, p. 153,mentioned the coin finds from Turda,Ocna Sibiului. Also other scholars (E. Chirilá,loc.cit.; H. Daicoviciu,loc.cit.) mentioned salt among the products furnished by the Geto-Dacian ter­ ritories.

276.

See the following chapter with regard to the commercial roads.

277.

B. Mitrea,pp. 152-153; E. Chirila,loc.cit.

278.

B. Mitrea,loc.cit.

279.

C. Daicoviciu,in IstRom, I, 1960,p. 277.

280.

!bid.

281.

R. Vulpe, HistDob, p. 96.

282.

With regard to the tonnage and the dimensions of the ships,see J. Rouge, pp. 70-71.

283.

V. Parvan,�.cit., pp. 608,665,716; D. Tudor,inArhMold, V, 1967,p. 45;

284.

Pliny,NatHist, IV,12,79(in izvistRom,I,1964,p. 401).

285.

strabo,VII, 3,13 (in IzvistRom, I,1960, p. 239).

286.

See also V .Parvan,Castrul de la Poiana �i drumul roman prin Moldava de Jos, inARMSI,XXXVI,1913,passim,and especially pp. 119-120.

287.

B. Mitrea,pp. 142-143; idem, Le trésor de Farca�ele (Dép. de RomanaJi). La pénétration du commerce romain dans la Petite Valachie avant la conqu�te de la Dacie,in Dacia,IX-X,1941-44,pp. 395-396; idem,in SCN, II,1958,p. 185.

288.

See also the anterior footnote; A. Bodor,Contribuj;ii la problema agriculturii in Dacia inainte de cucerirea romana, Problema ob§tilor la daci ( Partea I),in SCIV,VII, 3-4,1956,p. 262.

289.

M. P. Charlesworth, p. 124.

290.

!bid.

291.

Idem,p. 135.

292.

Idem,p. 129.

293.

B. Mitrea, pp. 144-145; idem,in Dacia, IX-X,1941-44,loe.cit.; E. Chirilá,.QE.Cit., p. 12�

294.

Strabo,IV, 6,10; VII, 5, 2; cf. V. Parvan, Getica,p. 718; M. P. Charlesworth,pp. 171-172,174-175,177-178; B. Mitrea,pp. 91, 145-146.

295.

M. P. Charlesworth, p. 229.

296.

Idem,p. 178.

I 97.

See supra,Maritime and river ways,with the footnote 286; R. Vulpe and collaborators,Evolu!ia a�ezarilor omene�ti in Moldava de ,1 os, iu SCIV,I,1,1950,p. 47.

�

11!)

298.

R. Vulpe and collaborators, loc.cit.;

B. Mitrea,

p.

148;

A. Ni,tu

and M. Zamoteanu, Sondajul In cetuia getica de la Tiseti, in Mat, VI, 1959,

381 (with bibliography).

P.

299.

N. Gostar, Cetãi,

36.

300.

V. parvan, Lapne'tration,

301.

Idem, Getica,

p.

218;

p.

35-40.

pp.

Gr. Florescu, Einige neue Beobachtungen tlber

den Donaulimes entlang der Dobrudscha, in Dacia, N.S., I, 1957, pp. 241-242 and fig. 1;

cf. R. Vulpe, Les Gtes de la rive gauche du

Bas-Danube et les Romains, in Dacia, N.S., IV, 1960,

p.

332, note

M. 302.

R. Vulpe,

antierul arheologic Popeti, in SCIV, VI, 1955,

idem, in Dacia, N.S., IV, 1960,

pp.

311-312;

p.

260;

idem, Getul Burebista,

conducãtor al intregului neam geto-dac, in StComPiteti, 1968, pp. 49-50. 303.

B. Mitrea,

p.

148;

D. V. Rosetti, Un depozit de unelte, clteva

stampile anepigrafice §i o monedã din a doua virsta a fierului, in SCIV, XI, 2, 1960, p. 395;

Gh. Bichir, Aezari dacice in Tara

Oltului, in StComSibiu, 14, 1969, p. 146. 304.

V. Prvan, Getica, IX-X, 1941-1944,

608-609;

pp.

394;

p.

B. Mitrea,

p.

149;

idem, in Dacia,

C. Preda, Descoperirea de monede romane

republicane de la Locusteni (r. Gura Jiului, reg. Craiova), in SCN, III, 1960, p. 167. 305.

I. Glodariu, Considerajii asupra circulaiei monedei strine in Dacia, inActaMN, VIII, 1971, p. 86.

306.

V. Parvan,

307.

B. Mitrea,

308.

Idem, loc.cit.

309.

Idem,

310.

Ibid.

311.

Cf. idem,

312.

D. Tudor, in StRefistRom, I, 1954, p. 84.

313.

V. parvan, op.cit.,

314.

N. Gostar, Cetile dacice de la ràsrit de CarpajiIn sec. Ite.n.-

p.

Pp.

218-219.

149.

p.

148.

P.

150.

p.

613.

Ie.n. (dissertation at the Archaeological Annual Conference, Craiova, 1969). 315.

Among the numerous notices, most often desultory, concerning the commercial role of Poiana, we mention only V. Prvan, in ARMSI, XXXVI, 1913, II, 1, 1951,

alumière

p.

p.

28 (excerpt);

211;

R. Vulpe and collaborators, in SCIV,

R. Vulpe, La civilisation dace et ses problèmes

des dernires fouilles de Poiana, en Basse

Dacia, N.S., I, 1957,

p.

159.

120

Moldavie, in

316.

N. Gostar, op.cit.

317.

I. Nestor, Aezri1e din societatea primitivt §i sclavagistáIn regiunea Dunrii de Jos.

Raport sumar asupra campaniei de späturi arheolo-

gice de la Zimnicea, in SCIV, I, 1, 1950, 318.

Ibid.

319.

R. Vulpe, in SCIV, VI, 1-2, 1955, p. 260; 1968,

p.

pp.

95-96.

idem, in StComPiteti,

49.

320.

D. V. Rosetti, .op.ci t.,

321.

We have to thank S. Dumitrascu for his kind information.

322.

Partially seen by us, after the writing of the catalogue of the present

p.

86.

work, owing to the good-will of the Head of the research, I. H. Cripn. 323.

Diodorus, V, 26 (cf. E. Chirilá, op-cit.,

324.

Tacitus, Annales, II, 62 (cf. E. Chirilä, loc.cit.).

325.

Caesar, De bello Gallico, III, i (cf. E. Chiril, loc.cit.).

326.

Ovid, Trist., I, 2, 75 (cf. M. P. Charlesworth,

327.

Seneca, ad Paul., 2 (cf M. P. Charlesworth, loc.cit.).

328.

M. P. Charlesworth, p. 184.

329.

125).

p.

224).

V. Prvan, Die Nationalitilt der Kaufleute im rLlmischen Kaiserreiche, Breslau, 1909,

330.

p.

pp.

19-22.

Caesar, De bello Gallico, VII, 42;

VII, 55;

see also J. Rouge', p.

276. 331.

M. P. Charlesworth,

332.

J. Hatzfeld,

333.

T. Frank, p. 215 and footnote 1.

334.

Cassius Dio, LXVIII, 30 (cf. E. Chirilã, .op-cit.,

335.

Some examples at E. Chiril,

336.

DioChrysostom, Orationes, XII, 16-17 (in IzvIstRom, I, 1964, p. 449).

337.

A. Calderini, Aquileia Romana, Milano, [1930], P. 308.

338.

J. Rouge,

339.

Idem, loc.cit.

340.

Idem,

pp.

p.

p.

45;

p.

178.

M. P. Charlesworth,

p.

90;

J. Rouge'

p.

p.

126).

p. 131, footnote 53.

276.

287-288.

The word mercator, which appears besides

negotiator did not mean absolutely a maritime merchant;

these mer-

catores appear often involved in overland commercial activities, specialized from the imperial period (idem, 341.

275.

V. Prvan, Dacia, 1957, p. 146.

121

pp.

288-289).

342.

D. M. Pippidi, $tiri noi despre 1eg.turile Histriei cu gejii in epoca elenisticã, in SCIV, XI, 1, 1960, pp. 46-47; Dobrogei, I, Bucharest, 1965, pp. 215-217.

343.

idem, in Din istoria

Em. Condurachi, inStRefistRom, I, 1954, p. 77;

with regard to the

action of Burebista, Em. Condurachi, Burebista §i oraele pontice, in SCIV, IV, 3-4, 1953, pp. 515-523;

D. M. Pippidi, Notes d'pi

graphiepontique, in Dacia, N. S., I, 1957,

pp.

Din istoria Dobrogei, I, 1965, pp. 283-289;

170-177;

idem, in

C. Daicoviciu, in IstRom,

idem, Politica externä a "regilor" daci, in

I, 1960, pp. 286-287;

Revista roman. de studii internationale, 1-2, 1967, pp. 148-149; H. Daivociu, Dacia de la Burebista la cucerirea roman, 1972, pp. 69-72. 344.

C. Daicoviciu, in IstRom, I, 1960, pp. 285-293, 296-297; inActaMN, I, 1964, pp. 125-136; 75, 112-123.

H. Daicoviciu,

345.

Cf. D. Tudor, in StReflstRom, I, 1954, p. 84.

346.

V. Parvan, Getica, AnUnivB,XV, 1966,

347.

p. p.

717; 30.

D. Tudor, loc.cit.;

.cit.,

E. Chiril, pp.

73-

Fl. Preda, in

The large spread of Thasian coins has been remarked for a long time (R. Vulpe, HistDob, p.93). For the importance of the Thasjantrade in the Northern-Danubian zone, see B. Mitrea, pp. 40, 64, 71.

348.

B. Mitrea,

349.

V. Part, op.cit., pp. 612, 716, 718;

350.

Idem,

351.

Cf. idem, op-ci t.,

352.

C. Daicoviciu, in IstRom, I, 1960, p. 281.

353.

See the Catalogue of local amphorae.

354.

D. Tudor, inArhMold, V, 1967, p. 50.

355.

See the observations concerning every piece in the Catalogue of local amphorae.

356.

The Catalogue of local amphorae, no. 12 and we have to thank Al. Vulpe for his verbal information.

357.

The Catalogue of local amphorae, no. 3/1-2.

358.

Idem, no. 12/46-47.

359.

D. V. Rosetti, Un deozit de unelte, clteva stampile anepigraficei

p.

.cit.,

77.

pp.

B. Mitrea, pp. 123-124.

612, 718. p.

M.

o monedi din a doua virsthi a fierului, in SCIV, XI, 2, 1960, pp. 397399. 360.

V. Eftimie-Andronescu, Stampila pe o amfor imitarea literelor greceti, in SCIV, 18, 1967,

122

de producie locala cu p.

402.

361.

D. V. Rosetti (.cit., p. 396) knew the finds at Cetheni, Popesti, Zimnicea and Cräsani.

V. Eftimie (Imports of stamped amphorae in

the Danubian regions and a draft Rumanian corpus of amphora stamps in Dacia, N.S., HI, 1959, p. 2IO) added cscioare1e and Giurgiu. 362.

V. Eftimie,

.cit., p. 209.

363.

V. Canarache, p. 388 and fig. 78/a .

364.

E. I. Levi, Materiall ol'viiskogo temenosa, in Ol'via, Moscow-Lenin-grad, 1964, p. 136 and fig. 3/1-2 (the stamp fig. uninscribed).

365.

„. .

3/ 2

is not E, but is

.The indigenous centre or centres of production of amphorae with

uninscribed stamps were situated elsewhere in the Muntenian plain, perhaps more to the North or more to the South, although it is not possible to establish this exactly" (V. Eftimie-Andronescu, .cit., pp. 402-403. 366.

See the Catalogue of local amphorae, no. I with bibliography.

367.

V. Eftimie, 2.cit., p. 210.

368.

D. V. Rosetti, loc.cit.

369.

D. Tudor, loc.cit.

370.

V. Eftimie-Andronescu,

371.

D. V. Rosetti, .cit., pp. 396-399; V. Eftimie, V. Eftimie-Andronescu, .cit., p. 416.

372.

R. Vulpe, in StComPiteti, 1969, pp. 48-49.

373.

I. H. Crian, Ceramica.

374.

With regard to the following observations concerning the painted pottery, see I. H. Crian, .cit., pp. 197-202; idem, Mit geometrischen Mustern bemalte dakische Keramik aus Traussilvanien, in Dacia, N. S., X, 1966, pp. 329-338 (both with bibliography).

375.

C. Daicoviciu and collaborators, §antierul Grditea Muncelului, in SCIV, IV, 1-2, 1953, p. 185; generally with regard to the painted pottery from there see also pp. 182-187.

376.

I. H. Crisan, Ceramica, p. 201.

377.

See the Catalogue of pottery imitations of imported products.

378.

We omit in the following to make reference to the Catalogue mentioned in the previous footnote; all forms of vessels which will be mentioned in the text can be found easily in the same Catalogue, distributed by

379.

.cit.,

p.

403. .cit., p. 211;

categories, at every locality recorded in the text. For the Geto-Dacian bowls, see especially, Al. Vulpe, Reprezentri umane pe cupele getice de la Popeti, in SCIV, 16, 2, 1965, pp. 341351; I. Casan-Franga, Contribuii cu privire la cunoasterea ceramicii geto-dacice. Cupele "deliene" getice de pe teritoriul Rom'niei, in ArhMold, V, 1967, pp. 7-35; I. H. Crian, .cft., pp. 137-140.

123

380.

Al. Vulpe,

381.

See the discussion, with bibliography at I. H. Cri9an, op.cit.,

382.

Al. Vulpe, 2.cit., Franga,

.cit.,

.cit.,

pp.

341-342;

341.

p.

p.

20. 137.

p.

Analogous observations at I. Casan-

18, 32-33;

pp.

I. Casan-Franga, op.ci t.,

I. H. Crisan, op.cit.,

p.

139.

An

attempt to classify the local bowls according to the form and decoration at I. Casan-Franga,op.cit., 383.

I. Casan-Franga,

384.

Idem,

385.

V. Parvan, Getica,

.Lit,

p.

.cit., 34;

pp.

p.

20, 23, 25-27, 30-31.

33.

I. H. Crian, 587-588;

pp.

p. 139.

more recently I. H. Crisan,

.cit.,

pp. 184-186 (with bibliography). 386.

I. H. Crisan,

387.

Idem,

388.

Idem,

389.

Idem, 2l2.' p. 201.

390.

Ibid.

391.

Idem,

392.

Idem,

393.

C. Daicoviciu and collaborators, in SCIV, IV, 1-2, 1953, pp. 166-167;

2E.2.'ii.

.cit.,

.cit.,

p.

183.

p. 186. 178.

p.

p. 144. .cit.,

pp.

210-211.

H. Daicoviciu, in Mat, WI, [1961],

p.

314;

I. H. Crian,

.cit., pp.

155, 212. 394.

I. H. Crian, op.cit.,

395.

• Cf.

396.

Idem, op.cit.,

397.

See the Catalogue of pieces imitating imported vessels of bronze.

398.

See all in the Catalogue mentioned in the previous footnote.

idem,

p.

167.

pp. 213-214. p.

153.

We will

not mention the other Geto-Dacian settlements with finds of crucibles, bronze and also the clear traces which can be connected with the metallurgy in bronze, owing to the fact that the products intended for use as accessories for bronze vessels are missing among those discoveries. 399.

R. Florescu, LTart des Daces, Bucarest, 1968,

400.

The catalogue mentioned in footnote 397, no. 2.

401.

H. Daicoviciu,

402.

A selective bibliography of the Geto-Dacian coinage inB. Mitrea, Unitate

.cit.,

p.

pp.

23-24, 51-54.

194.

icontinuitate in istoria poporului roman, Bucarest, 1968,

p. 53, footnote 1. 403.

For the statistical information concerning the localities of discovery, see the respective section of the Catalogue of the coin finds including the imitations of different categories of Greek and Roman coins. They are marked with the originals together on the same maps. 124

404.

C. Moisil, Les monnaies des Daces, in BSNR, XV, 1920, p. 59 and following.

405.

V. Parvan, La pénétration, p. 41.

406.

E. Chirila-I. Pop, .2e-cit., pp. 159, 161.

407.

E. ChiriUí-I. Pop, .2e.cit., p. 160; E. Chirilá-G. Milmescu, p. 42.

408.

E. Chirila-G. Mihaescu, p. 41. A coin-die has been discovered re­ cently in the settlement at Slimnic.

409.

V. Parvan, Getica, p. 603; B. Mitrea, p. 120; ídem, in Unitate $'i continuitate in istoria poporului roman, 1968, pp. 59-60; M. ChiSescu, Note asupra tezaurului de monete romane republicane de la Poroschia (r. Alexandria), in SCIV, 16, 2, 1965, p. 171; N. Lupu, Die MUnze in der dakischen Burg von Tilisca, in Forschungen zur Volks- und Landeskunde, 7, Sibiu, 1964, pp. 5-31; ídem, Aspekte des Mtlnzum­ laufe im vorrtlmischen Dakien, in JNG, 17, 1967, p. 101 and following.

410.

M. chi¡escu, Notá despre doua tezaure romane republicane descoperite in Cimpia Munteana (com. Suhaia, jud. Teleorman), in SCN, IV, 1968, p. 128.

411.

B. Mitrea, in Unitate �i continuitate in istoria poporului roman, p. 60.

412.

With regard to this problem see H. Daicoviciu, .2e.cit., pp. 196-198.

413.

With regard to the plough-share in the shape of a massive and flattened spoon existing among the Thracians, M. CiCikova, Au sujet du soc thrace, in Apulum, VII/1, 1968, pp. 118-122; with regard to the origin of the plough-share and its spreading over the northern-Danubian countries, I. H. Cri�an, Un depozit de unelte descoperite la Lechin,ta de Mure§ (Plugul la geto-daci), in SCIV, XI, 2, 1960, pp. 285-301; ídem, Un depozit de unelte descoperit 1n apropierea Sarmizegetusei (Gradi�tea Muncelului), in StComSibiu, 12, 1965, pp. 213-222; D. V. Rosetti, " �.cit., pp. 392-400; I. Glodariu and M. Cimpeanu, Depozitul de unelte agricole de la Dedrad (r. Reghin), in SCIV, 17, 1, 1966, pp. 23-25. G. Morariu Popa declares for a south-western origin (Ipoteze noi 1n legátura cu originea fierului "dacic" de plug, dissertation, Museum session, 1966).

414.

C. Daicoviciu and collaborators, in SCIV, I, 1, 1950, p. 147.

415.

D. Popescu, in SCIV, IX, 1, 1958, p. 144, no. 2.

416.

C. Daicoviciu, in IstRom, I, 1960, pp. 319-320; see also C. Daicoviciu and collaborators, in SCIV, I, 1, 1950, p. 147; SCIV, V, 1-2, 1954, pp. 130, 147; C. Daicoviciu, Sistemi e tecnica di costruzione militare e civile presso i Daci nella Transilvania, in Atti del settimo Congresso Internazionale di Archeologia Classica, III, Rome, 1961, p. 83; H . Daicoviciu, .2e.cit., pp. 127-149 (with bibliography).

417.

Vitruvius, De architectura, I, 10.

418.

C. Daicoviciu, Piatra Ro�ie, pp. 35-41; ídem, in IstRom, I, 1960, pp. 320-321; ídem, Sistemia tecnica di costruzione •..• , p. 84; H. Daicoviciu, .2e.cit., pp. 130-131. 125

419.

Th. Ng1er, Cercetrile din cetatea de la Breaza (Fgra), in StComSibiu, 14, 1969, pp. 91, 106.

420.

N. Lupu, Cetatea dacicdelaTilisca, in Mat, VIII, 1962, pp. 477484;

idem,

244;

idem, in M. Macrea, Oct. Floca, N. Lupu, I. Berciu, Cetâti

antierularheologicTilica, in Mat, LX, 1970, pp. 233-

dacice din sudal Transilvaniei, Bucarest, 1966, 421.

.cit.,

9-23;

pp.

idem, La citadelle

daciquedeCãpIlna, in Dacia, N.S., IX, 1965, pp. 201-232;

partially,

the results of the new research at H. Daicoviciu,

140.

.cit.,

p.

Oct. Floca, Cetatea dacicâ de la Bnija, in M. Macrea, Oct. Floca, N. Lupu, I. Berciu, op.cit.,

423.

34-45.

M. Macrea and I. Berciu, Cetatea dacic. de la Càp'ilna, in M. Macrea, Oct. Floca, N. Lupu, I. Berciu,

422.

pp.

pp.

23-33.

I. Berciu, Cetatea dacict de la Piatra Craivii, Floca, N. Lupu, I. Berciu, op.cit.,

in M. Macrea, Oct.

45-57;

pp.

I. Berciu, Al. Popa,

H. Daicoviciu, La forte resse dace de Piatra Craivii (Transylvanie, Roumanie), in Celticum XII.

Actes du IVe Congr'es International

d'Etudes Gauloises, Celtiques et Protoceltiques, 1965, pp. 115-146. 424.

For exemplification we refer only to the analogies from Histria (Em. Condurachi, in StRefistRom, I, 1954,

pp.

72-73;

V. Canarache and

C. Preda, in Em. Condurachi and collaborators, Histria (1954), in SCIV, VI, 3-4, 1955,

antierul arheologic

522-523 and fig. 3.

pp.

425.

C. Daicoviciu, Sistemi e tecnica di costruzione...., loc.cit.

426.

C. Daicoviciu, op-cit.,

427.

C. Daicoviciu and collaborators, in SCIV, U, 1, 1951,

428.

H. Daicoviciu and I. Glodariu, Considerajii asupra cronologiei

p.

85. 118-119.

pp.

aezrii dacice de la Feele Albe, in ActaMN, VI, 1969,

pp.

465-473;

idem, L'habitat dace de Fejele Albe, in 1er Congrs International de Thracologie, Contributions roumaines,Sofia, 1972, pp. 77-121. 429.

E. Comsa, Spàturi de salvare

icercetri de suprafaa in regiunea

Bucureti, in SCIV, VI, 3-4, 1955, 430. 431.

pp.

438-439.

C. Daicoviciu, loc.cit. See C. Daicoviciu, Piatra Roie, pp. 153-157.

pp.

50-55.

H. Daicoviciu, op.cit.,

Similar habitations have been found also on the terraces

of the settlement at Feele Albe, during the research of the summer of 1972. 432.

R. Vulpe, §antierularheologicPopeti, in Mat, VI, 1959, 316, 327-328;

307,

idem, Les Gtes de la rive gauche du Bas-Danube et

lesRomains, in Dacia, N.S., IV, 1960, 433.

pp.

p.

311.

I. H. Crian, Influenje greceti in arhitectura sacr

a dacilor (Dis-

sertation at the Session of the Archaeological Museum of Constana, 1972). 434.

C. Daicoviciu, Sistemi e tecnica di costruzione...., p. 84.

126

435.

Ibid;

C. Daicoviciu, in C. Daicoviciu and Al. Ferenczi, Affiezrile

dacice

din

MunjiiOrstiej, 1951, p.

M. Macrea and l. Berciu, in

it;

Dacia, N.S., IX, 1965, p. 213 and footnotes 18-19. 436.

C. Daicoviciu, inC. Daicoviciu and Al. Ferenczi, loc.cit.; Piatra Roie, pp. 42-68;

idem,

H. Daicoviciu, in C. Daicovociu and collab-

orators, Santierul arheologic Grditea Muncelului, in Mat, VII, [1961], p. 315;

I. H. Cri,an, Ceramica, .cit.,

p.

203.

437.

Th. Nigler,

100.

438.

M. Macrea and l. Berciu, loc.cit.; pp. 478-479.

439.

Ibid.

440.

C. Daicovociu and collaborators, in SCIV, VI, 1--2, 1955,

441.

C. Daicoviciu, Sistemi e tecnica di costruzione...., P. 85, for

p.

N. Lupu, in Mat, VIII, 1962,

P.

197.

analogies see for example one piece from Callatis (Th. SauciucSveanu, Callatis III, in Dacia, 111-1V, 1927-32, p. 479 and fig. 84). 442.

443.

C. Daicoviciu and collaborators, in SCIV, I, 1, 1950, Crian, op-cit., p. 204.

1954, pp. 128, 130, 133, 134, 136-139; 1955, pp. 220-221.

p.

12;

idem, in SCIV, V, 1-2,

idem, in SCIV, VI, 1-2,

H. Daicoviciu, in C. Daicoviciu and collaborators in Mat, VII, [1961], p. 315;

idem, Raport asupra cercet.rilor din anii 1962-1966,

(the finds at Costesti, in the spots Coman, La Tuurau, Bocitura). C. Daicoviciu and collaborators in SCIV, IV, 1-2, 1953, in Mat, VI, 1959, 446.

I. H.

idem, in IstRom, I, 1960, p. 321.

C. Daicoviciu and collaborators, loc.cit.;

445.

145;

C. Daicoviciu, in C. Daicoviciu and Al. Ferenczi, 22.cit., idem, PiatraRoie, p. 68;

444.

p.

p.

ms

esul Ciorii,

p.

165;

idem,

336.

Al. Popa-I. Berciu, Cetatea dacicã de la Piatra Craivii, in RevMuz, no. special, II, 1965, op.cit., fig. 31/1.

p.

427;

I. Berciu, Al. Popa, H. Daicoviciu,

447.

N. Gostar, Cetâi, p. 33.

448.

R. Vulpe and collaborators, in SCIV, VI, 1-2, 1955, in Mat, V, 1959, p. 346; VI, 1959, pp. 311-312; StComPiteti, 1968, p. 49.

p.

243;

R. Vulpe,

VIII, 1962, p. 457;

449.

We have to thank H. Daicovociu for his information.

450.

Concerning the constructive elements and the interpretation, C. Daicoviciu and collaborators, in SCIV, V, 1-2, 1955, pp. 140-142 and and fig, 18; C. Daicoviciu, in IstRom, I, 1960, p. 321; Sistemi e tecnica di costruzione...., loc.cit.

451.

C. Daicoviciu, in IstRom, I, 1960, pp. 321-322; tecnica di costruzione...., loc.cit.;

127

idem,

idem, Sistemi e

I. H. Crian,

.cit., p. 204;

452.

See, for example, Em. Condurachi and collaborators, Cercetàrile arheologice efectuate in campania anului 1950 la Histria, in SCIV, II, 1, 1951, p. 153 and fig. 16;

V. Canarache, Desprealimentarea

Histriei cu apa de but, in SCIV, II, 2, 1951,

64, fig. 1.

p.

453.

R. Florescu, Arta dacilor, Bucarest, 1968,

454.

C. Daicoviciu, in C. Daicoviciu and Al. Ferenczi,

p.

21. .cit.,

C. Daicovociu and collaborators, in SCIV, I, 1, 1950, C. Daicoviciu, Piatra Roie, pp. 58-60. 455.

V. Prvan, Getica,

p.

481;

costruzione...., p. 83; 456.

pp.

124-125;

pp.

19;

p.

146-147;

H. Daicoviciu,

.cit.,

C. Daicoviciu, Sistemi e tecnica di

H. Daicoviciu,

.cit.,

p.

193.

C. Daicoviciu and collaborators, in SCIV, V, 1-2, 1954, C. Daicoviciu, in IstRom, I, 1960,

321-322;

pp.

tecnica di costruzione...., loc.cit.;

142;

p.

idem, Sistemi e

M. Macrea, Burebista §i

celjii de la Dunàrea de mijioc, in SCIV, VII, 1-2, 1956,

p.

133;

H. Daicoviciu, loc.cit. 457.

R. Vulpe and collaborators, in SCIV, I,

458.

Cassius Dio, LXVII, 7, 4;

459.

Ibid.

460.

1, 1950, p.51.

LXVIII, 9, 5.

Concerning Geto-Dacian writing see C. Daicoviu, in C. Daicoviciu and Al. Ferenczi, .2E.cit., p. 41;

C. Daicoviciu and collaborators,

in SCIV, II, 1, 1951, pp. 118-121;

VI, 1-2, 1955, pp. 201-204;

C. Daicovociu, inlstRom, I, 1960,

pp.

op.cit., pp. 224-232;

cetarile dacice, in Crisia. 1972,

pp.

327-329;

H. Daicoviciu,

A. Bodor, Blocurile cu litere greceti din Culegere de studii si materiale, Oradea,

27-35.

461.

Gh. Bichir, Aezri dacice din Tara Oltului, in StComSibiu, 14, 1969, p. 134 and fig. 7/1, 8/5.

462.

Catalogue of local amphorae, no. 3/1-2.

463.

V. Eftimie-Andronescu, in SCIV, 18, 1967,

464.

C. Daicoviciu and collaborators, in SCIV, IV, 1-2, 1953,

465.

H. Daicoviciu, in C. Daicoviciu and collaborators, in Mat, VII, [1961], p. 314;

p.

418. 166-167.

I. H. Crian, Ceramica, pp. 155, 307.

466.

C. Daicoviciu and collaborators, in SCIV, VI, 1-2, 1955,

467.

Supra footnote 460; 229.

pp.

p.

227.

M. Macrea and I. Berciu, in Dacia, IX, 1965, p.

Recently, fragments of pottery with different "inscriptions" with

Latin and Greek letters incised before and after firing have been discovered in the settlement at Ocnita-Vilcea. the name

.tj)K(QZ)

among them.

M. Macrea, and I. Berciu, loc.cit.

128

and

We have to thank D. Berciu, the

head of research, for his verbal information. 468.

EAC IA[LO]

469.

C. Daicoviciu and collaborators, in SCIV, V, 1-2, 1954, p. 128; Daicoviciu, op.cit., p. 230.

470.

H. Daicoviciu, loc.cit.

471.

See M. J. Ackner, in Archiv des Vereins fUr Siebenbtlrgische Landeskunde, I, 2, 1844,

P.

22;

H.

C. Daicoviciu and collaborators, in SCIV,

II, 1, 1950, pp. 119-120, p1. V (no. 16 a flag-stone) and fig. 19; H. Daicoviciu, pp. 226-229. 472.

S. Jak, Cercetri arheologice la Gráditea Mmcelului (IV), i n Acta MN, X, 1973, pp. 638-639.

473.

H. Daicoviciu, 22.cit., P. 230;

474.

A. Bodor, op.cit., pp. 32-35.

475.

A. Bodor,op-cit.,

C. Daicoviciu, in IstRom, I, 1960, pp. 327-328;

p.

27.

cf. H. Daicoviciu,

2a.cit., pp. 230-231. 476.

C. Daicoviciu, in IstRom, I, 1960, p. 328.

Gallia is an analogy for

the situation of Dacia, where according to the account of Caesar (De bello Gallico, VI, 14, 2) it was forbidden to record in writing the secrets of Gallic religion and the Greek alphabet was generally used for other public and private matters. 477.

Idem, 2.cit., p. 329.

478.

Cassius Dio, LXVIII, 8, 1.

479.

For details and interpretation C. Daicoviciu and collaborators, in SCIV, VI, 1-2, 1955, pp. 201-203, 232; pp. 328-329.

480.

C. Daicoviciu,

481.

Cassius Dio, LI, 26, 2.

482.

C. Daicoviciu, Politica extern. a "regilor" daci, in Revista rornna de studii internationale, 1-2, 1967, P. 152.

483.

Idem, in IstRom, I, 1960, 329.

484.

Idem, Noi contribujii la problema statului dac, in SCIV, VI, 1-2, 1955, p. 54 and footnote 3.

485. 486.

.cit., p. 284;

C. Daicoviciu, in IstRom, I, 1960,

H. Daicoviciu, 2E.cit., pp. 74, 231.

1Cf. idem, Sistemi e tecnica di costruzione.

....

p. 86.

With regard to both the different categories of imported products and the regions of Graeco-Roman influences, see the partial conclusions at the end of every chapter.

487.

C. Daicoviciu, in IstRom, I, 1960, p. M.

488.

Ibid.

129

PART TWO

CATALOGUE OF FINDS The catalogue is divided into sections covering the majority of the imported products discovered in Romania and, where relevant, the most representative indigenous products imitating or inspired by imported goods. In addition, a schematic catalogue includes the Greek and Roman coin-finds (up to 100 A.D.) which are datable to the period covered by the -present book. The finds are registered in alphabetical order of the find-localities, taking into account the published material known to the author until 1969 (inclusive) and information from directors of excavations or from research workers in museums where material is stored. The following details are mentioned (if known) for every locality: the find-spot, the type of material, possible details concerning the form, colour etc., the provenance, the dating, the year of discovery, the assemblage in which it was discovered or other materials found with the object, the museum where stored, bibliographical source or the provenance of the information, bibliography concerning the dating and the provenance, and observations (where relevant). order, the following:

The sections of the catalogue comprise, in

imported amphorae and local imitations imported pottery and local imitations (the last being selective) imported vessels and objects of bronze and local imitations vessels of silver vessels and objects of glass other categories of finds Greek and Roman coins and their imitations (regardless of place of minting)

131

CATALOGUE OF IMPORTED AMPHORAE 1.

Andolina, district Ialomita. To the South of the village; fragment of red amphora; Dacian pottery; R. Vladescu-Vulpe, BCMI, XVII, 1924, p. 86.

2.

Baia de fier, district Gorj. Pestera Muierilor; handle of Rhodian ,, amphora with rectangular stamp: [bel ti]AM08E'.VIIOL::/[ 'Ao]rAMITIOY 220-180 B.C. MNA; C. Daicoviciu and col., SCIV, IV, 1-2, 1953 , p. 206, fig. 11/10; D. Tudor, OltRom3 , p. 25 and S.E. nr. 145; cf, F. Bleckmann, p. 254, no. 95; E. Pridik, p. 3 12; H.v. Gaertringen, col. 83 7, no. 109; V. R. Grace, p. 122, no. 69.

3.

Baldovinesti, district Braila. Fragmentary amphorae; Dacian pottery; F. Anastasiu and N. Hartuche, Danubius, I, 1967, p. 25. .,

4.

Banu, district Ia�i. Dealul C rucii or Dealul Ru�ilor; fragments of amphorae; Dacian pottery; La Teme III; RepMold, p. 167, no. 2a, pl. I/18.

5.

Barbosi, district Galati. - a. Stamped handles of "Rhodian amphorae from the 3 rd-1st centu'ry B.C."; V. Parvan, La pénétration, p. 3 7; - b. Stamped amphorae (Thasian ?); V. Eftimie, p. 206 and footnote 41, "Tirighina":- c. Fragmentary amphora, yellowish--white, with the neck and the bi-cylindrical handles broken; preserved: 0.87 m; the í st century B.C.; M. GalaJi; information 9. Sanie; cf. I. B. Zeest, p. 109 and plate XXVI/62 v (with bottom similar to that of plate XXVI/ 61b); M. B. Lloris, p. 3 67, III and fig. 140/4-5. - d. Fragmentary amphora, yellowish-white, with the neck and the handles broken; pre­ served: 0.45 m; the 1st century B.C.-1st century A.D.; MuzistMold; Information s. Sanie; cf. I. B. Zeest, p. 108 and plate XXVI/60 v; - e. Fragments of three amphorae (one bottom from the 1st century A.D.; cf. LB. Zeest, p. 110 and plate XXVIII/64 a); M. GalaJi; Inf .. s. Sanie; f-g. "Roman amphorae from the 1st century B.C.-1st century A.D." year 1966; D. Popescu, SCIV, 18, 1967, p. 53 0, no. 63 ; N. Gostar, Cetati, p. 3 7. Observation: c-g in Dacian layer.

6.

Baiceni, district Ia�i. Fragmentary amphorae. It seems that a few are Rhodian; A. Lászl6, ArhMold, VI, 1969, p. 79.

7.

Balteni, district Buzau. - a. Fragmentary handle, with fragmentary oval stamp in two rows, the first row damaged: [ó-,01:u]1,0 OYN:rm:: the 3 rd-2nd century B.C.; Chersonesus; after the year 1957; M. Galaji; I. T. Dragomir, Mat. VIII, 1962, p. 17; D. Tudor, p. 51, note 79; - b. "Hellenistic amphorae from the 3 rd-2nd century B.C."; possibly Thasos; M. Gala!i ; - e. "Roman amphorae"; M. Gala_!:i; I. T. Dragomir, Mat, VIII, 1962, p. 12, 17 (b-c). Observation: those Roman can be dated after the 1st century A.D. 13 2

8.

Belcesti, district Ia si, "La Cosere"; fragments of amphorae, of redsandy paste; Thasos?; La Tène pottery III; RepMold, plate CLVII/3.

9.

Berezeni, district Vaslui. "Horinceni amphorae;

10.

Dacian pottery;

BTrlleti, district Vaslui. -

a.

-

b "Dealul Tocarului";

lui Tudor pottery;

-

Rhodes?; p.

Bone9ti, district Vrancea.

"the bridge of Trajan";

p.

Dacian settlement;

year 1966;

157 and fig. 2/2;

p.

the 4th century B.C. (cf. Grace,

Rhodian amphorae; RepMold,

p.

La Tène II

M. Focani;

About 500 m below

Hellenistic amphorae, one of them

the 4th-3rd century B.C.;

Boroeti, districtla9i

c."Rtpa Baba

259.

and plate X[X/35 a (similar type).

13.

ljnstamped

"La Nucuori"; 'Tragments of Late

Borcea, (former Cocargeaua), district Ialomia.

RevMuz, ifi, 2, 1966,

-

"fragment of amphora";

year 1956;

Gh. Bichir, Mat, V, 1959,

high;

Rhodes: "Mosnegei":

La T'ene II pottery.

339-340, no. 402 e-g.

Hellenistic amphorae";

12.

346, no. 422.

La Tène TI-HI pottery.

Dealul Ciomaga";

RepMold,

p.

fragments of

fragments of amphorae with

-

angular handles;

La Arie";

Stamped amphorae.

fragments of stamped amphorae;

amphorae:

11.

RepMold,

-

170, no. 7 d,

p.

La Picior

"

-

96

p.

possibly Thasian from

303 and fig. 1/3). Dealu]. Lessu";

Dacian and Bastarnian pottery;

314, no. 319 a;

I. Barnea,

cl. I. B. Zeest,

Observation: p.

0.61 m

M. CBrai;

fragments of La Tène II;

M. Babes, Dacii 0 bastarnii, ms

(dissertation, National conference of Archaeology Craiova 1969). 14.

Bosneagu, district Ialomqa. pottery"

(amphorae ?);

To the South of the village;

Dacian settlement;

"Hellenistic

R. Vldescu-Vulpe,

BCMI, XVII, 1924, p. 83. 15.

Bozieni, district Neam.

Roman amphorae;

M. Chiescu-V. Ursache, SCIV, 17, 4, 1966,

Dacian settlement; p.

704.

Observation:

material collected from the ground. 16.

Bradu, district Bacu.

-

a. Fragments of Hellenistic amphorae

from the 2nd- Ist century B C. of Roman amphorae from the Ist century .

A.D. (one of them from the Ist century A.D.; and plate XXVHI, 64 a); I, 1968, p. 177;

Dacian settlement;

cf. I. B. Zeest,

Information V. Ursachi and V. Cpitanu;

ment of amphora";

Dacian

Al. Vulpe, Morminte tumulare la daci 'in sec.

It.e.n.-Ie.n., ms. 17.

Braila, district Braila. amphorae.

. .

"Brflita

-

Vadul Catagatei";

from the 4th-3rd century B.C.";

a.

"Greek

Dacian ne cropoli s;

I. T. Dragomir, RevMuz, VI, 2, 1969, p. 165 and footnote 3;

-

b.

29 stamped and 5unstamped amphorae (Heraclea Pontica, Rhodes, Sinope and Thasos); and necropolis;

110

b. "f rag-

the ist century B.C.-ist century A.D.;

necropolis, tumulus II;

p.

V. Ursachi, Carpica,

the 4th-3rd century B.C.;

Information N. Hartuche.

133

Dacian settlement

18.

Bucureti.

Handles of stamped amphorae.

A, Chersonesus: 250-200 B.C.;

a. Plate 16:

-

p. 112, no. 6.

AIEx[ Cuov]/AETYJO[ov]

MMB (i nv. 2443/1957);

cf . R. B. Ahmerov,

Rectangular stamps.

Information M. Turcu;

116, no. 39 and plate IV/15.

p.

b. Partially impressed (Plate 16):

-

HPAKAEIOY/AC TINOMO'YNTO(. 180-100 B.C.; Ahmerov, B. Paros:

p. -

MMB (i nv. 2442/957);

116, no. 39 and plate Iv/15. c. Retrograde writing (plate 16):

MMB (mv. 2956/957); no. 502;

Information M. Turcu;

cf. R. B.

nAPION.

Information M. Turcu;

cf. V. Canarache,

M. Gramatopol-Gh. Poenaru, no. 921-925.

C. Rhodes

(?):

d. rIOA[x]/APM[o;]

-

Rhodes (F. Bleckmann,

p.

257), no. 211;

Gaertringen, col. 839, no. 252; Information M. Turcu. D. Sinope:

-

e. Pl. 16:

•pjj

The name is known in E. Pridik,

V. R. Grace,

317;

p.

H.v.

123, no. 138),

p.

./[&]ETYNOMOY/KpATITAPX[OU].

220-183 B.C.; MMB (i nv. 3105/957); Information M. Turcu; cf. Canarache (Grakov), p. 409, no. 18. E.

Uncertain provenance:

Pontic?;

-

f. Plate 16

MMB (inv. 295 7 /9 57);

Unstamped amphorae: the 3rd-2nd

century

MEHAPATIIONOT

year 1954;

M. Petrescu-DImbovja and collaborators, loc.cit and fig. 14 on the centre below; B.

D. Tudor, no. 8and fig. 1/7;

cf. E. Pridik, p.329.

Stamped amphorae of uncertain provenance:

year 1954;

-j.

-k.

.

KOAP ... ?

M. Petrescu -Dimbovita and collaborators, loc.cit., and

fig. 14 on the centre above (considered as Rhodian); 9 bis.

..

Obliterated:

[Aa]MOTAOy 143

D. Tudor, no. Uncertain dating;

year 1952;

D. Tudor, StRefistRom, I, 1954,

P.

82;

D. Tudor, no. 10

and fig. 1/9 (the 2nd century B.C., "probably of Pontic origin"). producer

c6(pl.Xoç

C.

Unstamped or fragmentary amphorae:

III;

RepMold,

178 and p1. XXVI/20.

p.

A

is known in Rhodes (E. Pridik,

p.

323).

-1. Fragment of lip; La Tene

-m.

145 fragments of

amphorae; 139 of Rhodian amphorae and 6 of amphorae from other centres: D. Tudor StRefistRom, I, 1954, p. 82; D. Tudor, pp. 38-39; RepMold,

p.

178, no. 17 m. Observation: Dacian-Bastarnian or only

Bastarnian settlement? Amphorae in MuzlstMold.

Possibly the fragments

mentioned m come, in the majority, from the stamped amphorae abovementioned. "Baba Nicola": Bastarnian pottery; amphorae; 29.

-n.

"Greek stamped amphorae";

RepMold, p. 177, no. 17 h "Zane"

La T'ene II;

Cirjoaia, district Iai.

Bastarnian pottery;

30.

p.

177, no. 17

Dacian settlement;

Information

-a.

Amphora with whitish slip:

M. Clärai (i nv. 9728);

-b

Rhodes?;

Fragmentary amphora;

the 4th-3rd century B.C. (the type with profilated shoulder); 1966;

M. Cälrai (i nv. 9729);

Zeest,

p.

Information A. Atanasiu;

89 and p1. X/24 a, XII/23 z,

p. 100 and p1. XXII/43; -c. the 4th-3rd century B.C.; Information A. Atanasiu; (similar type);

year cf. I. B.

96 and p1. XX/35 k, 1;

p.

Fragmentary amphora with whitish slip; year 1966;

Dacian pottery;

cf. I. B. Zeest,

P.

M. CMrai;

96 and p1. XIX/35 a

observation: possibly Thasian from the 4th century

B.C. (cf. Grace,

p.

303 and fig. 1/3);

the 4th-3rd century B.C.;

year 1966;

(i nv. 9727);

Information A. Atanasiu;

references;

-e.

Clinci;

j.

RepMold, p1. XXVII/1.

Clinci, district Ilfov. year 1966;

-o. Fragmentary

RepMold,

Fragmentary fluted handles of amphorae;

La T'ene II and possibly, La Tène III; N. Zaharia;

La Tène;

-d.

fragmentary amphora;

Dacian pottery; observation:

M. Cãthrasi

see the preceding

2 km to the south-east of the villages Stancea and

"Greek amphorae";

Dacian pottery;

year 1952;

B. Mitrea

and collaborators, SCIV, IV, 1-2, 1953, p. 236. 31.

Coconi, district Ilfov, "Piscul Coconilor"; APICTOFEITQii

Rhodes?

a.

(cf. E. Pridik,

Fragments of amphorae; Dacian settlement; BCIVII, 1924, pp. 46-47, 82. 32.

p.

322);

-b -d.

R. Vldescu-Vulpe,

Cogeasca (former Cogeasca Veche), district Iai "La Podi"; of amphorae;

theist century A.D.;

P. 180 fand p1. XOC/14; and p1. XXVIII/64 b. 33.

handle with the stamp

centre:

fragments

RepMold,

Information N. Zaharia; I. B. Zeest,

Coslogeni, district Ialomia. amphorae.

Dacian settlement;

Between Roseji and Coslogeni.

Rectangular stamps.

A. Thasos:

eAIQN/KYXPI.

-a

P.

110

Stamped

A ladder on the

350-270 B.C.;

I. Barnea,

RevMuz, III, 2, 1966, p. 156 and fig. 4/2 (dates the 3rd-2nd century B.C.);

cf. E. M.

no. 114-115. cf. a;

-b.

taerman, P. 34;

M. Gramatopol-Gh. Poenaru,

Caduceus on the centre eAI[wv]/KYxF[ç].

I. Barnea, -loc.cit. and fig. 4/1.

144

B. Sinope:

-c.

partially obliterated;

grapes:

['ATU]OMOY/[1J6CJO]/T0Y

LAIKOY/ETEAN[o].

120-70 B.C. (with the name of the magistrate and of the producer); I. Barnea, loc.cit. and fig. 4/3;

cf. Canarache (Grakov), group IV,

p. 412 no. 39 and 61. C.

Uncertain provenance:

centre:

.

.

-d.

The helmeted head of Hermes on the

AMONO/EIJCHE

(sic).

Producer from Thasos?

I. Barnea, loc.cit. and fig. 4/4 (dates from the 3rd-2nd century B.C.). Unstamped amphorae: I. Barnea, loc.cit. 34.

-e.

fragments of sides of some amphorae;

Observation:

Dacian settlement.

Costeti, district Hunedoara, "Blidaru"; Roman;

the Ist century A.D.;

bottom of amphora;

year 1953;

Dacian citadel;

Daicoviciu and collaborators, SCIV, V, 1-2, 1954, 35.

Cotnari, district Iai Dealul Ctlina; (Rhodes?);

-a.

p.

probably

C.

138.

Fragments of amphorae

the 3rd-2nd century B.C. (?);

Dacian fortification;

RepMold, p. 183, no. 23 g and p1. XXXLII/21; Information A. Florescu. -b. Fragments of amphorae; La Tène Ill; Dacian settlement; Information N. Zaharia. 36.

Craiva, district Alba, 'Tiatra Craivii", fragments of amphorae; probably Roman;

Dacian citadel;

special number, 1965, 37.

p.

Al. Popa-I. Berciu, RevMuz, II,

427.

Crsani, district Ialomia, Piscul Crásanilor. -a.

Stamped amphorae:

Rectangular stamp which is obliterated: EflI

Rhodes;

the 3rd-2nd century B.C. or possibly only the 2nd century

B.C.; I. Andrieescu, Piscu1Crsani, pp. 70-71 and fig. 204; Prvan, Getica, pp. 203-204 and fig. 150. rectangular stamp on one of the lobes: the 2nd century B.C. (?); (the reading reading

['A]5ou.

Unstamped amphorae:

V.

bi -cylindrical handle;

['AJAAIOY.

I. Andriesescu,

[]oXCou

151 (the same reading);

-b.

Cos; p. 71 and fig. 205

); V. Pârvan.cit., p. 204 and fig.

V. Eftimie, pp. 207-208, footnote 47 (the

-c. Fragmentary amphora with bi -lobate

handles; Cos; the 2nd century B.C.; I. Andrieescu, op.cit., p. 69 and fig. 203; V. Pârvan, .cit., fig. 155; cf. I. B. Zeest, p. 107 and p1. handles;

OcV/54 b;

-d.

Fragmentary amphora with bi-lobated

the Ist century B.C. (?);

loc.cit. and fig. 202;

amphora with fluted handles; loc.cit. and fig. 201; amphora; fig. 152;

MNA (i nv. 3825);

V. Pârvan, 22.cit., fig. 154; MNA (i nv. I 3826);

V. Pârvan,

2.cit.,

V. Pârvan, La penetration,

38.

P.

41.

p.

37;

Observation:

La Tène II;

idem, Getica,

Dacian pottery; 145

pp.

28-29, 32-34, 69;

pp.

179, 203-205;

Dacian settlement.

Diaconi, district Galai, "Costa Hnjesti1or" of amphorae; p. 210.

-f. Fragmentary

V. Prvan,

Fragments of amphorae (with those mentioned in a-f

together, atotal of about 30 amphorae);22.cit., D. Tudor,

Neck of

1. Andrieescu,

fig. 153;

I. Andrieescu, loc.cit. and fig. 200; -g.

I. Andreiescu, -e.

-

"Calud";

fragments

year 1951; SCIV, III, 1952,

39.

Dichiseni, district Ia1omia. Amphora; the 4th-3rd century B.C.; year 1960; M. Cã1.rai; Information A. Atanasiu; cf. I. B. Zeest, pp. 78-79 and p1. V/14 a.

40.

Doroban, district Iai "Poala Dealului orogari"; fragments of amphorae; pottery of Lunca Ciurei type; RepMold, p. 189, no. 30 c and p1. XLV/1-2. Observation: rather the Ist century B.C. if not the Ist century A. D.

41.

Dorobantu, district Ia1omiJa. Between Boneagu and Dorobanu in two spots: -a -b. Fragments of amphorae; Dacian pottery; R. VtâdescuVulpe, BCTvfl, XVII, 1924, p. 86. "2 km to the south of the Mostitea lake": -c. Fragmentary amphora; A. Atanasiu, RevMuz, VI, 1, 1967, p. 52 ; Observation: urn in cremation grave.

42.

Dunreni (former era), district Dolj "Grindul Rostii"; amphorae; the 3rd-2nd century B.C.; Bichir, Mat, V, 1959, p. 280.

43.

fragmentary

Dacian settlement;

Gh.

Fãceni, district Ialomia. On the Borcea shore: -a. Amphora with rectangular stamp on the neck (an unclear symbol between two lines) Pl. 15, 17: EFII ArNO/AAMOY. Heraclea Pontica; the 4th-3rd -

century B.C.; I. Barnea, RevMuz, III, 2, 1966, p. 157 (dates from the 3rd century B.C.); cf. Zeest, type II, p. 49 and fig. 10/2; I. B. Zeest, p. 100 and p1. XXfl/43. b. Fragments of Rhodian amphorae and probably from Heraclea Pontica and Thasos; I. Barnea, -

p. 158. 44.

Fedeti, district Vaslui "Sub Pâdure";

fragments of amphorae

(Sinope?); La T'ene II; Dacian settlement; RepMold, Information N. Zaharia. 45.

Fintinele, district Teleorman.

p.

344, no. 416

Amphora (Pl. 15;) year 1965;

C;

crema-

tion tumulus-grave; Thasos (?); the end of the 4th century B.C.? C. N. Mateescu and M. Babe, SCIV, 19, 2, 1969, pp. 283, 288, 291 and fig. 4 st.; cf. I. B. Zeest, pp. 85-86 and pl.VIII/20 g. 46.

Floresti (former Islam Geaferca), district Tulcea "coada Rtpii": -a-x. Amphorae with fluted handles and concave bottom; (Observation: two are "of special type'; Heraclea Pontica; the Ist century B.C., possibly also the beginning of the Ist century A.D.; year 1955; M. Tulcea (12), M. Constan,ça (I), M. Braila (1), MNA (6); E. Bujör, SCIV, MI, 1, 1961, pp. 85-90 and figs. 1-3. Observation: a total of about 26 amphorae; 7 are stamped with AIo[CouJ. Cf. E. M. taerman, p. 35 and figs. 36-37; stamps on the neck; four with rectangular stamps Lj ; one with the rectangular stamp (?); one with stamps in semi-circle ; one with the stamp MI; one with the stamp NE; one with the stamp in the shape of a leaf;

47.

obliterated letters;

one with the rectangular stamp OYAOy

(kdaj.i, district GaIai. Public garden; amphora; Heraclea Pontica? the 4th-3rd century B.C..(?); year 1899; M. Ga1aji; I. T. Dragomir, RevMuz, VI, 2, .1969, p. 165 and note 6.

146

48.

Garvan, district Tulcea. Efil

-a.

eEAI/HTO -I.

handle with rectangular stamp

Rhodes;

200-190 B.C.;

Gh. Stefan and collaborators, Mat, VII, [1961], Bleckmann,

p.

255, no. 132;

col. 838, no. 150;

E. Pridik,

V. R. Grace,

hill Chetriceaua;

p.

49.

585-586;

pp.

314;

cf. F.

H. v. Gaertringen,

123, no. 91. -b.

The foot of the

"sherds of Greek amphorae", "a handle with a be-

ginning of stamp" between them; IV, 3-4, 1953,

p.

Dacian settlement;

Dacian settlement;

E. Coma, SCIV,

752.

p.

Ghelieti, district Neamj.

Hellenistic amphora;

Information V.

Miháile scu-Birliba. 50.

Ghireasca, district Vaslui; La Tene III;

"Budàiul Oii"; fragments of amphorae;

Dacian settlement;

RepMold,

p.

345, no. 419 a;

Information N. Zaharia. 51.

Giurgiu, district Ilfov "Malul Rou". producers:

-a.

Rectangular stamps of Rhodian

Caduceus below the name:

AAIvIAE.

year 1958;

Al. Punescu, Gh. Rdulescu and M. lonescu, Mat, VIII, 1962, p. 134; D. Tudor,

51, n. 79;

p.

leaf on the right: 70, no. 123; 52.

Caduceus below the name and grapes or

[TLp]XIA.

E. Pridik,

Godeni, district Dolj. Rhodes;

-b.

p.

-a.

about 180 B.C.;

330;

year 1955;

M. Craiova;

Information Gh. Popilian. b-c. unstamped handles; observation (a-c): Dacian

Between Govãjdia and Cerb.l;

the ist century B.C.;

VI, Cluj, 1891, p.114.

year 1873;

Observation:

Govora

-

village, district Vilcea.

(Rhodian ?); 55.

Gh. I. Petre

Greaca, district Ilfov. below the name

-

Govora, Mat, IX, 1970, p. 477.

Handle with rectangular stamp; 220 B.C.;

E. Coma, SCIV, V, 3-4, 1954, p. 588; with the magistrates table of fig. 2;

The producer

V. R. Grace,

p.

caduceus (Pl. 17);

Rhodes;

D. Tudor,

p.

42,

M. Oltenija; p.

ApC3TÔ aq ,

' Ap ' LTcpxOc,

cf. F. Bleckmami,

col. 836, no. 57;

according to other sources

Fragments of Hellenistic amphorae

APAKOUTI,A.

120 and fig. 5/110.

Roman

G. Tgla's, in HThT,

it contained a coin hoard (the

2nd -ist century B.C.). Probably confused; the vessel was of bronze. 54.

42,

handle with rectangular stamp: tJOY.

Govájdia, district Hunedoara. amphora (?);

pp.

observation: (a-b) Dacian settlement.

See for the producer LOg 28/g-h. M. Craiova; Information Gh. Popilian; settlement. 53.

D. Tudor,

p.

together (Grace, 253, no. 49;

122, no. 36)

68 no. appears

p.

219 and the

H. v. Gaertringen,

'JppoTo;

(Grace, loc.cit.; cf. F. Blechmann, p. 254, no. 75; E. Pridik, p. 311; H. v. Gaertringen, col. 836, no. 87; V. R. Grace, p. 122, no. 56), 56.

57.

both from c. 220 B.C.

Gura Vitioarei, district Prahova. "In tumulus"; lobated handles; Cos ?; D. Tudor, p. 42. Hirova, district Constana. the 3rd-1 st century B C.; .

-a.

amphora with bi-

Handles of Rhodian amphorae from

V. Pàrvan, La pne'tration,

In the Dacian layer under the castrum; Em. Condurachi, IstRorn, I, 1960, 147

pp.

p.

37;

-b.

"fragments of Greek vessels"; 485-486.

58.

Horga, district Vaslui, "Dealul Fundäturei"; amphora;

59.

RepMold,

Igeti, district Vaslui. In;

60.

La T'ene II;

Dacian pottery;

Garden lAS;

RepMold,

fragment of Thasian

346, no. 421 c.

p.

fragment of amphora La Tene

346, no. 423b.

p.

Lunca (former Chioara) district Ialomia "Blagodeasca";

fragments

of Hellenistic and Roman amphorae ; Dacian settlement; I. Barnea, RevMuz, III, 2, 1966, 61.

159.

p.

Luncavia, district Tulcea. with the

iganea;

-a.

Near the confluence of the Luncavita

fragments of amphorae;

SCIV, IV, 3-4, 1953, p. 752, no. 21. of amphorae; 62.

La Tène II;

Rhodian amphorae.

"LaPunat";

colii";

p.

E. Com- a fragments

753, no. 15.

fragments of Greek

Dacian settlement;

Medgidia, district Constana. A.

-b.

E. Coma, 2p.cit.,

Mluteni, district Vaslui "Grádina amphorae;

63.

Dacian pottery;

Dacian pottery;

RepMold,

p.

349, no. 428 b

Quarry of the brick-factory.

Rectangular stamps.

Stamped:

Magistrates: -a.

EllI KAEQN/MOY/ B[aôpo ]MIOY. 220-180 B.C.; 1/5;

Al. Popeea, SCIV, 18, 3, 1967, p.511, no. 6 and fig.

cf. F. Bleckmann, p. 256, no. 170;

Gaertringen, col. 838, no. 194; EllI

E. Pridik, p. 315;

V. R. Grace,

p.

H. v.

123, no. 110. -b.

TIfk/[c]AFOFA.

220-180 B.C.; Al. Popeea, 2.cit., p.511, no. 7and fig. 1/6; cf. F. Bleckmann, p. 257, no. 231; E. Pridik, p. 316; H. v Gaertringen, col. 840, no. 280; V. R. Grace,

p.

124, no. 159.

TIMA/EAI'OFA. Al. Popeea,

-c.

Unclear symbol:

.cit.,

p.

511, no. 8;

EllI see b.

Producers: -d. Star with 8 rays on the right: fLA.NAMOY/AFICTE[ C5c] 4 Al. Popeea, op.cit., p. 510, no. 4and fig. 1/3; cf. E. Pridik, p. 321.

-e.

LIOY.

and fig. 1/4.

Circular stamps. AI'[ct&Xou

about 180;

Magistrate:

Ltoq -f.

.cit., p. 510, no. 5

see 28/g-h.

Flower on the centre: EllI

'AypL]ANJiQy.220_180B.c.;

509, no. land fig. 1/1; p. 307;

Al. Popeea,

For the producer

Al. Popeea,

cf. F. Bleckmann,

p.

H. v. Gaertringen, col. 835, no. 2;

.cit., p.

252, no. 2;

V. R. Grace,

E. Pridik, p.

123,

no. 1. Producers: .cit.,

p.

-g.

cf. E. Pridik,

AAMOKPATEYE. and fig. 1/2. names fig. 2;

' A\TCTCcTpOç

cf. F. Bleckmann,

no. 253;

321. -h.

together( Grace, p.

253, no. 38;

appears with the

p.

219 and the table of

E. Pridik, p. 309;

V. R. Grace,

p.

p.

517;

F. Bleckmann,

H. v. Gaertringen, col. 839,

V. R. Grace, p. 123, no. 139).

148

H. v.

122, no. 29)

(about 180 B.C.), Grace, loc.cit.; E. Pridik,

Al. Popeea,

Flower onthe centre: p. 510, no. 3

AaLo-tp&Tfl;

Gaertringen, col. 836, no. 44; flpcio(&vr)ç

p.

Al. Popeea,

The producer

p. 257, no. 212;

ANT LrO NOY.

Flower on the centre:

509, no. 2;

B.

Amphorae from Sinope.

Handles with rectangular stamps:

-i.

BOPYOE/ATYNo[ov]/Ano.pj[ Cou]. 350-270 B.C. or 270-220 B.C.; Al. Popeea, p.cit., p.511 and fig. 1 /9

. The magistrate

270 B.C.

Canarache (Grakov), p.405, no.!, but the producer does

-

-j.

not appear in these groups. 250-220 B.C.; magistrate

-

EKYIVfNC[ç]/AEION.

cf. E. M. D.

-k.

cl. E. M.

Kantharos on the

]

[

p.

511, no. 10 and fig.

1 /8 ;

34.

p.

Amphorae of uncertain provenance, Rectangular stamps:

EFI['i.

to]/NIcI[o'].

Seem;

Al. Popeea,

mentioned).

-

MIN

Observation:

Al. Popeea,

512, no. 15 and fig.

Amphorae with rectangular stamps:

MNA;

cf. F. Bleckmann,

Gh.

Rhodes;

tefan, Dacia, 11, 1925,

253, no. 40;

p.

E. Pridik,

V. R. Grace,

-b.

producer;

Rhodes?

HP[oXECTou].

loc.cit., and fig. 12/11;

cf. E. Pridik,

TJnstamped amphorae:

.

-c -i.

p.

-a.

the 2nd -Ist century B.C.

v. Gaertringen, col. 836, no. 47;

Cos ?;

p.

o. bi-

Dacian settlement.

E[itL ]/AI1OJJ.Q[v Coy].

(the shape of letters); fig. 13;

...

-

p. fragments of amphorae (possibly of those above-

Mnstirea, district Illov. Pl. 17

[ALo]/iiY[aCou]

p.512, no. 14 and fig. 1/10.

lobated handle with stamp: i/Il (Cos).

-m.

Northern-Pontic (Heraclea ?); Al.

Popeea,op.cit., p. 512, no. 13. (Heraclea) -n. ELlI

64.

Al. Popeea,

taerman, p.34.

Line 2 broken: [e AE IQ v].

Al. Popeea, op.cit.,

taerman,

The

407, no. 19 and 13.

350-270 B.C.;

Amphora (?) on the centre.

350-270 B.C.;

p.

Rectangular stamps:

op.cit., p.511, no. 9 and fig. 1/7; -1.

511-512, no. 12.

pp.

and the producer belong to the group

Canarache (Grakov),

Thasian amphorae.

centre:

ATYNOM[ov]/ivLEAKAE[ouç]

ATTAAOY. Al. Popeea, .cit.,

Mfl3-t2ç

111:250-220 B.C. C.

appears also in group 1:350-

LO q

Canarache (Grakov), p. 405, no. I and in group 11:270-

-

250 B.C.

'AmoX7'.v

p.

398 and

309;

p.

H.

122, no. 31.

p.

MNA; Gh.

tefan,

325.

Fragments of handles and sides;

R. Vládescu-Vulpe, BCMI, XVII, 1924,

p.

81 (e, 1, i);

tefan. loc.cit., and fig. 10/59, 61 (o-g); V. Pârvan.

Getica,

and Gh. p.

467

("Thasian amphorae"). 65.

Mogoeti, district Iai "Dealul Bàu1ui":

fragments of amphorae

La Tène 111;

208, no. 52 a;

Dacian pottery;

RepMold,

p.

Information

N. Zaharia. 66.

Moigrad, district S1aj. right: Sinope;

Handle with rectangular stamp;

prow on the

A[cuóiou]/IKEEIOY TOY/BPXXIOY/IVIENQN. 183-120 B.C.;

Al. Culcer-I. Winkler, ActaMN, VII, 1970,

p. 544, no. 35 and p1. IV/23 a-b magistrate

I-touoç

(dates it 150-120 B.C.).

6 BcCOU and the producer

belong to the group V:183-120

-

and 44.

149

Canarache (Grakov),

The

Mvw p.

410, no. 12

67.

Mosna, district Iai. Cos;

-a.

"Cethuia";fragments of amphorae from

the 3rd-2nd century B.C.;

Bastarnian pottery;

and Gh. Melinte, SCIV, 19, 1968, pp. 131-132. -b. fragments of amphorae;

La T'ene U;

pottery;

A. C. Florescu "Intre Vii";

RepMold,

p.

325, no.

354 b. 68.

Moteni, district Ilfov.

"Ulmul lui Nea";

fragment of handle;

Dacian settlement (the 2nd century B.C. -the Ist century A. D.);

§.

69.

Semo, RevMuz, ifi, 5, 1966, p. 450.

NazIru, district Braila. the stamp

8AEIN

Fragments of amphorae and handle with (the last Thasos);

Ana stasiu-N.Harjiiche, Danubius, I, 1967, 70.

Ocnia, district Vllcea.

p.

F.

24.

Fragments of about 17 amphorae, some of

them with fluted handles; Information:

Dacian settlement;

the 2nd century B.C. -theist century A. D.;

G. Purc.rescu;

cf. I. B. Zeest,

P.

110 and p1.

XXVIII/64 a, v, 65 v. 71.

Ograda, district Ialomija. ist century B.C.;

72.

Fragment of handle;

northern-Pontic;

the

E. Coma, SCIV, VI, 3-4, 1955, p. 441.

Oltenia, district Ilfov.

Fragments of amphorae;

Information B.

Tone scu. 73.

Orlea, district Olt.

Amphora with stamp on the neck:

Uncertain provenance; probably the Ist century B.C.; M. Orlea;

D. Tudor, no. 141 and fig 7/149;

POYOy. year 1954;

Apulum, VII, 1, 1969,

p. 394 and fig. 2. 74.

Piatra Neam, district Neam. "Bltca Doamnei": amphorae;

years, 1957, 1958, 1961;

century A.D.;

Dacian citadel;

M. Piatra Neam;

Zamoteanu and M. Zamo,teanu, Mat, VI, 1959, Apulum, V, 1965,

p.

139, 141;

V. Mihile scu-Blrliba.

fragments of Pontic

the ist century B.C. -the Ist

idem, Cet4i,

"C ozia":

p.

amphorae;

A. Niu, I.

p.

365;

20;

N. Gostar,

Information

Dacian settlement;

N. Gostar, Cetâti, pp. 25-26. 75.

Piatra §oimului (formerly Calu) district Neam.

the ist century B.C . -the 1st century A. D.; Dacia, VII-VIII;

76.

1937-40,

p.

36, no. 8 and fig. 39/10.

Pleeti, district Suceava.

Handle with stamp;

Severin;

383 and n. 2.

V. Canarache,

P.

Fragmentary amphorae;

Dacian settlement: R. Vulpe

Rhodes ? M. Tr.

D. Tudor dates it from the

2nd-3rd century B.C. (D. Tudor, no. 140). 77.

Poiana, district Galaçi. Stamped A. Thasos.

(The numeration with Arabic numbers).

Rectangular stamps.

-1. Hercules kneeling and shooting with a bow below the inscription (Pl. 15, 17): eAYQ[v]. about 390 B.C.; V. Prvan, ARMSI, XXXVI, 1913, pp. 100-102, fig. 6 and p1. IV/2 (dates it from the 3rd century B.C.):

cf. V. Canarache,

pp.

36-37.

-2.

Bull's head on

the centre of the stamp (Pl. 17, 46): 220-180 B.C.; 1952,

p.

year 1951;

198 and fig. 19/4;

MNA (i nv. 116348);

R. Vulpe, SCIV, UI,

cf. Canarache (Pridik), p. 397, no. 86; 150

E. M.

taerman,

46):

34.

p.

TIOYAYAAOY

-3. Symbol on the centre of the stamp (Pl. 17,

/ eAEIQN.

350-270 B.C.;

year

1950; MNA (i nv. II 6403); R. Vulpe and collaborators, SCIV, II, 1, 1951, p. 167 and fig. 16; cf. E. M. Staerman, p. 54. B.

Uncertain provenance:

on the neck (Pl. 17); Vulpe.

-4. Small amphora with unclear inscription

north-Pontic (?);

Unstamped amphorae.

M. Tecuci;

Information Al.

A large number of the over 200 amphorae dis-

covered at Poiana are lost.

Others are in MNA and M. Tecuci.

Verbal information of Al. Vulpe in the cases in which there are no mentioned bibliographical indications. amphora c. 110 cm in height;

In Museum Tecuci:

cf. I. B. Zeest,

-7. Fragmentary amphora; century B.C.;

Ovoidal

the 4th-3rd century B.C. (?). -6.

Amphora with spheroidal body, c. 90 cm in height; 4th-2nd century B.C.;

-5.

pp.

Sinope (?);

the

90-91 and p1. XHI/29 a.

the end of the 3rd-the beginning of the 2nd

cf. I. B. Zeest,

86 and p1. IX/20 k.

p.

-8.

Amphora

with a circular fluting below the lip, c. 90 cm in height;

the 2nd century

B.C.;

-9.

cf.I. B. Zeest, pp. 106-lø7 and pl. XXV/57b.

Amphora with ribbed handles; p. 110 and p1.

XVIII/64 a.

handles (Pl. 15);

the Ist century A.D.;

cf. I. B. Zeest,

-10. Amphora with angular bi-lobated

the ist century A.D.,;

year 1950;

R. Vulpe and

collaborators, SCIV, II, 1, 1951, p. 189 and fig. 20/2; Zeest,

p.

A.D.) M. B. Loris, -II.

370 and fig. 143/2 (the Ist century A.D.).

p.

Amphora with fluted handles;

the ist century A. D. -12. Amphora;

the ist century B.C. -the Ist century A.D.; and p1. XXLX/69.

-13 -16.

mentaryamphorae; and fig. 86/1, 2.

cf. I. B. Zeest,

Fragmentary amphorae.

P.

-21 -29.

Fragp.

310

Fragmentary amphorae, some profiles from

R. and Ec. Vulpe, 2p. !,, it., p. 311 and fig. 80/8,

86/3, 87/4, 5, 7, 88/3, II, 13, 89/1. bi-lobated handles, M. B. Lloris, Fragmentary amphorae; cit. and fig. 87/3, 6;

111

-17 -20.

R. and Ec. Vulpe, Dacia, III-IV, 1927-32,

the ist century A.D.;

-32 -64.

cf. I. B.

109 and p1. XXVT/62 v (the ist century B.C. -the Ist century

P.

cf. for the types with angular 370 and fig. 142/3.

the Ist century A.D.;

cf. I. B. Zeest,

p.

-30 -31.

R. and Ec. Vulpe, l oc.

110 and p1. XXVIII/64 a.

Handles and bottoms of different types of amphorae; R. and

Ec. Vulpe, 2.cit., pp. 311-12 and fig. 80/7, 88,'2, 4-5, 9-12, 89/1, 4-6 (handles) 89/2-3, 7-8, if, 90/1-5, 7, 9-13, 15-16. (Observation, fig. 90/2-3, the Ist century B.C. -the ist century A.D.). -65. Fragment of bottom (inv. II 6162); A.D.; cf. I. B. Zeest, amphora; 1927-32, 143/2.

p.

the Ist century B.C. -the Ist century

109 and pl. LXEb.

the Ist century A.D.; P.

342 and fig. 124/3;

Observation:

same amphorae.

-66.

Fragmentary

R. and Ec. Vulpe, in Dacia, cf. M. B. Lloris,

P.

III -IV,

370 and fig.

It is possible that some fragments belong to the

Mention referring to the amphorae from Poiana also

in V. Pârvan, La pn4tration, p. 37; p.282 (statistics on periods);

R. and Ec. Vulpe,

R. Vulpe, in SCIV, III, 1952, p. 193;

Al. Vulpe, Morminte tumulare la daci in sec. Ite.n.-I e. n., Dissertation at the National archaeological conference, Craiova, 1969.

151

78.

Polovragi, district Gorj. shores of Asia Minor; dacicà de la Polovragi,

79.

Rhodes.

Stamped amphorae.

Magistrates:

a.

EII

pp. 313-314 and fig. 12/5; 315;

p.

Rectangular stamps.

KAHTOETPA/TOy/AFpIANIOy

the 2nd century B.0 . (?)‚ year 1957; Pridik,

Al. Vulpe, Cetatea

Dissertation at Museum Session 1965.

Popeti, district Ilfov. A.

Amphorae from Rhodes and from the western

the Ist century B.C.;

MNA;

R. Vulpe, Mat, VI, 1959,

cf. F. Bleckmann, p. 256, no. 171;E.

H. v. Gaertringen, col. 838, no. 195;

p. 132, no. 111.

b.

Obliterated:

V. R. Grace,

EllI .... /.Il../A[Xov].

MNA; R. Vulpe and collaborators, SCIV, VI, 1-2, 1955, p.249 and fig. 17/2 . The producers: -c.

Retrograde writing:

6QPE u]

and collaborators, loc.cit. and fig. 17/1; -d. [AJIH Oy p. 342; (I);

(sic). year 1956;

cf. E. Pridik,

327.

p.

MNA; -e -f.

Uncertain provenance:

ETA.

(Pl. 17): B.C.;

-j.

MMB (1) and MNA

cf. E. Pridik,

MMB;

330.

p.

year 1957;

MNA;

313 and fig. 12/3; cf. E. M. taerman, (and see infra, k). -i. Retrograde writing

p.

JTTIOXOY.

year 1955;

324.

cf. E. Pridik, p.330. -g.

-hAAAI[ou]Cos (?);

R. Vulpe, Mat, VI, 1959, p. 39 and fig. 5/103-104.

p.

IAOLTE/A[v]OY.

D. Tudor, no. 118 and fig. 5/108; B.

cf. E. Pridik,

R. Vulpe

R. Vulpe, Mat, V, 1959,

D. Tudor, no. 119 and fig. 5/109;

Altar (?) below the name (P1. 17):

MNA;

the 2nd-the beginning of the Ist century

MNA (i nv. I 6069);

R. Vulpe, Mat, III, 1957, p. 2311.

['A ] TIOXOY.

Retrograde writing:

the 2nd-the beginning

of the Ist century B.C.;

MMB (i nv. 3282/957);

-k.

the 2nd-the beginning of the Ist century B.C.;

(Pl. 17):

6A6A

Cos (?);

R. Vulpe, Mat, VI, 1959,

h).

(Pl. 17):

-1.

(EOAAC

tors, SCIV, VI, 1-2, 1955,

p.

Cos (?); p.

249;

Information, M. Turcu.

313 and fig 2/2 (see also above MNA;

R. Vulpe and collabora-

cf. D. Tudor,

with three lines of rough and obliterated writing; of the Ist century B.C.; p. 313 and fig. 12/4.

year 1957;

-n

.

VII, [1961],

p.

century B.C.; 6/7.

-p.

year 1958;

329 and fig. 6/6. -o.

O,

IN

Rhodes (?);

.

year 1958;

Stamp

..

.NIA.

MNA;

The 2nd-the

R. Vulpe, Mat,

Retrograde writing, line 2 the 2nd-the beginning of the Ist

MNA; R. Vulpe,

Writing on two lines, obliterated;

the beginning of the ist century B.C.;

-m.

R. Vulpe, Mat, VI, 1959,

Retrograde writing:

beginning of the ist century B.C.; obliterated:

MNA;

41.

p.

the 2nd-the beginning

.cit.,

p.

332 and fig.

Rhodes (?);

the 2nd-

MrvrB (inv. 1960/957).

Information

M. Turcu. Amphorae with graffiti or painted letters: graffito (Pl. 17); and fig. 10/1. 1958; 253;

MNA;

year 1956;

MNA;

-r.

Fragment of side with

R. Vulpe, Mat, V, 1959, p. 343

-s.Other fragments with graffiti (one in pl. 17). Year R, Vulpe and collaborators, SCIV, VI, 1-2, 1955, p.

R. Vulpe, Mat. VII, [1961], p. 332.

"x" above and mLp (?) below. 1957, p. 332 and fig. 16. Unstamped amphorae:

-t.

-s. Red-painted;

year 1955;

R. Vulpe, Mat. Ill,

Fragments of amphorae;

R. Vulpe and collaborators, SCIV, VI, 1-2, 1955, Mii:. III., 13 '1

\i,

(957,

p.

"x" or

p.

pavements; 249;

R. Vulpe,

231 and fig. 7 (Rhodes, the 2nd -Ist century B.C.),

l99, p. 34:;

VI, 1959, p. 313 and fig. ti; 15 2

VII, [1961],

pp. 327;

332;

Observation:

VIII, 1962, p. 458;

Fragments of amphorae also in another spot (Mat, VII,

[19611, p. 336). 80.

StComPiteti, 1968, p. 49.

Dacian settlement.

Prundu, district Ilfov.

"Vadul Pescriei";

fragments of amphorae;

the second half of the 2nd century-the beginning of the ist century B.C.; D. Tudor, 81.

Fl. Preda, AnUnivB, XV, 1966,

Rasa, district Ia1omia. pottery;

82.

42;

p.

Old mill;

fragments of amphorae;

N. Anghelescu, SCIV, VI, 1-2, 1955,

Rast, district Dolj.

24.

p.

"Grindu Tifa1111ui";

pp.

Dacian

317-318.

fragments of amphorae;

Information S. Marinescu-Bilcu. 83.

Rcätäu, district Bacu. -a. Angular bi-lobated handle; Italian; the Ist century A.D.;

-b.

handle with rectangular stamp with inverted letters:

89 YAA.

the 2nd -Ist century B.C.;

of amphorae (about 15); Dacian settlement; 84. 85.

M. Bacâu;

Rimnicelu, district Br.ila. ment;

Fragments of amphorae;

Dacian settle-

Rosei, district Ialomija. To the east of the village; -a. amphora with ç ‚ zwo

Ewa

Heraclea Pontica;

L i6ç

cf. Zeest, tip IV, =1 /45.

‚ E6Tc

CW

pp.

p.

M. Cälrai;

500 m from the first spot: p.

I. B. Zeest,

-b.

Hellenistic amphora;

ArhMold, VI, 1969,

p.

Runcu, district Gorj.

MNA;

VI, 3-4, 1955, p.

the end of

251. On the right of the Sohodor; handle with circular eEYANEY[

AL oa6 ]OY[u].

C. S. Nicolescu-Plopor and C. N. Mateescu, SCIV, pp.

402-403 and fig. 11;

255, no. 144;

col. 838, no. 163;

E. Pridik,

V. R. Grace,

Satu Nou, district Constana.

p.

3rd century B.C.;

D. Tudor, no. 122; p.

314;

cf. F.

H. v. Gaertringep,

123, no. 96.

Fragmentary amphorae and two intact.

One with stamp on the neck (Pl. 15); necropolis;

I. Barnea,

M. Florescu and V. Cpitanu,

flower on the centre (Pl. 17): Ei-II

Bleckmann,

amphora;

Fragments of amphorae;

the 4th century-the 3rd century B.C.;

Rhodes;

100, pl.

p.

156.

Rugineti, district Vrancea.

stamp;

I. Barnea,

155, fig. 1, I a (the 3rd-2nd century B.C.);

49-50, fig. 11/2;

I. Barnea, loc.cit. "Gráditea Coslogeni": -c. .cit.,

(abbreviation

T65aç,

‚

the 3rd century B.C.;

RevMuz, III, 2, 1966,

88.

fragments

Information V. Cpitanu.

illegible stamp on the neck (Pl. 15);

87.

-c.

Information N. Harçuche.

of

86.

Cos;

the Ist century B.C. -the ist century A. D.

Heraclea Pontica (type IV, the

cf. I. B. Zeest, pp. 100-101, p1. XXII/45);

Dacian

B. Mitrea, C. Preda, N. Anghelescu, Mat, VIII, 1962,

p. 371 and fig. 1/4. 89.

Scinteia, district Iai. the 2nd century B.C.; I, 1954,

90.

p.

82;

"Dealul Boroetilor"; Bastarnian pottery;

fragmentary amphorae;

D. Tudor, StRefistRom,

cf. R. Vulpe, StRefistRom, II, 1954,

Sf. Gheorghe, district Ilfov. Dacian settlement;

"La Olane";

pp.

1857-1858.

fragments of amphorae;

E. Coma and S. Morintz, SCIV, IV, 3-4, 1953,

p. 762. 153

91.

Sihleanu, district Bri1a.

Fragments of amphorae;

Information

N. Haruche. 92.

Sofroneti, district Vaslui.

"La Pirtu";

amphorae, some stamped; p. 332, no. 374; 93.

La Tène II;

fragments of Rhodian Bastarnian pottery; RepMold

Information N. Zaharia.

Somova, district Tulcea.

"La izvor".

Stamped amphorae;

Retrograde writing containing two names: ('Hpopv,

fIc.tcp u[Xoq], 'Hpop...

Eipó(paVTOç?)

-b.

Two names and grapes (on the centre):

-c.

Monogram: MI; Oh.

Observation: 94.

pOp6vToç,

-a.

'Ap'c'

xi) 5Eoç

tefan, StRefistRom, I, 1954; p. 38;

uncertain provenance.

Spanov, district Ilfov.

Rhodian amphora with rectangular stamps on

both handles (p1. 15, 17).

On one handle:

EFII APIETOLA/MOY fIkNAMOY. On the other:

cornucopiae and

the second is producer; MNA;

e]IAEOY.

Rhodes;

The first is magistrate,

220-200 B.C.;

Dacian settlement;

Or. G. Tocilescu, Monumentele, pp. 181-183;

V. Prvan,

ARMSI, XXXVI, 1913, p. 121, n. 4; D. Tudor, StRefistRom, I, 1954, p. 83, n. 2; cf. F. Bleckmann, p. 253, no. 58; E. Pridik, p. 310; H. v. Gaertringen, col. 836, no. 70;

V. R. Grace, p. 122, no. 43.

95.

Spinoasa, district Iai,"Poa1a Catargului (Coasta Budei)"; fragment of amphorae; La Tène III; Dacian settlement; Information N. Zaharia.

96.

Spiru Haret, district Bràila. Information N. Harjuche.

Two amphorae;

Strachiojd, district Prahova.

Handle of amphora;

97.

the 4th-3rd century B.C.;

Dacian pottery;

Information V. Teodorescu. 98.

Stinceti, district Botoani. Chios, Rhodes and Thasos; fortification;

"Dealul

anu1ui";

Suceava, district Suceava. the ist century B.C. (?);

100.

Dacian

A. Niu and N. Zaharia, SCIV, VI, 1-2, 1955,

A. Florescu, S. Ra1, StMatSuceava, 1969, 99.

fragments of amphorae;

the 3rd;the 2nd century B.C.; pp.

"Malul" or "Dealul Tätrsc"; V. Prvan, Getica, p.631;

endreni, district Galai.

p.

amphora;

D. Tudor, p.40.

Handle with illegible stamp, bipennis axe

and bottom of amphora (Thasos ?) on the centre of the stamp; settlement; N. Gostar, Mat, VIII, 1962, p. 505. 101.

imian, district Mehedini. Dacian settlement; 1963, p. 646.

102.

Ostrovul

Handle of amphora;

Cpitanu, ArhMold, VI, 1969, 103.

orogari, district Iai. ArhMold, VI, 1969,

104.

imian;

p.

p.

Dacian

bottom of amphora;

M. Tr. Severin (i nv. 1/1831);

icani, district Vrancea.

334;

9-21.

D. Berciu, Mat, I,

M. Florescu-V.

247.

Fragmentary amphorae (Rhodes ?);

S. Teodoru,

326.

uletea, district Vaslui. Rhodian fragmentary amphora; 154

La Tène II;

Bastarnian pottery;

RepMold,

355, no. 449 d;

Information

Fragmentary amphorae;

Information

p.

N. Zaharia. 105.

uteti, district Braila. N. Haruche.

106.

Tãriceni, district Ilfov. Magistrates: -a. c. 220 B.C.; Bleckmann,

p.

MNA;

p.

E. Pridik,

1ThTA;

p.

309;

H. v. Gaertringen,

122, no. 19. -b.

p.

E. Pridik, p. 312;

V. R. Grace,

[]IU EYAA/MOy/

p.

cf. Grace,

cf. F.

H. v. Gaertringen,

123, no. 79. Producers:

BPOM[Cou].300-100B.c. or only i8ø-150B.C.; no. 115 and fig. 5/105;

cf. F.

D. Tudor, no. 117 and fig. 5/107;

255, no. 115;

col. 837, no. 130;

Rectangular stamps.

D. Tudor, no. 114 and fig. 5/104;

V. R. Grace,

['Ayp L) Cjoy.

Rhodes.

'A]/J\A/MIN[eCjOY.

252, no. 21;

col. 835, no. 28;

Bleckmann,

"La C€tate".

[i

MNA;

-c.

D. Tudor,

230, no. 60 (300-100 B.C.;

p.

according to F. Bleckmann 180-150 B.C.) -d. EP1VE[A.

MNA;

Tudor, no. 116 and fig. 5/106;

Observation:

cf. E. Pridik,

p.

324.

D.

Dacian settlement. 107.

Tinosu, district Prahova. -a-b.

(Pl. 17):

MNA; year 1924;

Stamped amphorae.

Rectangular stamps:

A[]TYNOM[ou]/[]A[LvCjflfloy. R. and Ec. Vulpe, Dacia, I, 1924,

204-205 and fig. 34/9 and 39/12;

D. Tudor,

p.

42.

p.

167, 180,

It is presumed

that the provenance is Olbia or Panticapaeum, but the magistrate

cCv

L7TTEOC,

is known also in Sinope, in the chronological

group Vl:120-70 B.C. Unstamped amphorae:

-

Canarache (Grakov), -c -r.

the ist century B C. -the ist .

MNA (i nv. 16773 a-b, 116775, 116777, I 16780, I

16772, 116747 a-b, 116748; Vulpe.

Observation:

116820, 116630-32);

108.

1'Inganu, district Ilfov. -a -d.

173, 179-80, 182,

Fragments of amphorae; MMB;

Dacian settlement;

the end of the Information

A. Niu and M. Zamoteanu, Mat, IT!, 1959, pp. 376, 378 and fig.

5/3, 5, 7;

N. Costar, Cetti, p. 28.

TIrpeti, district Neam, A.D. (?); 1962,

Iii.

pp.

Tirgu Ocna, district Bacu. "Titelca"; Fragments of amphorae; the ist century B.C. -lst century A.D.; D. Popescu, SCIV, IX, 1, 1958, p. 145, no. 33;

110.

.Lt.,

Dacian settlement.

2nd-the ist century A.D. (?); M. Turcu. 109.

Information Al.

The fragments from Tinosu belong to about 90

different amphorae (R. and Ec. Vulpe, 184, 203).

413, no. 45.

Fragments of the mouth, sides,

bottom and handles of some amphorae; century A.D.;

p.

pp.

Fragments of amphorae;

Dacian settlement;

the ist century

S. Marinescu-Blicu, SCIV, XIII, 1,

112-113.

Turnu-Severin, district Cara-Severin. with rectangular stamp (Pl. 17, 46):EIII

155

"Schela Ciadovei";

handle

AI}CPA/TILA/ArPII[ou]

Rhodes; 220-180 B.C.; Dacian settlement; M. Tr. Severin; V. Boronean-M. Davidescu, Apulum, VII, 1, 1969, P. 255 and fig. 6 (wrong reading); cl. F. Bleckmann, p. 256, no. 161; E. Pridik, p. 315; H. v. Gaertringen, col. 838, no. 172; Grace, p. 229, no. 54; V. R. Grace, p. 123, no. 104. 112.

Tuluceti, district Galaji. Near Brate lake; -a. amphora 0.45 m high with stamp ("circular with two relief symbols") on the neck (p1. 15); -h. amphora (p1. 15; -C. fragmentary bottom: Heraclea Pontica; the second half of the 4th century B.C.; year 1964; Dacian necropolis; I. T. Dragornir, RevMuz, VI, 1959, pp. 164-166; cl. I. B. Zeest (type IT: 350-300 B.C.), p. 100 and p1. XXII/43 (amphora a is variant); Observation: Amphorae a and b were used as urns. was used as top for amphora b.

113.

Vadu Sapat, corn. Fintinele,

district Prahova.

handle with rectangular stamp (P1. 19): ArPIkNIOY.

Rhodes;

Fragment of c

"Budureasca";

EfIT KJdDTOETP[a]/TOY

the 3rd century B.C. (?) Dacian settlement;

M. Ploeti; Information V. Teodorescu; cf. F. Bleckmann, P. 256, no. 171; E. Pridik, p. 315; H. v. Gaertringen, col. 838, no. 195; V. R. Grace, p. 123, no. ill. 114.

Valea Teilor (former Meidanchioi) district Tulcea. -a -b. amphorae; Heraclea Pontica (?); the ist century B.C.-the beginning of the ist centuryA.D.; year 1950, 1952; M. Tulcea (inv. 1281, 1291); E. Bujor, SCIV, XII, 1, 1961, pp. 86, 88-89. Observation: one is stamped.

115.

Vàräti, district Ilfov.

"On the shores of the Boian lake":

-a.

Fragmentary stamp: ti T1ooTp6Tou Rhodes; I. Barnea, RevMuz, X, 3, 1966, P. 160, footnote 19; cf. F. Bleckmann, p. 258, no. 241; E. Pridik, p. 318; H. v. Gaertringen, col. 840, no. 291; V. R. Grace, p. 124, no. 164. "Boian All; -b. handles (one stamped and another fragmentary); Information, E. Coma "To the east of Vrästi": -c. fragments of amphorae." To the South of Grditea Ulmilor"; -d. fragments of amphorae "the limit between the villages Vrti and Ciocneti": -e. handle; R. Vlâdescu-Vulpe, BCME, XVII, 1924, p. 86 (c-e). "Grditea Ulmilor": -f. fragments of amphorae; Dacian settlement; 116.

M.

E. Coma, Mat, VI, 1959,

p.

130.

Vlädiceni, district Iai. "Schitul Vlãdiceni"; fragment of amphora; La Tene II; Bastarnian pottery; RepMold, p. 226, no. 86 cand pl. CXC VII/14. Zinmicea, district Teleorman.

Stamped amphorae:

A.

Cos:

Branch on the right of the name on the bicylindrical handle: year 1924; taerman,

-a.

['A] AAIOY.

MNA; D. Tudor, no. 131 and fig. 7/141; cf. E. M. p. 39 and fig. 5/103-104. B. Heraclea Pontica (?): -b.

Inverted stamp, on the neck of the amphora: IETIAIOYE.

year 1924;

156

[]ni AFXIH[H(o)]/

D. Tudor, no. 135 and fig. 7/147.

C.

Rhodes.

Rectangular stamps.

c. 220 B.C.;

[-rou]/A[a7Co 1 ].

no. 127 and fig. 7/137;

['ApE]M/BPO

Magistrates: Elli year 1924;

MNA;

cf. F. Bleckinann, p. 234, no. 75;

p. 311;

H. v. Gaertringen, col. 836, no. 87;

no. 56

..... OTI/eu5aL]IOY

[ l

E. Pridik,

V. R. Grace,

]

(?).

[

D. Tudor, 122,

p.

Circular

]

stamp. Magistrate ; -e. m Ecp FANOPO ç.. . .before 150 B.C.; 1948; D. Tudor, no. 130 and fig. 7/140; cf. F. Bleckmann, p. 255, no. 122;

E. Pridik,

V. R. Grace,

313;

p.

H. v. Gaertringen, col. 837, no. 140;

123, no. 86.

p.

APOiEIO[;].

Rectangular stamp.

year 1949;

7/139; cf. E. Pridik, p. 322. eagle with dolphin on the left:

MNA; D.

Producer: -f.

D. Tudor, no. 129 and fig.

Sinope:

-g.

Retrograde writing;

AIXINHE/AETYNO[to]/flOEEIA[w(vou)]. 350-270 B.C. 0r250-220B.C.; 136 and fig. 7/145. producer

AtxCvrc

(Grakov),

-

h.

MNA;

D. Tudor, no.

Hoot L56)\) uor,

occurs with the

together in group 1:350-270 B.C.

405, no. 19 and no. 1-2;

p.

occurs also in group III; no. 25.

year 1948;

The magistrate

-

Canarache

the magistrate floo

250-220 B.C.

-

L5()v LO

Canarache (Grakov), p. 407,

Crab (?) on the right;

AETYNOMOY/AEQ1vONTQE/TOy EIJIAHMOY 1V1ENN. 120-70 B.C.; year 1924; MNA; D. Tudor, no. 138 and fig. 7/148; cf. Canarache (Grakov), -i.

p.

412, no. 28 and 47

(Mvwv).

Deteriorated:

[&otuvoiou]/ [UXE .]ETAFXI[5Euç]/[To 120-70 B.C.;

year 1949;

fI?ElopXC6fl

MNA;

'A'rou

VI- Canarache (Grakov), 'APCCaPXoc

-

p.

occurs in the group

412, no. 37.

-

year 1949; HOXTWp

Canarache (Grakov),

p.

p.

411, no. 11

Canarache (Grakov),

[&oruv6ou]/fl[o]AYKT0POE/TOY 183-120 B.C.;

The producer can be

Canarache (Grakov),

probably KXPXOc partially obliterated:

The magistrate

'A]IIELVIANTOY/ ... AFXOE

D. Tudor, no. 137 and fig. 7/146.

MNA;

p.

or more

412, no. 37

j.

-

HIV1ETPI[ou]/AHOAAQN[ Loc].

D. Tudor, no. 139 and fig. 7/150.

ó Ar)1rTp Lou

occurs in group V

410, no. 22, but the producer

is not known in this group. -k.

-

'ATtoXX6u

...Y/ ...TOY/.. .NI

LO

OY.

According to the paste it can be from Sinope;

year 1924; MNA, D.

Tudor, no. 134 and fig. 7/144.

I.

lines:

Thasos:

Bull between the

[eo]IQN/[ 'Ap]TOA[u);)].

220-180 B.C.; cf. E. M.

year 1948;

taerman,

p.

220-180 B.C. (?); fig. 7/136; ii.

E.

-

cf. E. M.

EPA, year 1924;

MNA;

34. -rn.

D. Tudor, no. 125, and fig. 7/135; Thyrsos in the centre: [ecx]EIoN/.H.

year 1924. taerman,

MNA;

p.

MNA; 34.

F.

D. Tudor, no. 126 and Uncertain provenance:

D. Tudor, no. 132 and fig. 7/142. -o.

eEYI/Aoy. year 1924; MNA; D. Tudor, no. 133 and fig. 7/143. Unstamped amphorae: -p -t. intact and fragmentary amphorae (one in plate 15);

the 4th-3rd century B.C.;

157

I. Nestor,

SCIV, I, 1, 1950, -t -v.

98;

R. Vulpe, IstRom, I, 1960, pp. 222, 226.

From a spot in the bronze-age necropolis;

amphorae; MNA;

P.

the Ist century B.C. -lst century A.D.;

Information A. Alexandrescu.

and necropolis.

Observation:

fragments of year 1957; Dacian settlement

Amphorae mentioned at s-t, researchers I.

Andriesescu and I. Nestor.

158

CATALOGUE OF LOCAL AMPHORAE To save space, all the illustrated pieces will not be described. 1.

Bucureti (on the map no. 18) ?!T ei?? ; stamp-mould, flat-convex, 10.6 cm in length, 5 cm in width. On the upper part, holder for handling;

Pl. 19;

NIB (i. 15632);

D. V. Rosetti, PMI\'tB, II, 1935,

p. 69 and figs. 1-2 a-c; Al. Vulpe, SCIV, 16, 1965, pp. 347-348 (dates it from the 2nd -Ist century B.C.); Observation: the human figure with radiate crown is inspired from Rhodian circular stamps. Vessel on the left and another vessel above; in the front, human representation with open arms and above rosette. 2.

Cãscioarele (on the map no. 22) district Ilfov. -a. "Ostrovel"; with rectangular stamp (Pl. 19);

year 1924;

MNA;

handle

S. Marinescu-

Bilcu, SCIV, 17, 1966, p. 119; D. Tudor, no. 150 and fig. 8/159; Observation: design after D. Tudor. -b. Handle with round stamp (Pl. 18); the end of the 2nd century-the beginning of the Ist century A.D.); Dacian settlement; MNA; S. Marinescu-Bilcu, .cit., p. 119, 121 and fig. 4 /2 . 3.

Cetäeni (on the map no. 25) district Arge

(the numeration with

Arabic numbers). Handles with rectangular stamps: -1. Few letters are distinguishable (Pl. 18: EllI C/TA lines E /lines D. Tudor (no. 47 and fig. 3/46) considers it as imported. It seems rather that the stamp resulted from the imitation of a Greek stamp, from which the artisan reproduced by chance a few letters. -2. In the field of the stamp (p1. 18) perhaps 6 D. Tudor (no. 82 and fig. 4/77) considers it as imported, reading: 6.. OY. See the comment given in no. 1-3. Obliterated stamp; year 1961; M. Piteti; Information .

.

.

.

E. Popescu. -4. Pl. 18; year 1961; M. Piteti; Information E. Popescu. -5. Pl. 18; year 1958; M. Piteti; D. Tudor, no. 178 and fig. 9/182.

-6.

Pl. 18;

M. Cimpulung, Muscel;

D. V. Rosetti,

SCIV, XE, 2, 1960, p. 398, fig. 6/7; D. Tudor, no. 185 and fig. 9/ 189. -7 -8. Pl. 18; M. Cimpulung Muscel; D. V. Rosetti, p. 398 and fig. 6/1; D. Tudor, no. 193, 194 and fig. 9/173. -9. Pl. 18; M. CTmpulung Muscel; D. Tudor, no. 171 and fig. 9/175. -10. Pl. 18; M. Cimpulung Muscel; D. Tudor, no. 172 and fig. 9/176. -II. Pl. 18; M. Clmpulung Muscel; D. Tudor, no. 173 and fig. 9/177. -12. Pl. 18; M. Clmpulung Muscel; D. Tudor, no. 174 and fig. 9/178. -13. Pl. 18; M. Cimpulung Muscel; D. V. Rosetti, p.398, fig. 6/2; D. Tudor, no. 175 and fig. 9/179. -14. In the field a curved line and below, transversal lines; M. CImpulung Muscel; D. Tudor, no. 176 and fig. 9/180. -15. Pl. 18; M. Cimpulung Muscel; D. Tudor, no. 177 and fig. 9/181. -16. Fragmentary stamp;

two curved lines and two dots between letters? 159

M.

"

Cimpulung Muscel; D. Tudor, no. 179 and fig. 9/183. -17. - Pl. 18; ,,., M. Cimpulung Muscel; D. Tudor, no. 180 and fig. 9/184. -1ª_. In the field of the stamp, zigzag line and below, small obligue lines; M. Cimpulung Muscel; D. Tudor, no. 181 and fig. 9/185. -19. Pl. 18; M. Cimpulung Muscel; D. Tudor, no. 182 and fig. 9/186-. -20. Pl. 18; M. Cimpulung Muscel; D. Tudor, no. 183 and fig. 9/18� -21. ... Pl. 18; M. Cimpulung Muscel; D. Tudor, no. 184 and fig. 9/188. -22. Similar to that of no. 6; M. Cimpulung Muscel; D. Tudor, no. 186 and fig. 9/190. -23. In the field of the stamp, disorderly lines; M. Cimpulung Muscel;D. Tudor, no. 187. -24. Pl. 18; M. Cimpulung Muscel; D. Tudor, no. 188 and fig�/191. -25. In the field of the stamp, six horizontal lines and three vertical lines; M. Cimpul, ng Muscel; D. Tudor, no. 189. -26. In the field of the stamp, blundered signs; M. Cimpulung Muscel; D. Tudor, no. 190 and fig. 9/192. -27. Pl. 18; M. Cimpulung Muscel; D. Tudor, no. 191 and fig. 9/193. Observation: see 2/a. -28. Pl. 18; M. Cimpulung Muscel; D. Tudor, no. 192 and fig. 9/194. -29 -30. Pl. 18. Stamps similar to that of no. 5; M. Clmpulung Muscel; D. Tudor, no. 196-197 and fig. 9/196-197. -�. Pl. 18; M. Cimpulung Muscel; D. Tudor, no. 198 and fig. 9/198. Handles with circular stamps: -32. Pl. 18; M. cfmpulung Muscel; D. V. Rosetti, _2E.cit., p. 398, fig. 6/9; D. Tudor, no. 195 and fig. 9/195. -33. Pl. 18; M. Cimpulung Muscel; D. Tudor, no. 170 and fig.9/174. -34. In the shape of a rosette; M. Cimpulung Muscel; D. Tudor, no-:-199. Unstamped amphorae: -35. -37. Fragmentary amphorae; year 1960; M. Pite�ti; Information E. Popescu. Observation: Dacian settle­ ment; Other references D. Tudor, StRefistRom, I, 1954, pp. 83, 87; V. Eftimie, Dacia, N.S., 111, 1959, p. 206; idem, SCIV, 18, 1967, pp. 411-413; D. V. Rosetti, SCIV, XI, 1960, p. 395 and fig. 4, 6; ídem, Mat, VIII, 1962, p. 86 and 7/3; D. Popescu, SCIV, XII, 1961, p. 142, no. 92 • .J.he designs no. 1-2, 8-13, 15, 17-22, 24, 27-31, 33, after D. Tudor. 4.

Cozia (on the map, no. 118) district Hunedoara. -�. Pl. 18; Observation: , the stamps which are disposed also on the lateral sides of the handle, have an ornamental role; -�. Pl. 18; the 1st century B.C.; the year 1968; Dacian settlement; M. Deva; M. Valea-L. Marghitan, Sargetia, VI, 1969, p. 48; L. Márghitan, Sargetia, VII, 1970, p. 16, pl. 11, f; observation: similar examples at la Pope�ti, 39.

5.

Crasani (on the map no. 37) district Ialomi1a. Uninscribed stamp; V. Eftimie, Dacia, N.S., 111, 1959, pp. 207-208, footnote 47.

6.

Giurgiu (on the map no. 51), district Ilfov. Uninscribed stamp; the 2nd-the 1st century B.C. ; MNA; V. Eftimie, .2E. cit., p. 21O.

7.

Gradi�tea Muncelului (on the map no. 119), district Hunedoara. -a. -�- Fragmentary amphorae (one base and two angular handles; the 1st century B.C.-the 1st century A.D.; the years 1952-1954; :MIC; Information, H. Daicoviciu.

8.

Ozun (on the map no. 120), district Covasna. On the right shore of 160

the PIrlul Negru; hand-made amphora, 0.375 m in height (Pl. 29, 46); Dacian settlement;

M. Sf. Gheorghe; Rep., ms.; I. H. Crian, Ceramica,

pp. 85, 300, p1. XXII, 1= Cxxxvi, 2; Information Z. Szkely (of. I. B. Zeest, 9.

p.

97 and p1. XX, 36 v, (the 4th-the 3rd century B.C.).

Pecica (on the map no. 121), district Arad.

"anu1 Mare";

Frag-

Dacian settlement;

M.

mentary hand-made amphora;

year 1898;

Arad (inv. 154);

unusual form;

observation:

I. H. Crian dates it

from the 3rd-the 2nd century B.C., but rather from the 2nd century B.C. 10.

Design after I. H. Crian.

Poian (on the map no. 122) district Covasna. 0.31 m in height (p1. 20);

Amphora hand-made,

Dacian settlement (?);

MIC (i nv. 2427);

I. H. Crian, Ceramica, p. 85, 270-271, 300 and p1. XXII, 2 = CXXXVI, 1; II.

observation:

design after I. H. Crian.

Poiana (on the map no. 77), district Gal4i.

-a -e. Fragmentary the ist century B. C -the Ist century A .D.; Dacian settlement; M. Tecuci; V. Eftimie, Dacia, N.S., III, 1959, p. 210,

amphorae;

.

footnote 56; Information Al. Vulpe; amphorae is larger. 12.

observation:

Popeti (on the map no. 79), district Ilfov. Arabic numbers). stamps:

-1.

A.

the number of

(The numeration with

Handles with uninscribed stamps.

Pl. 18, 46, year 1954;

MNA;

Rectangular

R. Vulpe and collabora-

tors, SCIV, VI, 1-2, 1955, p. 249 and fig. 17/3. -2. Pl. 18; year 1955 MNA;

R. Vulpe, Mat, III, 1957, p. 231 and fig. 11/3.

stamp; 1955;

M1B (i nv. 15958); MNA;

Information M. Turcu.

M. Turcu. -7.

MMB (i nv. 15946, 15949);

Obliterated stamp;

III, 1957, p. 231 and fig. 11/4. 46;

The same

Pl. 18;

R. Vulpe, Mat, III, 1957, p. 231 and fig. 11/5.

The same stamps (P1. 19);

I6068);

-3.

-4.

year 1955; MNA;

-8.

Pl. 19;

year 1955;

MNA;

and fig. 10/3.

R. Vulpe, Mat,

year 1955;

MNA (i nv.

MNA;

P1. 19;

R. Vulpe, Mat, V, 1959, p. 342

year 1957;

MNA;

1959, p.313, 321 and fig. 12/1. -12. Pl. 19, 46; year 1958; -13 -14.

MNA;

Pl. 19,

R. Vulpe, Mat, III, 1957, p. 231 and fig. 11/7.

year 1956;

-11.

-5 -6.

Information

R. Vulpe, Mat, III, 1957, p. 231 and fig. 11 /6 . -9.

-10. Pl. 19, 46;

year

R. Vulpe, Mat ,vi, the ist century B.C.

R. Vulpe, Mat, VII, [1961], p. 329 and fig. 8/6.

Pl. 19;

MMB and MNA;

one at D. Tudor, no. 151 and fig.

8/160. -15 -16. Pl. 19; M1VB (i nv. 15944) and MNA; D. Tudor, no. 152, 153 and fig. 8/161; Information M. Turcu. -17. In the field of the stamp, rectangle divided in triangles and with two dots at the extremities;

MMB;

D. Tudor, no. 154 and fig. 8/159;

similar stamps at Cáscioarele (a) and at Cetäeni (27). 19; MMB (i nv. 15947, 15957); and fig. 5/1-2; M. Turcu.

-21.

Rosetti, 8/164;

observation:

p. 396 and fig. 5/10; D. V. Rosetti,

MNA;

year 1961;

D. V.

D. Tudor, no. 159 and fig. -24.

P1. 19, 46;

p. 396 and fig. 5/13;

161

MMB;

similar stamp at Cetájeni (23)

MMB (i nv. 15959);

Information Al. Vulpe, M. Turcu.

(inv. 15961);

Information

In the field of the stamp, disorderly lines;

Pl. 19, 46;

P1.

D. V. Rosetti, SCIV, XI, 7965' , — p. 396

D. Tudor, no. 155-157 and fig. 8-162;

D. Tudor, no. 158; -22-23.

observation: -18 -20.

MMB

D. Tudor,

no. 160 and fig. 8/165; M1VtB (inv. 15955);

Information M. Turcu.

Tudor, no. 161 and fig. 8/166; 19, 46; 5/5,7; -28.

-25.

Pl. 19;

D. V. Rosetti, 2p.cit., p. 396 and fig. 5/4;

MMD (inv. 15943);

Information M. Turcu.

D. V. Rosetti, op.c i t.,

D. Tudor, no. 162-163 and fig. 8/167; D. V. Rosetti,

-26 -27. Pl.

p.

396 and fig.

Information M. Turcu.

In the field of the stamp, oblique zig-zag lines;

15942);

D.

MMB (i nv.

p. 396 and fig. 5/6;

D. Tudor, no.

164 and fig. 8/168;

Information M. Turcu.

(inv. 15945), MNA;

D. V. Rosetti, 2Q.cit., p. 396 and fig. 5/8;

Tudor, no. 165 and fig. 8/169; 46;

MMD (i nv. 15948);

5/12;

Information M. Turcu.

MMD D.

-31. P1. 19,

MMD (i nv. 15954);

Information M. Turcu.

D. V. Rosetti, op.cit.,

D. Tudor, no. 168 and fig. 9/172;

-33.

Pl. 19;

D. V. Rosetti, op.cit., p. 396 and fig. 5/3;

D. Tudor, no. 167 and fig. 9/171; Pl. 19;

-29 -30.

p.

-32.

396 and fig.

Information M. Turcu.

Obliterated stamp which is similar to those of CetáJeni (7-8);

D. Tudor, no. 169.

-34.

In the field of the stamp;

lines in the centre and oblique and broken lines; -35.

two longitudinal

year 1961;

MNA.

In the field of the stamp curved irregular lines; MMD (inv.

15956);

D. V. Rosetti,

Turcu.

-36. Obliterated stamp;

5/16;-37.

Pl. 19;

forms; -39. 8/170;

.cit.,

MNA.

Pl. 19;

396, fig. 5/9;

p.

-38.

Pl. 19;

MNA.

MMD (i nv. 15960);

Information M. Turcu.

R. Vulpe, Mat, V, 1959,

p.

Information M.

D. V. Rosetti,op-cit.,

-40 -41.

D. Tudor, no. 166 and fig.

year 1961;

-45. Impressions similar to palmettes;

of the ist century B.C.; p.348 and fig. 3/2.

year 1962;

year 1961; MNA;

D. V. Rosetti, length 6.3 cm;

MNA;

.cit.,

observation:

Stamps with human representations:

figure with radiate crown (Pl. 19, 46);

MNA;

D. V. Rosetti, MNA;

analogous stamp at Coma (b). -43 -44. P1.19, 46; 396 and fig. 5/15.

396, fig.

Pl. 19; year 1956;

342 and fig. 10/4;

p. 396 and fig. 5/14. -42. Pl. 19;

p.

Stamps of other

.cit., p. -46. Human the second half

Al. Vulpe, SCIV, 16, 1965

-47. Human figure with radiate crown (Plate 19, 46);

length: 5.1 cm. Applied on the bi-lobated handle; the second half of the ist century B.C.; year 1961; MNA; 3/1.

Observation (46-47):

Al. Vulpe,

.cit., p. 348 and fig.

the representation of the head of the human

figures is inspired by the representations of the Helios head on Rhodian stamps (Al. Vulpe, l oc. cit.). Fragmentary amphorae;

MNA;

Unstamped amphorae: year 1957-1958;

laborators, SCIV, VI, 1-2, 1955, StComPiteti, 1968, p. 49;

p.

-48 -52.

R. Vulpe and col-

253, fig. 13/3;

R. Vulpe,

V. Eftimie, Dacia, N.S., ifi, 1959, p.

210. General observations: Dacian settlement; excavations by D. V. Rosetti and R. Vulpe. The number of amphorae is larger. No. 1-11, 13-32, 34, 37-44, 48, 51-52 from the 2nd-the Ist century B.C. No. 1-2, 4, 8-12, 14, 16, 22-23, 30, 34, 37-38, 42-44, 4852 information Al. Vulpe. 13.

Sighioara (on the map no. 123), district Mure.

"Wietenberg"

Fragmentary amphora, 2nd century-Ist century B.C.; ment;

M. Sighioara;

Information Gh. Moldovan.

162

Dacian settle-

14.

Tinosu (on the map no. 107), district Prahova. some of them with bi-lobated handles;

Fragmentary amphorae,

the Ist century B.C. -the ist

century A.D.; MNA; Dacian settlement; R. Vulpe and Ec. Vulpe, Dacia, I, 1924, p. 199, 204. 15.

Zimnicea (on the map no. 117), district Teleorman. inscribed stamps. 145 and fig. 8/154. 8/155.

-C.

Pl. 20;

Rectangular stamps: -b. Pl. 20;

MNA;

-a. Pl. 20;

D. Tudor, no. 149 and fig. 8/158;

similar to that of Cet4eni, 5.

-d.Pl. 20; -e. -1.

Circular stamps:

Pl. 20;

Pl. 20;

from years 1924, 1948, 1949.

Il/a-b;

General note:

D. Tudor, no. 148 and

D. Tudor, no. 144 and fig. 8/153.

See also I. Nestor,SCIV, I, 1, 1950,

Tudor.

observation:

Pl. 20; D. Tudor, no. 142

D. Tudor, no. 146 and fig. 8/157;

settlement; B.C.

-.

D. Tudor, no.

D. Tudor, no. 147 and fig.

fig. 8/156.

and fig. 8/152.

Handles with un-

no. 2/b; 3,'3

12/2-20, 22-32, 34-35, 37;

163

-

Observation:

-h.

Dacian

The 2nd-the Ist century p.

98.

Designs after D.

13, 15, 17-18, 21, 26, 31, 32; 15/e-g imitated Rhodian handles.

CATALOGUE OF IMPORTED POTTERY The catalogue includes the main types of vessels and the great majority of the finds made until the year 1969 (inclusive); with regard to the excavations of Raditau, Grádi§tea Muncelului, Gu§lteril:3-, and others, the information con­ cerns the finds from up to the year 1971. The pieces without at least the possibility of having been found in Romania (Graeco-Hellenistic and Roman materials existing in different museums which have been acquired from private amateur antiquity-collectors and from persons travelling in countries famous for archaeological finds) are not registered in the catalogue. 1.

Arpa�u de Sus, district Sibiu. Fragmentary small vessel, red; prob­ ably the 1st century A.D.; Dacian settlement;M. Macrea, Mat, IV, 1957 p. 148 and fig. 23/2.

2.

Barbo§i, district Gala1i. "Tirighina"; -�. yellowish-red Kantharos; height 8 cm; probably the 1st century A.D. -�. Unguentarium, brick­ red coloured (Pl. 49); height 10 cm; late form (H. S. Robinson, p. 65, K 71, pl. 13); year 1968. Other categories: -�-g. Fragmentary vessels; before the 2nd century A.D.; year 1963; InstArhia¡;,i and M. Galaji. Bowls: -g. Fragmentary; Information s. Sanie, I. T. Dragomir; N. Gostar, Apulum, V, 1965, p. 145; Mat, VIII, 1962, p. 508; Cetáti, p. 34; D. Popescu, SCIV, 16, 1965, p. 597, no. 68. Observation: Dacian settlement.

3.

Bonte�ti, district Vrancea. "La Nucusiori"; 'imported pottery ... from the 2nd-1st century B.C. "; Dacian settlement; year 1956; M. Foc�ani; Gh. Bichir, Mat, V, 1959, p. 259; observation: amphorae?

4.

Bradu, district Baca.u (the numeration with Arabic numbers). Pottery with relief decoration: -.!. -7... Fragments of terra sigillata (Pl. 47); the 1st century A.D.; year 1963; M. Baca.u, M. Roman; V. Ursachi, Carpica, 1968, p. 177. Dishes: --ª. -.!.Q. Fragmentary, with or without red slip; the 1st century A.D.; year 1963; M. Baca.u. Kantharoi and handled cups: -.!.!_. Fragments with red slip and relief decoration; the 1st century A.D. (cf. M. Bucoval8., Necropole elenistice la Tomis, 1967, p. 114, b); year1963; M.Roman. -g-24. Frag­ mentary with red slip or paint (geometrical painting); the 1st century A.D., one from the second half of the 1st century A.D. (cf. H. S. Robinson, p. 84, pl. 18, 70); M.Roman. -25. Painted in brown (pl. 24); height 8.9 cm; the 1st century A.D.; the year 1963; M.Roman. -26. Painted in brown (Pl. 24); height 9 cm; the 1st century A.D.; the year 1963; M. Roman. -27 -28. One with yellowish slip, painted in brown (Pl. 24); height 8.7 cm; the second half of the 1st centu ry A. D. (cf. H. S. Robinson, loe .cit., variant); the year 1963; M. Roman. Other categories: -29. Fragmentary 164

vessel with spout;

the end of the ist century A.D.-the beginning of the

2nd century A.D., possibly the period Domitian-Trajan (cf. B. Heukemes,

36, p1. 6/95-99;

p.

Roman. Observation: and V. Ursachi. 5.

Dacian settlement;

Braov, district Braov. unguentarium;

Bucharest.

M. Braov;

fragmentary

Information Fl. Costea.

"Brãi1ia";

fragmentary Delian bowl;

N. Harjuche-F. Atanasiu, Brailita,

Slipped pottery and painted pottery:

Bucur" fragmentary vessel with black slip; year 1953;

-a.

p.

27.

"The church

the 3rd-2nd century B.C.;

Dacian settlement.

-b.

unguentaria

Fragments of vessels (lagynos ?) painted in brown (P1. 21); half of the 2nd-the beginning of the 1st century A.D. Thompson, p. 403, E 70, fig. 92; (inv. 15740);

p.

Information M. Turcu.

brown-green slip;

-c.

relief decoratioi:

-e.

B.C. (cf. H. S. Robinson, Information M. Turcu.

-f.

P.

(p1. 22);

-.

13, F 24 and pl. 1); MMB (i nv. 15748);

Unguentaria

(Pl. 49);

-L

a relief

Fragmentary;

Information M. Turcu. the 2nd century B.C. (cf. M.

Bucovalá, Necropole elenistice la Tomis, 1967, MMB (i nv. 2119/1957); Information M. Turcu. P1. 2);

Informa-

the Ist century A.D. (D. Iványi, type VII,

MMB (i nv. 17728); -h.

MMB (i nv. 15727);

Fragmentary lamp with vertical handle;

grape near the hole for oil; 12-13);

Pottery with

the ist century

Fragmentary kantharos, painted with brown

lines (P1. 24); the Ist century B.C. (?); tion M. Turcu.

informa-

the ist century

Information M. Turcu.

Fragmentary

MMB

Fragment of vessel with

the end of the 2nd-the iSt century B.C.;

MMB (i nv. 15726);

the second

(cf. H. A.

418, E 134, fig. 104);

tion M. Turcu. -d. Fragment painted with brown lines;

pp.

the

I. Ionacu, V. Zirra, D. Berciu, M. Tudor, StRef[stRom,

I, 1954, p. 413, 454;

B.C.; (?);

M.

Information V. Câpitanu

'Tietrele lui Solomon";

Brãila, district Bräila. 2nd century B.C.;

7.

year 1963;

the Ist century B.C. (cf. H. S. Robinson, p. 15,

P. 15, F 49 and p1. 2); 6.

p. 88, p1. 24/49);

127 and fig. 78/b); -i. Fragmentary

P.

the Ist century B.C. (cf. H. S. Robinson, p. 19, F 49 and MMB (i nv. 17723);

"Colentina";

year 1957; P. 817, 820.

Information M. Turcu.

Pottery fragment;

MNA;

the 2nd-the ist century B.C.;

Dacian settlement;

-k. "State archives";

Other categories:

Gh. I. Bichir, Mat, VI, 1959,

fragments of Roman vessels;

Ist century B.C. -1st century A.D.;

year 1953;

the

Dacian settlement;

S. Morintz-Gh. Cantacuzino, StRefistRom, I, 1954, pp. 336, 341. Bowls: -1. Fragment with red-glaze (Pl. XXV); the 2nd century B.C. (cf. H.M.JloceBa, flaHTzKane, MIA, 103, Moskva, 1962, p. 197 and fig. 1/4; -.

"Fundeni";

MMB (i nv. 15691);

in grave;

intact piece;

Information M. Turcu. the 2nd century B.C.; Vl.

Dumitrescu, In memoria lui Vasile Parvan, 1934, pp. 121-125. 8.

Butea, district Iai.

To the south of "La 1utrie";

with outer intense gloss;

La T'ene Ill;

165

fragment of vessel

RepMold, p. 298, no. 267 a.

9.

Clrai, district Ialomija.

"Grditea"; "black sherd

incised decoration "the 3rd-2nd century B.C.;

...

with

Dacian settlement;

R. Vldescu-Vulpe, BCMI, XVII, 1924, p. 86. 10.

Celei, district Olt.

-a -b.

Hellenistic and Roman pottery;

century B.C. -the ist century A.D.; pits;

inDacian layer and

D. Tudor, E. Bujor, A. Matrosenco, Mat, VII, [1961],

487.

Fragments of Roman vessels;

-.

1956;

11.

year 1957;

the 2nd

in the Dacian hearths;

the Ist centuryA.D.; year

Mat, VII, [1961], p. 474;

Roman lamps (one of them stamped;

the letter S);

A.D.;

25;

D. Tudor, OltRom 3 , 1958,

Cernatu, district Covasna.

p.

-b.

Mat

p.

478.

-a.

Fragmentary

the end of the 2nd century B.C.;

Fragmentary terra sigillata vessel;

of the 2nd century B.C. (similar pieces at Mirmeki); Observation: (a-b):

-d--e.

the 1st century

VII,

,

"Pmintu1 lui Robert";

glass "relief decorated en barbotine"; M. Sf. Gheorghe;

481-

pp.

the end

M. Sf. Gheorghe.

Z. Szkely, Contribuie la problema culturii materiale

a thcilorin sud-estul Transilvaniei (ms) and information in writing Z. Szkely. U.

Dacian settlement.

Cetäçeni, district Arge. -a. "Hellenistic pottery"; century B.C.;

SCIV, XII, 1961, p. 142, no. 92; -b-c.

"Delian cups";

Mat, VIII, 1962, 13.

964);

14.

"La Picuiata";

Dacian settlement. -a.

Fragmentary dish with

2965);

Information L. Chiu. -b.

Fragmentary small

the ist century B.C. -the ist century A.D.; Information L. Chiu.

Observation:

M. Aiud (i nv.

Dacian settlement.

I. H. Crian, Ceramica,

p.

Checea, district Timi.

"Pottery" (also Roman ?) with coin of

Domitian and glass; 15.

Observation:

Bowls:

D. V. Rosetti, loc.cit.;

only the 2nd century B.C. or also the ist century B.C. (?);

M. Aiud (inv. vessel;

D. Popescu,

SCIV, 16, 1965, no. 50.

the 2nd century B.C.;

86.

p.

Cetea, district Alba. black slip;

the 2nd-the Ist

D. V. Rosetti, SCIV, XI, 1960, p. 395;

slip;

136.

M. Timioara;

Ciurea, district Iai.

Rep, ms.

Fragmentary vessels, some of them with black

the end of the 3rd century B.C.-the 2nd century B.C.;

1954;

Cf.

year

M. Petrescu-Dimbovia and collaborators, SCIV, VI, 1-2, 1955,

p. 184, 186-187. 16.

Coconi, district Ilfov. Ist century B.C.; p. 82.

17.

Pottery fragments;

year 1923;

Costeti, district Hunedoara. vessels;

the 2nd century (?)

"Blidaru";

-a.

Fragmentary red

C. Daicoviciu and collaborators;

the year 1953;

SCIV, V, 1-2, 1954, p. 138. -b.

In the tower VI of the citadel of Blidaru, in the inferior layer; the Ist century B.C.;

C. Daicoviciu and collaborators; -c -d. p. 221;

observation:

p.

166

223.

red fragments of two vessels;

C. Daicoviciu and collaborators., Dacian citadel.

fragment

the year 1954;

SCIV, VI, 1-2, 1955,

The same spot, the upper layer;

the Ist century A.D.;

the

R. Vldescu-Vulpe, BCMI, XVII, 1924,

the Ist century B.C.-the ist century A.D.;

of vessel with black glaze;

-

.cit.,

18.

Craiva, district Alba. 47);

height 6.8 cm;

maroon Julia. 19.

"Piatra Craivii";

slip (Pl. 47); height 8.5 cm;

Observation:

Dacian citadel.

Crsani, district Ialomia. painted pottery: century B.C.;

-a.

the Ist century A.D.,;

-a.

With reddish slip (Pl.

M. Alba Julia. -b. With

the Ist century A.D.;

M. Alba

Information Al. Popa and Al. Aldea.

"Piscul Crsani".

Glazed pottery and

Fragment of small vessel with red glaze;

MNA (inv. 3668).

-B.

the ist

Fragment of vessel painted

with red lines;

the ist century B.C.

relief figures:

c. Fragment of vessel with a female figure in dancing

attitude; and

MNA (i nv. 3672).

Pottery with

the 2nd-the Ist century B.C. (cf. H. A. Thompson,

151-153,

pp.

56, Moskva, 1957, p. 196 and fig. 7/1); pitchers. -cl.

p.

394

422-424; MNA (i nv. 3664). Jugs and

Fragmentary flagon painted in brown (p1. 23);

the end

of the 2nd-the beginning of the Ist century B.C. (cf. H. A. Thompson, p. 403, E 71 and fig. 92, pp. 450-451); jug with white slip; A.D.;

MNA;

-f. Neck of jug;

the ist century A.D.; yellow slip; -B.

MNA (i nv. 3898).

the ist century B.C. -the beginning of

MNA (i nv. 2059).

-.

Trilobate handle with white-

the ist century B.C. ;the ist century A.D.;

Jug with whitish slip and trilobate handle (Pl. 47);

the ist century A.D. (cf. V. V. Kropotkin, year 1923;

-e. Side of

the Ist century B.C. -the beginning of the Ist century

MNA (inv. 116600);

p. 78 and fig. 228;

p.

MNA (i nv. 2076); height 33.6 cm;

79, no. 630 and p1. 36/7);

I. Andrieescu, Piscul Crsani, 1924,

V. Prvan, Getica,

p.

205 and fig. 156.

-i.

Frag-

mentary lamp with vertical handle and "with the part of the wick-holder in the shape of a trunk"; the 2nd century B.C.-Augustus (cf. T. Szentlleky, Ancient lamps, Budapest, 1969, p. 49, no. 40, pp. 50-51; I. Andrieescu, 2j.cit., p. 89 and fig. 288; 210-211 and fig. 210. (P1. 49);

-j.

p. 34, 72;

Other

year 1923;

V. Pârvan,

I.

p. 664.

Two fragmentary bowls (originals or imitations ?);

the ist century B.C.;

year 1923;

I. Andrieecu,

fig. 218-219. V. Pârvan, loc.cit., Observation:

pp.

cit.,

the 2ndp.

74 and

207-208 and figs. 160-161.

Dacian settlement.

Cuciulata, district Braov.

"Stogul lui Coofan";

-a -c.

Three

fragments (of bowl, of patera and of other vessel);

the ist century

B.C.;

pp.

MNA;

Gh. Bichir, St.ComSibiu, 14, 1969,

Mat, VII, [1961],

p.

145-146 (cf.

352).

Doroban, district Iai, "The foot of the saucer with traces of brown paint; 30 b;

22.

MNA (inv. I3843).

-k. Fragmentary "Greek" vessels;

Andrieescu,

21.

Q.cit., pp.

the 2nd century B.C. (cf. M. Bucoval5, Necropole elenistice

categories:

20.

V. Pârvan,

Fragmentary unguentarium with brown slip

la Tomis, 1967, p. 127 and fig. 78 d);

-1 -rn.

MNA (?);

orogari hill";

La Tène II;

Fragmentary

RepMold,

p.

189, no.

Information N. Zaharia.

Dunreni, district Dolj.

'Grindul Rostii";

"the 2nd-the Ist century B.C.";

"Hellenistic sherds" from

Dacian settlement;

Gh. Bichir, Mat,

V, 1969, pp. 276,280. 23.

Gherla, district Cluj.

" Hellenistic -Roman imported pottery";

beginning of the ist century A.D.; 167

Collection E. Orosz;

the

Rep, ms.

24.

Giurgiu, district Ilfov. "Malul Ro�u"; "imported material" (pottery ?) year 1959; in Dacian pit; Al. Pli.unescu, Gh. Radulescu and M. Ionescu Mat, VTII, 1962, p. 134.

25.

Grádi�tea Muncelului, district Hunedoara. ''Dealul Gradi�tii"; Pottery with relief decoration: -!. Terrace O.P.; fragment of terra sigillata; the 1st century A.D.; year 1952; MIC; C. Daicoviciu and collaborators. SCIV, IV, 1-2, 1953, p. 185, n. 1. Lamps: -�. open, fragmentary (PI. 26); length: 7.8 cm; the 1st century A. D.; (cf. S. Loeschcke, Lampen aus Vindonissa, Zfirich, 1919, type XII, p. 256 no. 1006, p. 309 and pl. XX); MIC. -.2_. Fragmentary, (PI. 48); the 1st centuryA.D.; MIC; Unguentaria: -d. Fragment with brown slip; the 1st century A.D.; MIC; -� -_!. Fragmentary; the 1st century A.D.; (cf. H. S. Robinson, p. 15, F 49 and pl. 2); MIC. Other categories: -_g. Fragmentary vesseJ: with black slip; the 1st centuryB.C.; MIC. -!! . Fragmentary vessel with black slip (now lost); the 1st centuryB.C.; MIC. -!..-1· Fragmentary vessels; the 1st centuryB.C.; MIC. -�. Terrace Hirban; Fragmentary "amphorette"; the 1st century A.D.; MIC; C. Daicoviciu and col­ laborators, SCIV, VI, 1-2, 1955, p. 219. -_!. "Pustiosu"; Fragment­ ary vessel; the 1st century A.D.; year 1955; C. Daicoviciu, N. Gostar, I. Cri�an, Mat, m, 1957, p. 274. -!!!_. Handle of red ves­ sel; the 1st century A.D.; MIC. Observation: Dacian settlement; Information H. Daicoviciu (e-f, i-m).

26.

Hir�ova, district Constanj:a.. On the area of the castrum; "fragments of Greek vessels"; Em. Condurachi, IstRom, I, 1960, pp. 485-486.

27.

Ipote§lti, district Olt. Fragmentary plate with brown-reddish glaze (pl. 22); the first ha1f of the 1st century A.D. or whole 1st century A.D. (cf. H. S. Robinson, p. 27, G 50 and pl. 65; H. Dragendorff, BonnJahrb, XCVI-XCVTI, 1895, form 36, p. 118); year 1962, Dacian settlement; M. Slatina; Information Gh.Butoi.

28.

Málu9teni, district Vaslui. "Leaua II"; Greek fragmentary vessels; the 1st centuryB.C.-the 1st century A.D.; Dacian settlement; RepMold, p. 349, no. 428 f.

29.

Oradea, districtBihor. Quarter Salea. Roman pottery fragment; the 1st century A.D.; year 1959; in Dacian pit; M. Rusu, V. Spoialá and L. Galamb, Mat, VIII, 1962, p. 160; observation: before 106 ( ?) •

30.

Pecica, district Arad. "�anp.il Mare"; Dish of terra sigillata (pl. 22); height 3.2 cm; the 1st century A.D. (cf. "forro 29" in H. Dragendorff, Bonn.Jahrb, XCVI-XCVTI, 1895, pp. 126, 146); year 1898; Dacian settlement ; I. H. Cri9an, Ceramica, pp. 196, 291. Piatra Neam!, district Neam�. A. "Bitca Doamnei". Pottery with relief decoration: -!· Fragmentary dish with brown-red slip; the last three-quarters of the 1st centuryB.C. (cf. H. S. Robinson, p. 13 F 27 and pl. 62, p. 14 F 36, 42 and pl. 65); year 1967; M. Piatra Neam1; Information N. Gostar. Pitchers and jugs: -�. Lekythos with

31.

168

handle in band and with a girth groove on it (Pl. 23); the ist century B.C. (an identical piece at Histria Coja);

M. PiatraNeam;

and fig. 7.

Information M.

-

N. Gostar, Apulum, V, 1965,

the year 1957; M. Piatra Neam

formation N. Costar. the year 1961;

-d. Similar to the last; M. Piatra Neamj;

Jug with Dionysos mask;

139, 141

pp.

-c. Fragmentary pitcher with trilobate handle;

century A.D. (?); (?);

height 13.2 cm;

the ist

(inv. 3087);

In

the Ist century A.D.

Information N. Costar. -e.

the Ist century A.D. (?);

N. Gostar,

Cetài, P. 20. Kantharoi: -f. Fragmentary, grey, with remains of black slip (Pl. 24) ;the second half of the Ist century B.C. (J. Schifer, Hellenistische Keramik aus Pergamon, 1968, 36);

M. Piatra Neam;

with reddish lines; Neam;

the Ist century A.D.;

Information N. Gostar.

and Roman pottery; 1962;

the year 1958;

M. Piatra

-h -j.

Greek year

.

M. Piatra Neam;

D. Popescu, SCIV, XIV, 1962,

20.

Observation:

B.

p.

458, no.

N. Gostar, Ceti, p.

"Cozla". Fragmentary

the Ist century B.C.-the Ist century

Dacian settlement;

M. Zamoteanu, Mat, VI, 1959,

367;

P.

Dacian settlement;

kantharoi painted with brown lines;

32.

-g. Fragment painted

the ist century B. C -the Ist century A. D.;

C. Scorpan, ArhMold, IV, 1966,

year 1957;

68, type E 85 and pl.

Other categories:

63;

A.D.

p.

Information N. Costar.

p.

A. Niu, I. Zamoteanu and

364 and fig. 4/1, 6.

Piatra Soimului, district Neam. "Horoditea".

-a.

Fragmentary dish

with red glaze and with circles of lines incised on the inside face of the bottom; Robinson,

the ist century B.C. -the Ist century A.D. (cf. H. S.

p.

14 F 42 and pl. 65);

Vu-Vu, 1937-40, and cups:

p.

M. Piatra Neamj;

54 no. 3 and fig. 39/14, 16.

-b. Painted in brown-red

24, 48);

(Pl.

R. Vulpe, Dacia,

Handled kantharoi height 7 cm;

second half of the Ist century A.D. (cf. H. S. Robinson, pl. 18, 70);

from Pontic workshop?;

and fig. 36/10.

-c.

R. Vulpe,

Fragment with red glaze;

P.

.cit.,

the

84 M 3 and

P.

54 no. I

the second half of the

Ist century A.D. (cf. H. S. Robinson, loc.cit); R. Vulpe, p. 54, no. 2. -d. Fragment painted with brown red lines (Pl. 24); height 9.8 cm; Robinson, (?);

p.

the second half of the ist century A.D. (cf. H. S.

84 M 2 and p1. 18, 70, variant);

M. Piatra Neamj (inv. 1558);

Birliba.

Other categories:

-e.

from Pontic workshop

Information V. Mihâilescu-

Fragmentary vessel with handle of

"little basket" type and with remains of red glaze; A.D.; R. Vulpe, 22.cit., Dacian settlement. 33.

Ploeti, district Prahova.

p.

the Ist century

55, no. 7 and fig. 40/4.

Quarter Bereasca.

Observation:

Fragmentary little

jug with the handle decorated with fluted prominences and small incised lines; the Ist century A.D.; Teodorescu. 34.

M. Ploeti;

Information V.

Poiana, district Galai (the numeration with Arabic numbers). Painted pottery:

-1.

Painted fragment with relief decoration;

Ist century B.C.-the ist century A.D.; SCIV, III, 1952,

p.

fragments (Pl. 21);

202 and fig. 20/1.

the year 1951; -2 -5.

the

R. Vulpe,

Hellenistic and Roman

the ist century B C -the Ist century A D. (?); .

169

.

.

R. Vulpe, Dacia, N.S., I, 1957,

P.

156 and fig. 9/7-8;

R. Vulpe

and collaborators, SCIV, II, 1, 1951, p. 189 and fig. 17/6-8. -6. Fragmentary vessel painted with oblique, black and red lines; century A.D. (?);

private collection;

Dacia, Ill-TV, 1927-1932,

R. Vulpe and Ec. Vulpe,

342 and fig. 121/2;

p.

the ist

Observation:

ported ? Pottery with relief decoration and terra sigillata; no. 1. -7. Fragmentary yellowish vessel (Pl. 22, 47);

im-

Supra,

the end of the

2nd century-the beginning of the ist century B.C. (possible analogies inH.

A.

Thompson,

MIA, 56, 1957,

p.

422-426;

pp.

198, fig.

R. Vulpe, SCIV, III, 1952, pp. 156, 158, fig. 9/1. vessels; 1950;

'I.A.UeeTaeBa,

7 /2 ;

p.

year 1951;

198 and fig. 21;

-8 -11.

rIaHTzicaneD,

MNA (inv. II 6361); Dacia, N.S., I, 1957,

"Hellenistic and Italian" fragmentary

the Ist century B.C. -the Ist century A.D.;

MNA, private collection;

the years 1949,

R. Vulpe and collaborators, SCIV,

I, 1, 1950, p.48;

SCIV, H, 1, 1951,

Dishes:

Fragmentary, some with red varnish, others painted

-12 -22.

with horizontal red lines;

the ist century B.C -the Ist century A.D.; .

R. Vulpe and Ec. Vulpe, 93/10-15;

94/17.

189 and fig. 17/4-5.

p.

.St.,

-23.

p.

314 and fig. 90/8, 16, 19; with red varnish;

Fragmentary,

92/3;

the second

half of the Ist centuryB.C. (cl. H. S. Robinson, p.11, F 2, pl. 60); R. Vulpe and Ec. Vulpe,

cit.,

p.

342 and fig. 124/6.

Fragmentary, with red varnish (Pl. 22, 47); Ist century B.C. (cf. H. S. Robinson, M. Tecuci; varnish;

Information Al. Vulpe;

25-26, G 33 and pl. 62 p. 314 and fig. 92/1

=

-

85, form 17;

p.

variant);

94/10.

-

variant);

century A.D. (cf. H. S. Robinson, R. Vulpe and Ec. Vulpe With brown-red slip;

H. S. Robinson, p.

R. Vulpe and Ec. Vulpe,

-27.

Information Al. Vulpe. -28 -29. -30.

11 F 3 and pl. 60

p.

-26. Small deep, with black

the first half of the ist century A.D. (cf. H. Dragendorff,

BonnJahrb, XCVI-XCVII, 1895,

A.D.;

-24 -25.

the second half of the

Pl. 22; the first half of the Ist 24, G 9 and pl. 60);

p.

Flat, fragmentary; p.cit.,

p.

M. Tecuci;

the Ist century

314 and fig. 94/2, 13.

on inside, on the bottom:

two incised

circles and incised oblique lines filling the space between them (Pl. 22, 47);

the ist century A.D. (cf. H. Dragendorff, BonnJahrb, 101,

1897,

141 and fig. 1/4);

p.

-31 -32.

M. Tecuci;

Information Al. Vulpe;

Fragmentary with red varnish;

one of them with an im-

pressed rosette and a circle of small incised lines on the lower part of the exterior;

the ist century A.D.;

Information S. Teodoru.

-33.

the year 1968;

Fragmentary;

MuzlstMold;

the ist century A.D.

(cf. E. B6nis, p. 160, p1. XXI/30); R. Vulpe and Ec. Vulpe, .cit., p. 314 and fig. 92/6. -34. With red slip and with two circular bands of incised dots on the bottom of the inside (Pl. 22, 47);

the second

half of the Ist century A.D. (cf. P. Alexandrescu, Histria, II, 1966, pp. 199-200 (XXX/13) and p1. 99); -35.

Jug (Pl. 23, 48);

height

M. Tecuci; Information Al. Vulpe.

31 cm;

the ist century A.D.;

probably product of the Pontic workshops; Al. Vulpe.

Kantharoi and cups:

-36.

M. Tecuci;

Pl. 25;

Information

the second half of

the Ist century B.C. -the Ist century A.D. (cf. M. Bucoval, Necropole elenistice la Tomis, 1967, formation Al. Vulpe.

-37 -41.

170

p.

71);

MNA (i nv. 636); In-

Fragmentary one of them 111 pl. 25);

the ist century B.C. -the Ist century A.D.;

M. Tecuci (1)

i nv. 1204;

-

R. Vulpe and Ec. Vulpe, 22 .cit., — pp. 313-315, fig. 91/8-9, 18; Information Al. Vulpe. M. Tecuci;

-42.

Fragmentary;

Information Al. Vulpe.

with brown-red lines;

92/11;

the Ist century A.D.;

-43 -47.

Fragmentary, painted

the second half of the Ist century A.D.

(cf. H.

S. Robinson, p. 84, M 3 and pl. 18, 70); M. Tecuci (2); R. Vulpe and Ec. Vulpe, loc. cit. ,and fig. 91 /2 , 3, 19; Information Al. Vulpe. -48 -49.

Fragmentary cups with red slip;

century B.C.; slip (Pl. 25); A.D.;

MuzlstMold; height 7.5 cm;

M. Tecuci;

of the same type;

in layer from the ist

Information S. Teodoru.

-50.

With red

the ist century B.C.-the Ist century

Information Al. Vulpe.

-51 -61.

Fragmentary,

the ist century B.C. -the Ist century A.D.;

R.

Vulpe and Ec. Vulpe, loc.cit and fig. 91/1, 3-5, 10-11, 13, 16, 23, 93/1.

Lamps:

-62.

Fragmentary (Pl. 26, 48);

AIEA/AiiOYC.

Hellenistic;

the inscription

MNA (inv. II 6339);

and collaborators, SCIV, II, 1, 1951, pp. 189-190.

R. Vulpe

-63.

Fragment-

ary, with vertical handle, decorated with astragalos and rays; century B.C. -the Ist century A.D.; Vulpe;

-64.

M. Tecuci;

the Ist

Information, Al.

Grey, with fluted handle and spout (pl. 48);

the first

half of the Ist century A.D. (R. H. Howland, Greek lamps and their survivals, in The Athenian Agora, IV, Princeton, 1958, type 44 d, no. 577, p1. 47);

MNA (i nv. II 6333);

p. 202 and fig. 18.

-65.

R. Vulpe, SCIV, III, 1952,

Red with spout with semi-volutes (Pl. 48);

the second half of the ist century A.D. (cf. J. Perlzweig, Lamps of the Roman period, in The Athenian Agora. no. 115); -66.

MNA

(i nv.

II 6334);

information Al. Vulpe.

Fragmentary with black glaze;

Information Al. Vulpe; (cf. H. S. Robinson Al. Vulpe.

p.

Hellenistic (?);

-67. Rosy paste (p1. 27); 85, M 6 and pl. 18);

Other categories:

-68.

1, 1951, p. 191;

SCIV, III, 1952, -69 -71.

156.

82,

Unguentaria:

the ist century A.D.

M.Tecuci;

Information the 2nd

R. Vulpe and Ec. Vulpe, Dacia,

R. Vulpe and collaborators;

I, 1957,

p.

M. Tecuci;

Fragmentary vessels;

century B.C. ;the Ist century A.D.; 111-1V, 1927-32, pp. 313-315; p.

VII, Princeton, 1961,

p.

202;

SCIV, II,

R. Vulpe, Dacia, N. S.,

Fragmentary vessels with red slip;

the

ist century A.D.; M. Tecuci (2), MuzlstMold (I); Information Al. Vulpe and S. Teodoru. -72. Cup with red slip; height 6.6 cm; the Ist century B.C. (cf. H. S. Robinson, M. 33 and pl. 18, 62); Little pitcher;

M. Tecuci;

height 8.3 cm;

Tecuci;

Information Al. Vulpe.

8 cm;

the Ist century A.D.;

pp. 197, 291 and fig. 108/3.

29, G 71 and pl. 5;

Information Al. Vulpe.

-74.

Globular vessels;

M. Tecuci;

height

-75-79.

Fragmentary, one .

p.

313 and fig. 86/2, 91/25;

R.

Observation : Daci an

the number of the vessels is larger.

Popeti, district I1.fov (the numeration with Arabic numbers). pottery:

M.

I. H. Cri ) san, Ceramica,

Vulpe, SCIV, III, 1952, p. 198 and fig. 22/1-3.

35.

-73.

the 2nd century B C.; R. Vulpe and

Ec. Vulpe, Dacia, 111-1V, 1927-32, settlement;

p. 87,

probably the ist century A.D.;

Bowls:

of them with brown-red varnish;

p.

-i -2.

Painted

Fragmentary vessels, painted in black, brown and

yellow (p1. 21, 47);

the 2nd century B.C. (?);

171

the years 1955, 1963;

Information Al. Vulpe.

-3.

the 2nd century B.C. (?); -4 -5.

Fragmentary vessel painted in brown;

MI\'fl3 (i nv. 15745);

Information M. Turcu.

Fragmentary vessels painted in brown and with floral patterns

(Pl. 21);

Hellenistic;

Turcu. -6 -8.

MMB (i nv. 15735, 15746);

Fragmentary vessels;

Information Al. Vulpe.

-9 -10.

VII, [1961],

p.

MNA;

Hellenistic;

R. Vulpe, SCIV, VI, 1-2, 1955,

Mat, V, 1959, p. 342, fig. 9/4;

vessels;

year 1955;

Fragmentary vessels;

years 1954, 1956, 1957, 1958; MNA; p. 253;

Information M.

Hellenistic;

VT, 1959, pp. 313, 321;

329, fig. 73 (Hellenistic ?)‚ 8/3.

-11-12.

Fragmentary

the 2nd century-the Ist century B.C.; MMB (inv. 15738, i5743);

Information M. Turcu. B.C. (?);

-13. Fragmentary vessel;

MMB (inv. 15728);

6-13 painted in brown.

the Ist century

Information M. Turcu;

Dishes and plates:

-14.

observation:

Fragmentary plate

with red slip, decorated inside with impressed leaves; B.C. (cf. I. T. Kruglikova, fig. 7/10;

with regard to the form, H. A.

year 1958;

MNA; MNA;

Thompson, p. 426, E 154);

R. Vulpe, Mat, VII [1961], p. 332 and fig. 9/7.

-15. Fragmentary plate with brown slip; year 1963;

the 2nd century

MIA, 56, p. 128 and

flaIiTMIcarief

the 2nd-the Ist century B.C.;

Information Al. Vulpe. -16.

Fragmentary dish,

painted on the lip and on the shoulder with a wide brown band;

probably

the first half of the Ist century A.D. (cf. P. Alexandrescu, Histria, II, 1966,

p.

Vulpe.

219, )CCV/3 and pl. 101); -17.

year 1955;

Information Al.

Fragmentary dish, with small umbo, decorated in con-

centric circles with incised leaves (Pl. 22); year 1954;

MNA;

MNA;

Information Al. Vulpe.

painted in black on yellow-white (Pl. 23); Information M. Turcu.

Jugs:

-20.

the Ist century B.C.; -18 -19.

Fragmentary,

MMB (i nv. 15727, 15730);

Fragmentary lagynos with yel-

lowish slip and painted in brown (Pl. 47);

the end of the 2nd century-

the beginning of the ist century B.C. (cf. H. A. Thompson, pp. 403405, E 72 and fig. 92); p. 232 and fig. 17/1.

year 1955; -21.

MNA;

R. Vulpe, Mat, III, 1957,

Fragmentary lagynos, with yellowish slip;

the end of the 2nd century B C. -the beginning of the 1st century B.C. .

(cf. H. A. Thompson, loc.cit.;

J. Schifer, Hellenistik Keramik aus

Pergamon, 1968, pp. 105, 110, 114 F 5 and p1. 44); MNA;

Information Al. Vulpe.

the 2nd-the Ist century B.C.; Vulpe;

-23.

year 1955;

MNA;

Information Al.

year 1961;

MNA;

-27.

the

Information Al. Vulpe.

Fragments painted in brown-red on the paste;

ist century B.C.; Turcu.

year 1961;

Fragmentary, painted in red;

Fragmentary, painted with white lines on the red;

2nd-the ist century B.C.; -24 -26.

-22.

MMB (i nv. 15726, 15736, 15739);

the 2nd-the

Information M.

Fragmentary, painted in brown-red on the whitish slip;

the 2nd-the ist century B.C. (cf. M. BucovaTh., Necropole elenistice la Tomis, 1967, p. 59, h);

year 1955;

1957, p. 232 and fig. 17 /2 . -28.

three incised lines on the shoulder; (i nv. 15929); -29.

MNA;

R. Vulpe, Mat, 111,

Fragmentary, two bands each with the ist century B.C. (?);

M. Turcu, Bucureti, VII, 1969,

Fragmentary, painted in white;

p.

MMB

169, and p1. 111/3.

the end of the ist century B.C.

-

the ist century A.D. (cf. M. Bucoval, Necropole elenistice la Tomis, J.967,

p.

116, b);

Pl. 23, 47;

height

year 1963; 21 cm;

MNA;

Information Al. Vulpe.

-30.

the ist century A.D. (the first half ?)172

cf. A. Rdu1escu, Dezvoltarea meteuguri1or in Dobrogea roman, ms.;

year 1954;

fig. 18/2. 25);

MNA;

Kantharoi:

R. Vulpe, SCIV, VI, 1-2, 1955,

-31 -32.

Fragmentary with black slip (Pl.

the end of the the 2nd-the beginning of the ist century B.C. (cf.

M. Bucoval, Necropole elenistice la Tomis, 1967, 1955;

MNA;

R. Vulpe, Mat, ifi, 1957,

mation Al. Vulpe.

-33.

the ist century B.C.; 1959, -34.

the year 1956; -33a.

MNA;

the 2nd-the Ist century B.C.;

of amphora;

the year 1957;

MMB;

Information M. Turcu.

MNA;

the 2nd century B.C.;

Bucureti, VII, 1969, p. 171 and p1. 111/7.

-36.

the 2nd century B.C.;

p.

century B.C. (?);

329 and fig. 8/4.

1954;

MNA;

flaHTcane

M. Turcu, Fragment with MNA;

Fragmentary;

R. Vulpe, the 2nd

InforniationM. Turcu.

-38.

the 2nd-the Ist century B.C.;

year

R. Vulpe, SCIV, VI, 1-2, 1955, p. 253, fig. 15/1, and

information Al. Vulpe.

-39.

2nd-the Ist century B.C.;

Fragmentary, brick-red coloured; the

year 1958;

MNA;

R. Vulpe, op.cit.,

p. 332 and information Al. Vulpe.

-40.

century B.C.;

Information Al. Vulpe. -41. Intact

(?);

year 1961;

MNA.

the ist century B.C.;

1959, p. 313. red slip;

year 1957;

Other categories:

Fragmentary bowls;

1958;

Fragment; MNA;

-42-49.

the 2nd-the Ist

R. Vulpe;

Mat, VI,

Different fragments with

the 2nd-the ist century B.C. (2), the Ist century B.C. (6);

MMB (inv. 15712, 15724), MNA; -50.

p.

In the shape

year 1958;

-37.

NM (i nv. 18380);

Fragment, brick-red coloured;

-35.

I. T. Kruglikova, Mv;

Mat, VII, [19611,

the 2nd-the

R. Vulpe, Mat, VI, 1959,

Unguentaria:

MIA, 56, 1957, pp. 125-127 and fig. 7/4); black-red varnish;

the 2nd-

R. Vulpe, Mat, V.

Lamp, with monogram on the bottom; Ni (Pl. 26);

ist century B.C.;

year Infor-

Fragmentary, kantharoi painted in

P. 313 and information Al. Vulpe.

MNA;

Observation:

Information M. Turcu and Al. Vulpe.

the 2nd-the Ist century B C.; .

R. Vulpe, SCIV, VI, 1-2, 1955,

[1961], p. 332 and fig. 5;

37.

108, b);

p.

232 and fig. 17/5;

P.

Fragment with knotted handle;

342 and fig. 9/5.

p.

brown;

36.

253 and

P.

p.

253;

years 1954,

Mat, VII,

I. Casan-Franga, ArhMold, V, 1967,

P.

18.

Dacian settlement.

Radovanu, district Ilfov. Fragmentary vessel; the Ist century B.C.; year 1963. M. Oltenita; Observation: Dacian settlement; Information B. lonescu. R5.cätu, district Bacu (the numeration with Arabic numbers). Painted pottery:

-1.

Fragmentary vessel painted with red lines;

century B.C. (?);

year 1971;

Fragments with red varnish; A.D.

-4.

Bacãu;

V. C5pitanu and V. Ursachi, -5.

the Ist century A.D.;

Carpica,

line;

p1.

61). year 1968;

-6.

the second half of the

H. S. Robinson,

(Pl. 23); loc.cit.);

year 1968;

p.

12,

Fragmentary, on lip a red painted

the second half of the ist century B.C. (cf. H.S

II, F3 and pl. 60);

M.

II, 1969, p. 96.

Fragmentary red plate;

ist century B.C. (with regard to the form, F 15 and

-2 -3.

the ist century B.C.-the Ist century

Fragment of terra sigillata;

Dishes and plates:

the ist

Pottery with relief decoration;

-7.

.

Robinson, p.

Fragment with brown varnish

the second half of the Ist century B.C. (cf. H. S. Robinson, year 1969.

-8 -9.

Fragmentary with red varnish;

the s

second half of the ist century B.C. (cf. H. S. Robinson, loc.cit.); 173

313

year 1970;

-10.

the outside; Robinson,

Fragment with black varnish, with red paint line on

the second half of the Ist century B.C. (cf. H. S.

p.

14, F 41 and pl. 65);

plate with red varnish; the year 1968;

-12.

year 1971.

the ist century B.C.-the Ist century A.D.;

Fragmentary dishes with red varnish; A.D.;

varnish; -16.

Fragmentary

Fragmentary dish painted in red on yellow: the

Ist century B.C. -the ist century A.D.; century

-11.

the year 1968;

-15.

the year 1968;

-13 -14.

the ist century B.C. -the Ist Fragmentary plate with red

the Ist century B.C. -the ist century A.D.;

Fragmentary dish with red varnish;

the year 1969;

the ist century A.D.;

the year 1970; -17 -26. Fragmentary plates and dishes, with red varnish; the Ist century B.C. -the Ist century A.D.; the year 1971. -27.

Fragment with red varnish;

the first half of the Ist century

A.D. (cf. P. Alexandrescu, Histria, II, 1966, pp. 218-2l9 and pl. 101);

year 1968.

varnish (Pl. 23); Robinson,

P.

-28.

Fragmentary dish with maroon-greenish

the first half of the ist century A.D. (cf. H. S.

24, G 12 and pl. 60);

plate with red varnish; H. S. Robinson,

year 1968.

Fragmentary

the first half of the ist century A.D. (cf.

24, G 19 and pl. 60);

P.

-29.

ary dish with red varnish;

year 1969.

-30. Fragment-

the first half of the ist century A.D. (cf.

H. S. Robinson, pp. 24-25, G 19 and p1. 61);

year 1970.

Fragmentary plate with brown varnish on the outside;

-31.

the middle of

the ist century A.D. (cf. P. Alexandrescu, Histria, IT, 1966, pp. 199-200, and p1. 99; -32.

E. Bónis, p.48 and p1. XXI/29);

year 1970.

Fragmentary dish with red paint in the inside and on the outer

part of the lip;

the Ist century A.D. (cf. I. D. Marcenko,

MIA, 57, 1956, p. 120 and fig. 4/il);

year 1967.

-33.

aHarops,

Fragmentary

dish with red varnish, and with circular bands of incised lines on the inside;

the Ist century A.D.;

dish with red varnish; -38.

the year 1970.

the Ist century A.D.;

-34.

Fragmentary

the year 1970.

-35

Fragmentary dishes with red varnish which is lost on some parts;

the Ist century A.D.;

the years 1970, 1971.

Jugs and pitchers; -39.

Fragmentary lekythos, painted in red (Pl. 47); century-the first half of the ist century B.C.; Fragmentary jug;

the end of the 2nd the year 1971. -40.

the end of the 2nd century B.C. -the 1st century B. C.;

(with regard to the form, M. Bucovall Necropole elenistice la Tomis, 1967, p. 98);

M. Bacáu;

V. C.pitanu and V. Ursachi, Carpica,

II, 1969, p. 115 and fig. 21. Below -41. slip;

the ist century B.C.;

Fragmentary with brown-red

the year 1970;

mentary pitcher with red varnish (Pl. 47);

M. Bacäu;

-42. Frag-

the ist century B.C.-the

Ist century A.D.;

the year 1970.

decoration:

Fragmentary pitchers with brown-red slip, some

-43.

Kantharoi and cups:

of them painted with whitish leaves (Pl. 48);

A. Painted

the end of the ist century

B.C.-the Ist century A.D. (cf. with regard to the form, P. Alexandrescu, .cit.,

p.

year 1971.

199 and p1. 99; -51.

M. Bucoval, op.c i t., P. 116, b);

Fragment painted in red (P1. 25) the first half of

the Ist century A.D. (with regard to the form H. S. Robinson, G 39 and pl. 4); Ursachi, -52 -53.

.cit.,

the

the year 1968; p.

M. Bacäu;

26,

V. Cpitanu and V.

117 and fig. 23 below (without details;

Fragmentary pitchers painted with red lines; 174

p.

imported ?).

the first half

of the Ist century A.D. (cf. form the years 1970, 1971.

-54.

H. S. Robinson, p. 30, G 79 and p1. 4);

Fragment painted in brown-red (triangles)

with horizontal lines (P1. 25);

the ist century A.D. (similar form in

H. S. Robinson, p. 84, M 3 and p1. 18);

the year 1968;

V, Cipitanu and V. Ursachi,

122 and fig. 28 centre-left.

B.

.cit.,

With handles with horizontal bars:

p.

-55 -62.

kantharoi and cups with red slip (Pl. 25, 48);

M. Bacu;

Fragmentary

the ist century B.C. (cf.

form H. Dragendorff, BonmJahrb, 101, 1897, p. 144 and fig. 5); years 1970, 1971.

C. With handles without horizontal bars:

Brick-red coloured (Pl. 25);

height 8.8 cm;

century A.D. (cf. H. S. Robinson,

P.

the

-63.

the middle of the ist

84, M 2 and pl. 18, but without

pedestal); the year 1968. -64 -73. Fragmentary kantharoi and cups with red slip (P1. 26); the middle of the Ist century A.D. (cf. H. S. Robinson, p. 84, M 3 and p1. 18, 70); 1971. D. (P1. 48);

the years 1968, 1970,

With relief decoration: -74 -81a. With vegetable decoration the Ist century A.D. (cf. H. Dragendorff, BonnJarb., 101,

1897, p. 144, fig. 5; M. Bucovala, op.cit.: p. 774b); the years 1969, 1970, 1971.

E.

Other fragments of kantharoi:

-82.

With handles

with horizontal bar which is cut out and with two back-to-back lions; figures of rider and winged masculine deity (Pl. 48); Ist century B.C.; Pontic zone;

possibly comes from Asia Minor or from northern-

the year 1971.

cups with brown slip; years 1968-1971; 103.

probably the

-83-90.

Fragmentary kantharoi and

the Ist century B.C. -the 1st century A.D.; the

M. Bacu.

F. Small cups with two handles: -91

Fragmentary cups with red slip and relief decoration (Pl. 26);

the ist century B.C. -the ist century A.D.; Lamps:

104.

Fragment with brown slip;

the year 1970;

M. Bacu. -105.

the years 1969-1971. the Ist century B.C.

Fragment with red slip, vertical

handle, decorated with ovolos; the ist century B.C.-the ist century A.D.;

the year 1971;

pink (Pl. 27, 49);

M. Back.

Robinson, p. 85, M 7 and p1. 18); -108.

Unguentaria: year 1971.

Fragmentary vessel with tube;

century A.D.;

-106 -107.

the year 1971.

-109.

Other categories:

the ist century B.C.-the Ist With red slip (Pl. 26);

first half of the ist century A.D. (cf. H. S. Robinson, p1. 4, 62);

year 1968;

op-cit.,

122, fig. 28, right, above.

P.

M. Back:

-110.

the second half the year 1970.

Fragmentary bowl with red glaze on the outside and brown

glaze on the inside; Observation:

the 2nd century B.C.;

Dacian settlement;

Ursachi (no piece has reference). ferences are in M. Bacàu.

the year 1970;

M. Bacu;

information V. Câpitanu and V. The pieces mentioned without re-

Satulung (unified with Säcele at present), district Bra sov. probably the Ist century A.D.;

39.

the

25, G 28 and

Fragmentary cup with

of the Ist century A.D. (cf. B. Heukemes, pl. 3/40)-

38.

P.

V. Cpitanu and V. Ursachi,

red varnish and with rows of vertical impressions; -ill.

Yellow-

the second half of the Ist century A.D. (cf. H. S.

M. Sibiu;

Lamp:

Rep, ms.

SfintuGheorghe, district Covasna, "Bedehza".

Lagynos whose slip is

lost and with a brown-red line painted on the bottom (P1. 23); height 25.5 cm;

the end of the ist century B.C. -the first half of the

175

Ist century A.D. (cf. M. Bucoval, Necropole elenistice la Tomis, 1967, pp. 121-122 and fig. 81; 1949;

MNA (i. IV 999);

E. Bónis, p1. XXV/15);

Dacian settlement;

laborators, SCIV, I, 1, 1950, p. 128; 13 and fig. 13/1. 40.

the year

K. Horedt and col-

K. Horedt, Mat, II, 1956, p.

Sibiu, district Sibiu. Quarter Guteria, "Formental". -a. Lekythos whose slip is lost, painted in brown-red (Pl. 48); height 21 cm; the end

of the 2nd century B . C. (cf. similar form but with spout and varnish P. Alexandrescu, Histria, II, 1966, 2nd century B.C.);

194 and p1. 95, dated from the

p.

1VIIC (i nv. IN 2967);

M. Rusu, SCCluj, VI, 3-4,

1955, pp. 84-85, 90 and fig. 5, 10. -b.

41.

the end of the 2nd century-the Ist century B.C. (cf. M.

Bucoval,

.cit.,

M. Rusu, settlement.

cit., pp. 80, 89 and fig. 1,6; The vessels in deposit.

B.C.;

pp.

height

ARC (inv. IN 2963); Observation.

Dacian

fragmentary vessel with

15 cm;

the 2nd century

M. Sighioara (i nv. 1104);

I. H. Crian,

136, 274 (no. 266 b) and fig. 62.

Sinnicoar., district Bistria-N.s.ud.

Patera from the end of the La

Tene period (import ?);

Rep, ms.

Slobozia, district 1110v.

On the banks of the Càma;

year 1954. 300-301. 44.

122-123 and fig. 83);

preserved

the year 1955;

Ceramica,

43.

pp.

Sighioara, district Mure§ "Càtunul Viilor"; brown slip (Pl. 49);

42.

Fragmentary lagynos whose

slip is lost;

"imported pottery";

Gh. Rädulescu and M. lonescu, SCIV, VI, 1955, 1-2, pp.

Tillica, district Sibiu.

"Cna".

-a.

slip is lost (p1. 48); preserved height: M. Sibiu; information N. Lupu. -b.

Fragmentary lagynos whose

13 cm; the 2nd century B.C.

Fragmentary lamp with grey-

black slip (Pl. 26); the Ist century A.D.; cf. H. S. Robinson, p. 38, G 155 and p1. 44; T. Szent11eky, Ancient lamps, Budapest, 1969, pp. 81-83); M. Sibiu; Information N. Lupu. 45.

Timioara, district Timi, Lekythos;

the end of the Ist century B.C.-

the beginning of the ist century A.D. (cf. M. Bucova1, !.cit., p. 116, a); 46.

M. Timioara;

Information Fl. Medelej.

Tinosu, district Prahova.

Dishes:

-a -d.

Fragmentary (one of them

with orange slip, painted with black lines in Pl. 23); B.C.-the Ist century A.D.;

the year 1924;

Vulpe and Ec. Vulpe, Dacia, I, 1924, Information Al. Vulpe.

pp.

the year 1924;

MNA (i nv. 116629);

p. 206 and fig. 31/14. Kantharoi:

25, G 25 and pl. 61);

R. Vulpe and Ec. Vulpe,op.cit., the ist century

R. Vulpe and Ec. Vulpe, loc.cit. and

-g -1.

Fragmentary, with red slip (P1. 26);

the middle of the ist century A.D. and pl. 18, 70);

R.

the first half of the Ist p.

-f. Fragmentary pitcher;

B.C. -the ist century A.D.; fig. 37/3.

MNA (i nv. 16737);

203-206 and fig. 30/5, 31/5;

-e. Fragmentary;

century A.D. (cf. form in H. S. Robinson,

the Ist century

the year 1924;

(cf.

MNA (i nv. 116782-4);

Ec. Vulp', loc.cit. and fig. 34/4, 7.

179

H. S. Robinson,

Other categories:

P.

84, M 3

R. Vulpe and -

-!.

Fragmentary vessels;

theist century B.C. -the Ist century A.D.;

R. Vulpe and Ec. Vulpe, 6, 206. 50.

Observation:

Ulmu, district Ialomia. (=Hellenistic ?);

51.

.cit.,

pp.

167, 172, 179-180, 183, 185-

Dacian settlement. In three different spots;

R. Vladescu-Vulpe, BCMI, XVII, 1924,

Vadu Sapat, district Prahova.

52.

p.

82.

Vessel of medium size painted in

brown (Pl. 21); the Ist century B.C. (?); ment;

"Greek pottery"

M. Ploeti;

Dacian settle-

information V. Teodorescu.

Zimnicea, district Teleorman. From the area of the bronze age necropolis. -a. (p1. 22);

Saucer with red slip and with relief floral patterns

height 18.3 cm;

Information A

form from the Ist century A.D.;

Alexandrescu.

lief floral decoration; the ist century A.D.; -k.

-j.

the year 1967;

177

the year 1967;

MNA;

Fragmentary fluted lid; (Pl. 49); MNA;

Fragmentary bowl;

Casan-Franga, ArhMold, V. 1967,

MNA;

Fragmentary vessels with re-

the ist century A.D.;

Information A. Alexandrescu. Alexandrescu.

-b -i.

p.

18.

Information A.

the 2nd century B.C.;

I.

POTTERY IMITATIONS OF IMPORTED PRODUCTS The catalogue includes a selective list of pottery imitations of imported products from the Hellenistic and Roman world. Owing to the fact that on the one hand, in the present state of the publication of archaeological material it would be impossible to include all pieces imitating Greek (Hellenistic) and Roman models and on the other hand such presentation would be too voluminous, we have been selective. We have paid especial attention to the imitations of forros of vessels whose originals (Hellenistic or Roman) have not yet been found in Dacia, but which certainly existed, as is proved by their imitation and spread throughout the Carpathian-Danubian territory. Pottery imitations include more or less accurate copies of the originals, both of Hellenistic and Roman pottery, and of Hellenistic-Roman glass and metal-work, which are not present in large numbers in the Geto-Dacian settlements. On the other hand, the Dacian pottery painted with geometrical patterns, which occurs in nearly ali the more important settlements, is included only to the extent of the occurrence of painting on forros which are evidently of Greek or Roman inspiration. 1.

Barbo§i (on the map no. 2), district Galati. Fragmentary bowl; the 2nd century-the first half of the 1st century B.C.; Dacian settlement; N. Gostar, Cetá1i, p. 34.

2.

Bota�ana, district Suceava, "La Grajduri"; Bowl without decoration (pl. 37); the 2nd-the 1st century B.C.; Dacian settlement; the year 1966; M. Sucaeva; Information S. Teodoru-M. Ignat.

3.

Bradu (on the map no. 4), district Bacau. -a. Chytra with gloss-paint patterns; height 9 cm; probably the 1st century B.C. (cf. M. Bucovala, Necropole elenistice la Tomis, 1967, p. 97, b); M. Roman; Inforroation V. Ursachi. -� -�. Fragmentary grey kantharoi with or without gloss-painted patterns; the middle of the 1st century A.D. (2). - cf. H. S. Robinson, p. 84, M 2 and pl. 18, 70 -, the 1st century A.D. (2); the year 1963; M. Roman; Inforroation v. Ursachi. Other categories: -.! -g. Lide, one painted with brown lines, another with gloss-paint patterns (pl. 49); cf. E. BÓnis, p. 56 and pl. XXXII/1; the 1st century A.D.; the year 1963; M. Roman; V. Cápitanu, Illiri sj daci, Cluj-Bucure�ti, 1972, p. 172, D 142 and inforroation V. Ursachi. -h -i. Bowls (one of them without decoration); the end of the 2nd-the first half of the 1st century B.C • ; M. Bac�u; V • Ursachi, Carpica, 1968, p. 177 and fig. 54/7-8. Observation: Dacian settlement.

4.

Bra�ov (on the map no. 5), district Bra�ov. "Pietrele lui Solo�on". Saucer painted in brown; the 1st century A.D. ; M. Bra§OV; Dacian settlement; Information Fl. Costea. 178

5.

Bránitari, district Ilfov. "La santier".

-a.

Fragmentary vessels;

the second half of the 2nd century B C -the beginning of the ist .

ç.

century A.D.; ary bowls; .

6.

.

emo, RevMuz, III, 1966,

p.

-b. Fragment-

the second half of the 2nd century-the Ist century B.C.;

emo, loc.cit.

Observation:

Dacian settlement.

Bucureti (on the map no. 7) (The numeration with Arabic numbers). Jugs and pitchers:

-1.

Grey (Pl. 27);

the 2nd-the Ist century B.C.; p. 178 and pl. 111/12. B.C. (?);

-Ia.

height 27.2 cm;

MMB;

the end of

M. Turcu, Bucureti, WI, 1969,

"Cãelu Nou";

pitcher;

the Ist century

V. Leahu, CAB, [1963], p. 32 and fig. 22/1. -2. Frag-

mentary lamp;

the ist century B C. (?);

MMB (i nv. 15751);

.

tion M. Turcu.

Other categories:

3rd-the 2nd century B.C.;

-3.

"Radu Vodá";

the year 1953;

Informa-

craters;

413.

p.

fragmentary vessel with gloss-paint traces;

-4. "RaduVod.";

the 3rd-the 2nd century

B.C.;

I. Ionacu, V. Zirra, D. Berciu, M. Tudor, loc.cit. -5.

"Tei";

lid with top in the shape of bird-head;

MMB;

M. Turcu op .cit.,

Nou";

lids with knobs;

[1963],

10.5 cm;

the ist century B.C. (?);

32 and fig. 22/3.

p.

-8.

"TInganu";

decoration (Pl. 51); "Bragadiru";

Turcu. 32.

-11.

-12.

"Rou",

bowls;

fragment;

-13.

P.

19.

M. Turcu.

p.

bowl;

I. Casan-Franga,

"Dàm,roaia", "Pantelimon", 172, p. IV/2 and information

-18. "Dealul Arhivelor"; Fragment; I. Casan-Franga,

-19. "Snagov"; fragment decorated with reproductions of height 6.5 cm; the 2nd century B.C. (on the -

Information E. Chiril);

idaci, Cluj-Bucureti, 1972,

"Tlnganu", "Str. Zidurilntre vii"; MMB;

p.

162, D 85.

Information M. Turcu.

-23 -128. -

Pl. 37, 51;

MMB;

Imitation in pottery of a bronze piece.

the 2nd-the ist century B.C.; P. 161, D 84 and p1. XXVII. Caciuläta, district Vllcea. Dacian settlement;

"Tei",

Fragmentary

Anthropomorphic representation (Pl. 31, 51);

stamped with rosettes;

M. Turcu,

-20 -22.

fragmentary

Information M. Turcu.

bowls, one of them without decoration (no. 31) -129.

-9

Information M.

V. Leahu, CAB [1963], PP.

"D.mroaia";

basis of the reproduced coins

bowls;

M13;

bowls (one of them without decoration); MMB;

Dacian coins (Pl. 51); Thin

MNB (i nv. 98869);

Gh. Bichir, Mat, VI, 1959,

-14 -17.

M. Turcu, Bucureti, VII, 1969, loc.cit.

Information

.

"C4elu Nou";

"Snagov";

M1'vIB (i nv. 17738);

height

Fragmentary vessel with impressed

fragmentary bowls;

p. 817 and fig. 3/1.

"Celu

Bowls (the 2nd-the Ist century B C.):

"Colentina";

ArhMold, V, 1967,

-6.

V. Leahu, CAB,

Reddish small pitcher;

the Ist century B.C. (?);

Information M. Turcu. -10.

-7.

the ist century B.C. (?);

M. Turcu.

the Ist century B.C.

173, 174 and pl. I/lI.

pp.

the

I. Ionacu, V. Zirra, D.

Berciu, M. Tudor, StRefistRom, I, 1954,

7.

450.

MMB (i nv. 14679); Observation:

"Cozia Veche";

height 9cm;

M. Turcu, op

.

cit.,

(1-129) Dacian settlement. Ornamental (?) piece

the 2nd-the beginning of the Ist century B.C.;

E. Moscalu, SCIV, 19, 1968,

pp.

631, 635-6,

640 and fig. 4/1. 8.

CpIlna, district Alba. ist century B.C.;

"Gtrgâlu", -a. Fragmentary lagynos;

the year 1966;

179

MIC. -b. Fragmentary grey

the

kantharos; the midclle of the 1st century A.D. (cf. H. s. Robinson, p. 84,M 3 and pl. 18,70); the year 1966; l\IlC; Observation: Dacian citadel. 9.

Carpini�,district Timi�. Grey jug with gloss-paint patterns; height 13.8 cm; probably the 1st century A.D.; M. Timi11oara; I. H. Cri�an, Ceramica, pp. 172,257,no. 54 and pl. LXIX/6,CLXVI/5.

10.

Cáscioarele,district Ilfov (on the map no. 11). Fragmentary bowl; Dacian settlement; s. Marinescu-Bilcu,SCIV, 17,1966,pp. 114-115, 121,fig. 1,2.

11.

Celei (on the map no. 10),district Olt. -a -b. Jug and kantharos; the 1st century A.D.; the year 1958; in Dacian layer; D. Tudor, E. Bujor,A. Matrosenco,Mat,VII,[1961],pp. 487-488.

12.

Cernatu (on th� map no. 11),district Covasña. Reddish hand-made situla (Pl. 33); height 37 cm; the 1st century B.C.; MIC (inv. IV 2939); Dacian settlement; I. H. Crisian,Ceramica, pp. 187,257 no. 65 and pl. e /3 (design after I. H. Cri�an).

13.

Cetaj:eni (on the map no. 12),district Arge§. -�. Kantharos with angular handles; the 1st century A.D.; I. H. Cri�an,Ceramica, pp. 194,291. Other categories: -�. Vessel with obligue hanclles which are vertically perforated (pl. 31); height 9.3 cm; the 2nd-� � the 1st century B.C.; M. Cimpulung Muscel; Information Fl. Mir-pi. -c. Fragmentary rhyton; height 12 cm; the 2nd-the 1st century B.C.; the year 1962; Fl. Mi$,SCIV,XV,4,1964,pp. 529-532. -�. .''Idol with calf-heads,birds •.."; the 2nd-the 1st century B.C.; Fl. Mi$,StArtist,V,1963,p. 24. -�. Fragmentary ves�el with two handles; the 1st century B.C. (?); the year 1960; M. Cimpulung Muscel (inv. 2062); Information Fl. Mir-pi. -:f. Rim of storage jar impressed with rosettes; the 1st century B.C.-the 1st century A.D.; Fl. Mirju,StArtist,V,1963,p. 16. -g. Cup with pedestal, hemi-spherical; height 10 cm; the 1st century B.C.-the 1st century A.D.; M. Pite§ti; Information E. Popescu. Bowls: -.!! -!_. Frag­ mentary bowls (pl. 37); the 2nd-the first half of the 1st century B.C.: M. Cimpulung Muscel; Information Fl. Mir-pi. -j. Horizontally fluted (pl. 37); height 6.4 cm; the 2nd- the 1st century B.C.; M. Cimpulung Muscel; Information Fl. Mi*; observation: similar piece at Crásani (.!). -� -g. Fragmentary bowls; the 2nd century­ the first half of the 1st century B.C.; the year 1964; M. Pite�ti; Information E. Popescu. -�. Bowls; I. Casan-Franga,ArhMold,V, 1967,p. 19; Al. Vulpe,SCIV,16,2,1965,p. 341,footnote 1. Observation; �-�): Dacian settlement.

14.

Cetea,district Alba (on the map no. 13). -a. painted in brown lines; the 1st century A.D.; Information L. ChiJu. Other categories: -�. the 1st century B.C.-the 1st century A.D.; I. p. 196; Observation: Dacian settlement.

15.

Chirnogi,district Ilfov. Bowls; I. Casan-Franga,ArhMold,V,1967, p. 19. 180

Fragmentary kantharos M. Aiud (inv. 2997); Fragmentary vessel; H. Cri�an,Ceramica,

16.

Cindesti, district Buzu. fig. 14.

17.

Costeti, district Hunedoara. saucer (Pl. 27); E. B6nis,

p.

Bowls;

I. Casan-Franga,

-a.

height 13 cm;

49, p1. XXI/19);

.cit.,

"Vlrful Alunului";

p.

32,

brown-yellow

the Ist century A.D. (close form to MIC;

I. H. Crian, Ceramica, pp.

180, 260, no. 89 and p1. LXXXII/4 (design after I. H. Crian). Other categories:

-b.

"Muchia Chitoarei", in inside of the tower;

storage-jar stamped with a rosette; the year 1954; 1955,

p.

228.

MIC;

the end of the Ist century A.D.;

C. Daicoviciu and collaborators, SCIV, VI, 1-2,

-c. "Blidaru",

The citadel II, "the block-house" III;

brick-red coloured storage-jars (P1. 50); K incised;

the end of the Ist century A.D.;

laborators, 8.6 cm;

.cit.,

227.

p.

pp.

183-184,

p.

the year 1958;

MIC;

red-grey lid; MIC;

-e. "Laz";

brown-red saucer (Pl. 50);

the second half of the Ist century A.D. -106

(cf. H. J. Eggers, p. 107 no. 55 and fig. 42/8); 1.11. Crian, Ceramica, Observation:

height

I. H. Crian,

260 no. 89 and p1. LXXXrII/3.

Imitation of a bronze form: height 17 cm;

C. Daicoviciu and col-

-d. "Citadel";

ist century A.D.;

Ceramica,

one of them with a single

(a-e):

pp.

the year 1962; MIC;

182, 260 no. 89 and pl. LXXXI/5.

Dacian citadels and Dacian settlements;

the

painted pottery, storage-jars and other pottery fragments are not recorded. 18.

Cozmeni, district Harghita. tlement;

19.

Craiova, district Dolj (on the map no. 17). ArhMold, V, 1967,

20.

Fragmentary storage-jar;

Dacian set-

R. Vulpe, SCIV, VI, 3-4, 1955, p. 567.

p.

Bowl:

I. Casan-Franga,

20.

Craiva, district Alba (on the map no. 18);

Grey-yellow bowl;

of the 2nd century B.C.-the first half of the Ist century B.C.; Alba;

the end M.

Dacian citadel; I. Berciu, Al. Popa and H. Daicoviciu, Celticum,

XII, 1965, p1. 66/2. 21.

Cräsani (on the map no. 19), district Ialomia. -a. handle;

the Ist century B.C.;

I. H. Crian, Ceramica,

P.

fragments (profile Pl. 37); B.C. ; MNA;

(cf. E. B6nis,

22.

the same date;

23.

-j.

Free of decoration

Information S. Marinescu-Bilcu.

-k. Mould

V. Parvan, Getica, p. 208.

Dacian settlement.

Cuci, district Mure.

Grey situla;

beginning of the Ist century A.D.; (i nv. 349);

I. Casan-Franga,

19, fig. 5/6. -i. Yellowish fragment, with MNA; the same date; I. Casan-Franga, .cit.,

with vegetable patterns (Pl. 37, 51); Observation (a-k);

-b -h. Grey

p.

p. 18 and information S. Marinescu-Bllcu. (p1. 37);

Bowls:

the 2nd-the first half of the Ist century

Information S. Marinescu-Bllcu;

ArhMold, V, 1967, impressed grooves;

54 and p1. XXIX/8);

p.

172 and fig. 88/1.

Jug with raised

probably the Ist century B.C. -the height

17.5 cm;

M. Alba Julia

I. H. Crian, Ceramica, pp. 187, 261, no. 98.

Cucuiei, district Ilfov. the map in fig. 14.

Bowl;

181

I. Casan-Franga,

.cit., p. 32,

24.

Deva, district Hunedoara. -a -b. Grey-black situlae; height 22 and 36 cm; Ist century A.D.; M. Deva; I. H. Crian, Ceramica, pp. 187, 261-262 no. Ill b, p1. LXXXVIII/3, C/4.

25.

Geoagiu, district Hunedoara.

Bowl free of decration;

first half of the Ist century B.C.;

height 10 cm;

the 2nd-the

I. H. Crian,

Ceramica, pp. 137, 263 no. 131 and p1. LXV/2. 26.

Giurgiu (on the map no. 24), district Ilfov.

"Malul Rou";

the 2nd-the first half of the ist century B.C.;

-a. Bowl;

the year 1959;

Al.

Punescu, Gh. Rãdulesu and M. lonescu, Mat, VIII, 1962, p. 134 and fig. 4/1.

-b.

Fragmentary bowls;

ArhMold, V, 1967, P. 19, footnote 31. 27.

M. Giurgiu:

I. Casan-Franga,

Observation:

Dacian settlement.

Grditea Muncelului, district Hunedoara (on the map no. 25); numeration with Arabic numbers). Gráditii"; ist

Painted pottery:

-i -6.

pottery fragments with geometrical painting;

century B.C -the ist century A.D.; .

Observation:

MIC;

(the "Dealul

(Pl. 36);

the

Information H. Daicoviciu.

the Dacian pottery painted with vegetable and zoomorphic

patterns has not been included (see I. H. Crian, Ceramica, pp. 201202).

Some of these vessels have a sign on the bottom:

H, A, qA, A,

(C. Daicoviciu and collaborators, SCIV, IV, 1-2, 1953, pp. 166, 170).

-7.

"Rudele";

the Ist century A.D.;

grey saucer (pl. 27);

MIC (i nv. IN 11200);

pp. 180, 260 no. 89 and pl. LXXXI/4. Grditii";

oinocho

height 14.2 cm;

I. H. Crian, Ceramica,

Pitchers and jugs: -8. "Dealul

with maroon slip and relief ribs (p1. 27, 49); the

end of the 2nd century B.C -the beginning of the Ist century B.C. (all .

similar specimens are from earlier period); MIC; information H. Daicoviciu; -9.

"Rudele": with handle joined to the rim and to the

shoulder of the vessel (Pl. 27); MIC (i nv. IN 11141); v/I.

-iø.

height 32.8 cm; the Ist century A.D.;

H. Daicoviciu, ActaMN, I, 1964, p. 121 and p1.

"Fee1e Albe"; grey lagynos; height 15 cm; the second

half of the ist century A.D.-106 A.D.; "Meleia";

Grey;

the year 1972;

MIC.

-11.

height 10.2 cm; the end of the ist century A.D.

-

106 (close form E. Bónis, p1. XXV/9); the year 1959; MIC (i nv. A 189); I.H. Crian, Ceramica, pp. 172, 264 no .144 c an d p 1. LXIX 1/2. -12. "Dealul Gràditii"; Fragmentary Kantharos; painted in brown (Pl. 28); -13.

the ist century B.C.; MNA (i. IV 448).

Other categories:

"Dealul Gráditii": Vessel with maroon slip and vertically fluted,

fragmentary (p1. 32);

the Ist century B.C. (?); IVIIC; Information H.

Daicoviciu; observation: all similar specimens are from an earlier period -14. "Dealul Grádistii". Fragmentary blackish vessel with vertical ribs (P1. 32); the Ist century B.C. (?);

MIC; Information H. Daicoviciu;

observation: all similar specimens are from an earlier period. "Dealul Grâditii": century B.C.;

Little jug with black slip, fragmentary;

MIC;

"Dealul Grditii";

Information H. Daicoviciu. Situlae (Pl. 33);

B.C. -the lst century A.D.;

-16 -17.

height 40 em; - the-ist century

MIC and MNA (i nv. 402);

Crian, Ceramica, pp. 187, 264 no. 144 a and p1. C/6; imitated from Roman forms (?); jug stamped with rosettes; the year 1954;

MIC;

-18.

-15.

the ist

I. H. Observation:

"Dealul Grâditii"; storage-

the 1st century B.C. -the ist century A.D.;

C. Daicoviciu and collaborators, SCIV, vi, 1-2, 182

1955,

P.

215.

-19 -20.

"Dealul Grãditii";

century B.C. -the Ist century A.D.;

MIC;

I. H. Crian, Ceramica,

pp. 187, 264 no. 144 a, p1. XCIx/2, C/2; from Roman forms (?). rosettes

31);

(Pl.

observation:

"Rudele";

imitated

storage-jug stamped with

the Ist century B.C.-the ist century A.D.;

"Rudele";

Grey lids (Pl. 35);

height 7;10; 13; 12 cm;

the ist century B . C. -the Ist century A.D. (cf. E. Boni s, XXX[I/1-2;

B. Heukemes,

I. H. Crian, Ceramica, 9-11.

-25.

P.

33 and pl.

4 /6 8-69);

"Dealul Gräditii; -26.

"Meleia";

of the Ist century A.D.; MIC; 33);

the year 1956;

Stamped storage jar MIC;

Information H.

bowl with short pedestal;

(cf. H. S. Robinson,

Information H. Daicoviciu. height 25 cm;

56 and pl.

P.

183-184, 264, no. 144 d and p1. LXXXflI/2,

pp.

the ist century B.C.-the Ist century A.D.; Daicoviciu.

MIC;

H Daicoviciu, Acta MN, I, 1964, p. 121 and p1. V/S.

(i. IN 11288); -22 -24.

-21.

red vessels; the Ist

-27.

p.

23, G

"Rudele";

the Ist century A.D.;

MIC;

the beginning and p1. 4);

Grey vessel (P1.

(i. IN 11101);

I. H. Crian, Ceramica, pp. 187, 264 no. 144 d and pl. C/I. -28. "Meleia"; red vessel (Pl. 34); height 21 cm; the ist century A.D. (cf. form E. Bónis, p1. XVI/9); I. H. Crisan, Ceramica, -29.

"Meleia";

the year 1959;

MIC (i nv. A1 262);

189, 264 no. 144 c and p1. XCIX/6.

pp.

red vessel (Pl. 33);

height 20.3 cm;

century A.D. (cf. form E. Bánis, p1. XIV/6); Cluj (i nv. A1 261);

I. H. Crian, Ceramica,

-30 -32.

"Meleia";

6.2 cm.

The ist century A.D.;

Crian, Ceramica -33 -38. 36; tion:

34.5;

M.

189, 264 no. 144 c. height 10.7;

11.2;

MEC (inv. A1 190, 835, 119);

I. H.

p. 183-4, 264 no. 144 and p1. LXXXIII/12-14. Grey vessels of Crater type (P1. 34, 35);

26;

17.4;

18 cm;

height

the ist century A.D. (observa-

all similar specimens are from an earlier period) MIC;

A1 832, 831, 263, 125-6);

I. H. Crian, Ceramica,

no. 144 c and p1. XCVII/I-2, XCVIII/1-4. glossy vessel (Pl. 34);

height 44 cm;

year 1954;

MIC;

-39.

pp.

(inv.

193-4, 264

"Dealul Gräditii";

(observation:

specimens are from an earlier period); -40.

pp.

Red and grey lids (Pl. 35);

"Meleia"; 35;

the Ist

the year 1959;

all similar

the Ist century A.D.;

the

I. H. Crian, Ceramica, pp. 193-4, 264 no. 144 a.

"Fejele Albe";

Vessel with tube (Pl. 50);

the Ist century A.D.;

the year 1971;

MIC;

Glodariu, L'habitat dace de Feele Albe, in

height 12.7 cm;

H. Daicoviciu and 1. 1er

de Thracologie, Sofia, 1972, p. 96, fig. 24/B.

Congr'es International -41.

"Feele Albe";

Fragmentary patera;

the Ist century A.D.;

-42.

brown vessel with broken handle (Pl. 31);

"Fee1e Albe";

height 6.5 cm; Thompson, "Meleia"; 1VIIC.

p.

the year 1968;

1VIIC;

the Ist century A.D. (a less close analogy in H. A. 416, E124 and fig. 102);

vessel with tube;

the year 1972;

the ist century A.D.;

-44. "Dealul Grditii";

MIC.

-43.

the year 1972.

conical vessel (p1. XLIX/2) with the

stamps DECEBALVS PER SCORILO; the stamping system copied Arretine models; the ist century A.D.; MIC; C. Daicoviciu, IstRom, I, 1960, p. 329; I.H. Crian, Ceramica,

pp.

189-190. -45-46. "Dealul

Gr.ditii"; Vessels with tube; the end of the ist century A.D. (cf. B. Heukemes, p.88 and

p1.

24/49). Imitation of bronze vessel: -47. "Fetele

Albe"; pitcher painted with geometrical and zoomorphic patterns (P1.50);

183

height: MC;

32.5 cm;

the end of the Ist century A.D.;

the year 1971;

H. Daicoviciu and l. Glodariu, 2j.cit., p.96 and fig. 24/A

(imitated type in Boesterd, pp. 77-78 no. 277, pp. 82-83 no. 291). Observation:

(1-47);

Dacian settlement and citadel; there are in-

cluded in the catalogue only a few pieces;

no. 7, 9, 22, 27-39,

designs after I. H. Cripn. 28.

Hosman, district Sibiu. height: 32.5 cm; form

Grey vessel of medium size (Pl. 34);

the Ist century B.C.;

Eggers, type 17,

-

p.

I. H. Crian, Ceramica,

probably it imitates a bronze

160 and pl. 3);

pp.

M. Sibiu (i nv. A2112);

188, 265 no. 154;

design after I. H.

C rian. 29.

NInãstirea, district Ilfov. century B.C. (?);

30.

Gh.

Fragmentary unguentarium;

tefan, Dacia, II, 1925,

Moteni, district Teleorman. jar;

the ist

393 and fig.

p.

7 /2 3.

Pitchers, jug and fragmentary storage-

the 2nd-the ist century B.C.;

.

emo, RevMuz, III, 5, 1966,

p. 450. 31.

Ocna Sibiului, district Sibiu. height: 23 cm;

Red vessel of medium size, hand-made;

the Ist century A.D.;

M. Sibiu (inv. A 1048); I. H.

Crian, Ceramica, pp. 189, 269 no. 204 a and p1. Cl/6. 32.

Olteni, district Covasna.

Cup with handle (Pl. 33);

the Ist century B . C. ;the 1st century A. D.; Gheorghe (inv. 11461); 210 and pl. LXIV/I; 33.

height: ii cm;

Dacian settlement; M. Sf.

I. H. Crian, Ceramica,

pp.

165, 269 no.

design after 1. H. Crian.

Ormeni, district Brasov. Vessel of medium size (P1. 33); height: 21.3 cm; the ist century A.D.; M. Sibiu(inv. 13266) ; I. H. Cr isan, beramica, pp. 189-269-270 no. 215 and p1. Cl/3.

34.

Pecica (on the map no. 30), district Arad. -a. Lagynos painted with brown bands (Pl. 27); height: 19 cm; the ist century A.D. (cf. E. Bccnis, p1. XXVI/1);

the year 1960;

MEC;

I.

H. Crian, Ceramica,

pp. 172, 270 no. 221 and p1. LVIII/2, CLVIU/6-7, CLIX. categories:

-b.

height: 21 .6 cm;

Other

Vessel with two handles, yellow, glossy (P1. 33); the 2nd century B.C. -the beginning of the 2nd

century A.D. (cf. H. A. Thompson, Robinson, p. 88, M 4 1 and pl. 18);

p.

417 and fig. 100;

the year 1960;

MEC;

H. S. I. H.

Crian, .cit., pp. 196, 270 no. 211 and p1. LV/2. -c. Grey-red situla; (Pl. 33); height: 21 cm; the ist century B.C.-the ist century A.D. MC; -d.

I. H. Crian,

21.cit.,

pp. 187, 270 no. 221 and p1. LXXXVIII/2.

Small vessel similar to saucer;

height: 14.3 cm;

B. C. -the ist century A. D. ; the year 1900; p. 182, 270 no. 221 and p1. LXXXI/6. height: 7cm; 1900;

the Ist century

I. H. Crian, op.cit. ,

-e -f.

Grey lids (P1. 35, 49);

the lstcenturyB.C. -the Ist century A. D. ; the year

M. Arad (inv. 246), MIC;

I. H. Crian,

!2.cit.,

pp. 183-184,

270 no. 221 and p1. LXXXIII/4-5 (it is probably an amphora "plug"). Lid, hand-made (P1. 35); the Ist century A.D. ;(cf. B. Heukemes, -.

p. 47 and pl. 9/16); the year l96l;

MIC; I. H. Crian,

pp. 183-184, 270 no. 221 and p1. LXXXII/7.

-h.

height: 8.2 cm; the Ist century A.D. (cf. E. Bonis, XXXII/i);

the year 1901; 184

.cit.,

Grey lid (Pl. 35); p.

56 and p1.

I. H. Crian, .cit., pp. 183 -184, 270 no. 221 Observation (a-h): Dacian settlement; design

M. Arad (i nv. 751);

and p1. LXXXIfl/8. after I. H. Crian. 35.

Piatra Neam (on the map no. 31), district Neam. Fragmentary jug; year 1956;

M. Piatra Neam;

"Bitca Doamnei";

"Cozia";

-a.

theist century B.C. -theist century A.D..; -b-c-

the

Information V. MiMilescu-Birliba.

Fragmentary kantharoi;

the Ist century B.C. -the ist century A.D. (b), the Ist century A.D. (C);

M. Piatra Neam;

Fragment (Pl. 28); century A.D.; on Pl. 28);

height: 8.8 cm;

.

height: 8.9 and 7.8 cm; p.

Mihi1e scu-Birliba.

p.

the middle of the ist century A.D. M. Piatra

20 and fig. 20 and information V.

"C ozia":

-g.

century A.D. (cf. H. S. Robinson, Piatra Neam;

Fragments (one of them

84, M 2 , M 3 , and p1. 18, 70);

N. Go star, Cetäi,

Fragment; P.

the middle of the ist

84, M3 and p1. 18, 70);

Other categories:

"Bitca Doamnei":

-h. Vessel

with two handles with the same form as that of Pecica, b;

Robinson, p. 88, M 41 and p1. 18); 20 and fig. 30 left.

p.

fragmentary vessel; year 1960; -k.

height:

the end of the 2nd century B.C . -the beginning of the ist

century A.D. (cf. H. A. Thompson, Cetäi,

M.

A. Niu, I. Zamoteanu and M. Zamoteanu, op.cit.,

p. 363 and fig. 4/4. 48.8 cm;

-d.

the ist century B.C -the Ist

the same references. -e -f.

(cf. H. S. Robinson, Neam;

Information V. Mihãilescu-Btrliba.

--L.

417 and fig. 100;

p.

M. Piatra Neam;

N. Gostar,

Small vessel with handle and

the ist century B C -the ISt century A. D.; .

M. Piatra Neam;

C. Matas. and collaborators,

p. 341 and fig. 3/10.

the

.

Information V. Mihàilescu-Birliba.

Lid, the Ist century A.D. (cf. B. Heukemes,

M. Piatra Neamj;

H. S.

Observation (a-k):

p.

47 and p1. 9/16);

Mat, VII, 1961,

"Bitca Doamnei" Dacian

fortification; "C ozla" Dacian settlement. 36.

Piatra §oimului (on the map no. 32), district Neam. -a.

Lagynos, grey fragment;

Vu-Vu, 1937-40, century A.D.;

p.

52 fig. 39/9.

M. Piatra Neam,;

Other categories:

-c.

"Horoditea".

the ist century A.D.; R. Vulpe, Dacia, -b.

Grey kantharos;

Fragmentary lids with red slip, glossed;

Ist century B.C -the ist century A.D.; R. Vulpe,

37.

38.

Dacian settlement.

Poian, district Covasna (on the map no. 33). Ist century B.C.;

the

p. 54.

.

Observation: (a-c):

the ist

Information V. Mihäilescu-B?rliba.

Dacian settlement;

Fragmentary bowl;

the

Information Z. Szke1y.

Poiana (on the map no. 34), district Galaji (the numeration with Arabic numbers).

Saucers:

-1. Red;

height: 6.5 cm;

the end of the 2nd;

the beginning of the Ist century B.C. (cf. H. A. Thompson,

p.

414,

E117 and fig. 100); the year 1951; MNA (inv. II 6380); I. H. Crian, .cit., p. I80 and fig. 95/1. -2-6. Forms which could also be a local evolution (I. H. Crian, lo(Tcit., and fig. 96/4-7, 10); century B.C.-the Ist century A.D.

-7. Grey (Pl. 27);

the ist

height: 4.8 cm;

the ist centuryB.C. (cf. H. S. Robinson, p.24, G1 9 and p1.4, 57, 61); M. Tecuci; (Pl. 27);

I. H. Crian, Ceramica,

height: 5.8 cm;

p.

180 and fig. 96/3.

-8.

the Ist century A.D. (cf. E. Bnis, 185

p.

Grey 48

and pl. XXI/19); the year 1951; MNA(inv. II 6379); M. Tecuci;

I. H. Cri�an, �.cit., p. 180 and fig. 95/2. -�. Tall with shoulder;

height: 7 cm; the end of the 1st centuryB.C.-the beginning of the 2nd century A.D. (cf. E. Bonis, p. 49 and pl. XXX/29); M. Tecuci; I. H. Cri�an, .212.cit., p. 180 and fig. 96/8. Pitchers and jugs: -10. Grey; height: 13 cm; probably the 1st centuryB.C.; M.Tecuci; I. H. Cri�an, loe .cit., and fig. 88/4. -.!.!. . Globular small pitcher; height: 6.4 cm; the 1st centuryB.C.; M. Tecuci; Information Al. Vulpe. -12. Grey with glossy decoration; height: 11 cm; the 1st centuryB.C.-the 1st century A.D.; M. Tecuci; I. H. Cri�an, �.cit., p. 290 and fig. 88/2. -13. Hand-made; height: 15.2 cm; probably the 1st century A.D.; M. Tecuci; I. H. Cri�an, loc.cit., and fig. 88/3. Kantharoi and handled cups: -14 -!1_. Grey (Pl. 29, 49); the end of the 2nd century-the 1st e:enturyB.C. ( ?) ; M. Tecuci (inv. 939); Information Al. Vulpe (14-15); R. Vulpe and col­ laborators, SCIV, II, 1, 1951, p. 189 and fig. 19/2 (16); I. H. Cris3an, Ceramica, p. 194 and fig. 106/3 (17). -1ª_-20. Grey; one of them with handle with horizontal bar (Pl. 29, 49); the 1st centuryB.C.; the years 1950, 1951; MNA (inv. 6357 - no. 18); R. Vulpe and col­ laborators, loc.cit. and fig. 19/1 (19); R. Vulpe, SCIV, III, 1952, p. 208 and fig. 29/3 (20). -�. With globular body; the 1st century B.C. (?); M. Tecuci; Information Al. Vulpe. -22. Fragmentary (Pl. 29), the 1st centuryB.C. -the 1st century A.D. ; M. Tecuci; Information Al. Vulpe. -23 -25. the 1st century A.D.; I. H. Cri�an, 2E. .cit., p. 192, fig. 103/1, 5; Information Al. Vulpe. -26. With perforations under the lip; the first half of the 1st century A.D. (cf. H. S. Robinson, p. 30, G 79 and pl. 4); M. Tecuci; I. H. Cri§3-n, loc.cit. and fig. 103. -27 -31. Sorne decorated with glossy patterns (Pl. 29, 30); the middle of the 1st century A.D.(cf. H. S. Robinson, p. 84, M 2 and pl. 18, 70); M. Tecuci; Information Al. Vulpe; I. H. Cri�n, loc.cit. (27). -32 -35. One of them with glossy patterns (Pl. 30, 49); the middle of the 1st century A.D. (cf. H. S. Robinson, p. 84, M 3 and pl. 18, 70); MNA (inv. II 6358), MuzistMold (inv. II 1741), M. Tecuci; Information Al. Vulpe, S. Teodoru. -36 -37. Grey; M. Tecuci; I. H. Cri�an, loc.cit. -38. Cup; the 1st century A.D. (?); the year 1951; R. Vulpe, SCIV, III, 1952, p. 208 and fig. 29/4. Unguentarium: -39. Grey (Pl. 31); the 1st centuryB.C.-the 1st century A.D.; MuzistMold (inv. II 1745); Information S. Teodoru. Other categories: -40. Little jug with prominences; the 2nd-the 1st centuryB.C. (?); the year 1951; R. Vulpe, �.cit., p. 198 and fig. 17; Observation: imitation of a glass-form ( ?) • -41. Vessel with pedestal; height: 26.2 cm; the 1st century B.C. (?); I. H. Cri�an, �.cit., p. 187 and fig. 100/3. -42 -46. Lids; the 1st centuryB.C.­ the 1st century A.D.; I. H. Cri�an, loc.cit., and fig. 97/1-4, 7. -47. Fragmentary rhyton which ends in the shape of a horse-head; the 1st centuryB.C. -the 1st century A.D.; MuzistMold (inv. II 1752); R. Vulpe and Ec. Vulpe, Dacia, III-IV, 1927-32, p. 319 and fig. 99/3, 129/6; I. H. Cri�an, Dacia, N. S., X, 1966, p. 337. -48. Grey situla; the 1st century A.D. (?); the year 1951; R. Vulpe, SCIV, III, 1952, 1.86

p. 208, fig. 30/2.

-49.

Lid painted in brown;

the Ist century A.D.

(cf. form in E. Bnis, p. 56 and p1. XXXII/i); the year 1968; MuzlstMold; Information S. Teodoru. -50. Vessel with shoulder (Pl. 35);

height: 18.8 cm;

the end of the ist century-the beginning

of the 2nd century A.D. (cf. E. B6nis, p. 50 and p1. XXII/II); year 1950; R. Vulpe and collaborators, SCIV, II, 1, 1951, p. 189 and fig. 19/5; I. H. Crian, Ceramica, p. 189, 291 and fig. 101. -51."Plug" lid (P1. 35);

height: 5.2 cm; MNA (inv. II 6349);

I. H. Crian, op

.

cit., pp. 183-184 and fig. 98. Bowls and Moulds: -52-57: Bowls; the 2nd century-the Ist century B C.; I. Casan-Franga, ArhMold, .

V, 1967, p. 18 (with bibliography). -58. Moulds; the 2nd-the ist century B.C.; I. H. Crian, Ceramica ? P. 139. Imitations of glass forms: -59. Vessel with vertical little handles, which are horizontally perforated;

the Ist century B.C. (?) (cf. for the form of handles

C. C. Edgar, Graeco-Egyptian glass, Le Caire, 1905, pp. 68-69, no. 32730); I. H. Crian, .cit., p. 133 and fig. 59/1. Observation: (1-59) Dacian settlement; imitative pieces are more numerous; no. 1-4, 10-12, 40, 43, designs after I. H. Crian. 39.

Poiana Gruii, district Mehedmnji. century B.C.;

40. 41.

Fragmentary bowl;

I. Casan-Franga, ArhMold, V, 1967,

the 2nd-the ist p.

19.

Polovragi, district Gorj. Fragmentary bowl; the 2nd-the Ist century B.C.; year 1964; I. Casan-Franga, ArhMold, V, 1967, p. 20. Popeti (on the map no. 35), district Ilfov (the numeration with Arabic numerals. Painted pottery: -1. Fragment painted with white lines; the Ist century B.C.; the year 1958; MNA; Information Al. Vulpe. -2. Jug; fragmentary; the 1st century B.C. (?); MMB (inv. 17719); Information M. Turcu; -3. Grey kantharos; two circles with relief cross on the upper part of the handles (Pl. 50); the ist century B.C.; MMB (inv. 15910); M. Turcu, Bucureti, VII, 1969, pp. 169-170 and p1. 111/5. Lamps: -4. Candlestick with three orifices (Pl. 50); height: 12.3 cm; the 2nd-the Ist century B.C. (a distant analogy in H. A. Thompson, p. 340, B 27 and fig. 20); MNB (i nv. 15932); Information M. Turcu; -5. Brick-red colour, hand-made (Pl. 50); height: 4.8 cm; length: ii cm; probably the Ist century B.C.; MMB; (inv. 15951); Information M. Turcu. Unguentaria: -6. Amphorette; height: 15 cm; the 2nd-the ist century B.C.; the year 1954; NI NA (inv. I6035); R. Vulpe and collaborators, SCIV, VI, 1-2, 1955, p. 249-253 and fig. 18/i; Information Al. Vulpe. -7. Fragmentary spindle-shaped form;

the 2nd-the beginning of the ist century B.C.;

MMB; (inv. 18362); Information M. Turcu. Other categories: -8. Crater; the 2nd-the Ist century B C.; R. Vulpe, Mat, VI, 1959, p. .

315, fig. 9/6.

-9.

Fragments of rhyton with horse-head;

the ist century B.C.;

the year 1954;

the 2nd-

R. Vulpe, SCIV, VI, 1-2, 1955,

p. 253, fig. 13/6. -10 -13. Fragmentary vessels (Pl. 50) the 2ndthe ist century B.C.; the years 1954, 1957, 1958, 1962; MNA; Information Al. Vulpe. -14. Lid which ends above in the shape of bird protome; the 2nd-the ist century B.C. (?); 1V1JVtB (inv. 15940); Information M. Turcu. -15. Grey lid; height: 8.3 cm; the Ist century B.C.; the year 1954; MNA (i nv. I6028); I. H. Crian, 187

Ceramica, pp. 183-184 and fig. 98/2. VII, 1961,

P.

332, fig. 9/6.

-17.

century-the ist century B.C.; 1969, p. 171 and p1. IV/3. of them); 1959,

the Ist century B.C.;

rectangular stamp; amphorae. tion);

7 cm;

R. Vulpe, Mat, VI,

R. Vulpe, Mat, VII, [1961],

the stamp occurs on the local

-24 -28.

Bowls (two free of decora-

the 2nd-the Ist century B.C.;

MMJ3 (i nv. 15662,

15667, 17883, 17884, 72737);

Information M. Turcu.

the 2nd-the Ist century B.C.;

the years 1954-1959;

and collaborators, SCIV, VI, 1-2, 1955, 15/3-8;

R. Vulpe, Mat, III, 1957,

p.

fig. 9/2-3;

VI, 1959,

-31. B.C.;

MNA;

Bowl;

B.C.;

321;

349 and

p.

VII, [1961],

459 and fig. 2.

-30

the 2nd-the Ist century pp.

342-343, 345-346 and

Information Al. Vulpe ; -33 -35. -36 -39.

Moulds (P1. 37,

M1VB (i nv. 2213/957, 15693, 15698; Moulds:

the years: 1955, 1956, 1957;

p. 232 and fig. 13/3;

R. Vulpe

the middle of the 2nd-the Ist century B.C.;

the 2nd-the Ist century B.C.;

Information M. Turcu.

MNA;

V, 1959,

p.

p.

Al. Vulpe, SCIV, 16, 1965,

-32.

in tumulus II; 51);

VIII, 1962,

Bowls with anthropomorphic designs;

fig. 1, 2.

Bowls;

231-232 and fig. 12, 14/1 (the

313 and fig. 10/1-6,

p.

-29.

249, 259 and fig. 14/1-2,

p.

imitation of Dacian coin reverse type Philip II); pp. 329, 331-332 and fig. 7/1;

0 on one

Fragmentary storage-jar with

observation:

Bowls and moulds:

height

Storage-jars (letter

the year 1956;

-23.

the 2nd

M. Turcu, Bucureti, VII,

the ist century B.C.;

pp. 334-335 and fig. 8/7;

"Plug"; R. Vulpe, Mat,

Analogue to no. 16;

MMB;

-18 -22.

310 and fig. 1, 5.

p.

-16.

the 2nd-the Ist century

MNA;

R. Vulpe, Mat, III, 1957,

V, 1959, p. 342 and fig. 9/1;

VII, [1961], p.

329 and fig. 9/2 (the last from the first half of the Ist century B.C.). Imitations of metal pieces: -40. Candelabrum with three sticks; probably three perforations for hanging the candelabrum were around the orifice for oil (P1. 50); the year 1955; and fig. 18;

height: 8.1 cm;

MNA (i nv. I 6048);

observation:

the Ist century B.C.;

R. Vulpe, Mat, III, 1957,

imitation of bronze trilychnos.

233

p.

-41.

"Fragments of Getic vessel with relief decoration composed of aquatic birds and of stylized human figures"; the ist century B.C.; 1963; MNA; D. Popescu, SCIV, XV, 1964, p. 558, no. 54; observation:

probably imitation of silver vessel.

the first half of the Ist century B.C.; Popescu, SCIV, XIV, 1963, observation:

V. Ursachi.

the year 1970; -b.

Of red paste;

Fragmentary bowls;

the

24. -a.

Information V. Cäpitanu

height: 11.7 cm;

the year 1968;

-

the Ist century

V. Câpitanu and V. -C.

.cit., fig. 21 below

188

p.

Pitchers and jugs:

Jug with conical neck

the Ist century A.D. (cf. E. B6nis, p1. XXVI/3);

Cäpitanu and V. Ursachi,

1-31,

the Ist century B.C.-the Ist

M. Bacu;

Ursachi, Carpica, II, 1969, fig. 21 above. and body;

Observation:

Fl. Preda, AnUnivB, XV, 1966,

Fragmentary painted with red lines;

B.C. -the lst century A.D.;

D.

32 Dacian necropolis.

Räcãtãu (on the map no. 37), district Bcäu. century A.D.;

Nymph's head;

MNA;

Information Al. Vulpe;

Radovanu (on the map no. 36), district Ilfov. 2nd-the ist century B.C..;

43.

456, no. 52;

analogous piece at Bucharest, 129.

33-42, Dacian settlement; 42.

p.

-42.

the year 1962;

the year

V.

Kantharoi:

-d. Handles with horizontal bars;

the year 1971;

M. Bacu;

the ist century B.C.;

Information V. Cpifnnu and V. Ursachi,

-e -f. With pedestal (Pl. 49); height: 9.7 cm; the ist century B.C.the Ist century A.D.; the year 1968; M. Bac.u; V. C pitanu and V. Ursachi, ct., fig. 25. -g -i. Fragmentary; the first half of the Ist century A.D. (cf. H. S. Robinson, p. 30, G79 and p1. 4); the year 1968; M. Back; V. Cpitanu and V. Ursachi, .ct., fig. 29 right above and information. -j. Grey with glossy decoration (Pl. 30);

height: 6.9 cm;

Robinson,

p.

the middle of the Ist century A.D. (cf. H. S.

84, M 2 and p1. 18, 70);

the year 1968;

M. Bacu;

V. Câpitanu and V. Ursachi, .ct., fig. 26 below; -k -1. Grey; the ist century A.D.; the year 1968; M. Bacu; V. Cpithnu and V. Ursachi, E.ct., fig. 26 above, 29 above left. -rn. Candlestick with three prominences on the upper part (Pl. 50); height: 11.5 cm;

the Ist century B.C. -the Ist century A.D. (distant Rnilogue

in H. A. Thompson, p. 340, B27 and fig. 20); the year 1968; M. Bacu; V. Cpitanu, I l l i ri 9i daci, C1uj-Bucureti, 1972, p. 172, D1 4 1. Other categories: -n. Vessel with tube (Pl. 50) diameter: 15.5 cm;

the ist century A D. (cf. B. Heukeme s,

6/95-99);

the year 1968;

.

M. Back;

p.

V. Cpitanu,

36 and p1. .cit., p.172,

D139. -o. Fragmentary vessel with pedestal (P1. 50); height: 8.8 cm; the ist century A D. (H. Dragendorff, BonnJahrb, XCVI .

XCVII, 1895, pp. 126-172, form 30);

the year 1970;

-

M. Bacu;

V. Cäpitanu, p.171, D137 . Similar fragments to the above; the same references; -r. Fragmentary vessel with tube, -.

painted in brown; the ist century B.C -the Ist century A.D.; the year 1970; M. Back; Information V. C.pitanu and V. Ursachi. Imitations of bronze form: -s. Vessel with three feet (on the map no. 43); (Pl. 50); height: 25.5 cm; the ist century A.D.; M. Bacu; .

V. Cpitanu,

.cit.,

of bronze situla.

p.

172, D140 . Observation: probably imitation

Observation: (a-s);

Dacian settlement; the pieces

are more numerous. 44.

Rotbav (on the map no. 43), district Braov. Chytra hand-made; height: 13 cm; the ist century B.C. (?); M. Braov (i nv. 5315); I. H. Cri,an, Ceramica, p1. LXIV/4 (v. and

p.

312).

45.

Sceti, district Dolj.

46.

B.C.; M. Craiova; information M. Vechilu. Sftntu Gheorghe (on the map no. 39) district Covasna. Patera, handmade; the ist century A.D. (?); M. Sf. Gheorghe; I. H. Crian, Ceramica,

47.

pp.

Grey bowl (P1. 31); height 7.4 cm; 2nd century

192-193 and p1. CLXXII/3.

Sibiu (on the map no. 40), district Sibiu "Gusteria". -a. Grey dish; height: 10.7 cm; the ist century B.C.; M. Cluj (inv. IN 2966); M. Rusu, SCCluj, VI, 3-4, 1955, p. 80, fig. 9. observation: imitation of Roman form (?); -b. Grey lid; height: 11.4 cm; the ist century A.D. (cf. E. B6nis, p. 56 and p1. )XXH/I); M. Cluj (inv. IN 2966); I. H. Crian, E.ct., pp. 183-184, 264-265 no. 145 and pl. LXXX[hI/ 6. "Fintina. Rece"; -e. Fragmentary bowl with geometrical decoration;

the 2nd-the Ist century B .C.;

189

the year 1971;

M. Sibiu.

48.

Sighioara (on the map no. 41), district Mure. Grey dish;

height 10.4 cm;

(inv. A5904); 5.6 cm;

the Ist century A.D. (?);

I. H. Crian, Ceramica,

p1. LXXXIT/1.

-b.

"Wietenberg";

pp.

-a.

M. Sibiu

182, 273 no. 266 a and

Plate with glossy decoration (P1. 27);

height:

the ist century A D. (cf. H. Dragendorff, BonnJahrb, .

XCVI-XCSTII, 1895,

p.

I. H. Crian, op.cit.,

87, form 21);

M. Sighioara (inv. I 217);

182 and p1. LXXXrE/5.

p.

Jugs:

mentary, decorated with gloss patterns (P1. 28, 49); B.0 C -the ist century A. D. M Sighioara (inv. I 212); .

-c. Frag-

the Ist century I. H. C rian,

.

2.cit., pp. 172, 273, no. 266a and pl. LXIII/4, CLVIII/5.

-d.

Lagynos fragmentary, with brown-yellow slip, painted with brown lines (P1. 28);

the Ist century B.C.;

tion Gh. Moldovan.

M. Sighioara (inv. I 228);

Jug with "funnel" neck;

-j.

the Ist century A.D. (cl. I. D. Marcenko, 57, 1956, fig.

4 /8 )-

aHaropisi,

M. Sighioara (inv. I 5I);

pp. 172, 273 no. 266a.

-e.

Grey kantharos;

M. Sighioara (i nv. I 216);

height: 9.5 cm;

Cup with two handles, painted with brown lines; M. Sighioara (inv. I 232);

Other categories:

Information Gh. Moldovan.

(inv. i 215);

-11.

-i.

height: 9.6 and 7.4 cm;

M.

"Plug"; height: 8 cm; I. H. Crian,

183-184, 273 no. 266a and pl. LXXXIH/1.

-j, -k.

one of them free of decoration;

Bowls:

the

a.cit., iP•

Cups with

the Ist century A.D.;

192, 273 no. 266a and pl. XCl/4, 6. -

Grey situla;

I. H. Crian, Ceramica, pp.

ist century B.C.-the Ist century A.D.;

Bowls (Pl. 37)

27, G43 and

M. Sighioara (i nv. I 235); I. H. Crian,

187, 273 no. 266a and p1. XLIX/3.

pp.

p.

the ist centuryB.C. -the ist century A.D.;

Sighioara (i nv. I 215);

op.cit.,

-f.

height: 10.2 cm; the

Dacia, N. S. X, 1966, pp. 337-338 and fig. 6/2.

patterns;

the

30, G80 and

Fragmentary rhyton painted in brown (Pl. 31);

-.

the Ist century B.C. (?); height: 23.2 cm;

p.

Information Gh. Moldovan.

first half of the iat century A. D. (cf. H. S. Robinson, pl. 4);

MIA,

‚

I. H. Crian, 2P.cit.,

first half of the ist century A.D. (cf. H. S. Robinson, p1. 4);

Informa-

height: 11.5 cm;

glossy

I. H. Crian, -1-t.

the 2nd-the Ist century

B.C. ; M. Sighioara (inv. 1135, 162, 179, 191, 231, 233, 234); Casan-Franga (5 ex. )inArhMold, V, 1967, (8 ex.), Ceramica, 1-4.

p.

139 and pl. XL/1,

Observation (a-t);

I.

p. 2ø and l. H. Crian

3-4, 6-9, CLXX/5-6, CXXI/

Dacian settlement;

b,

c,

d, design after

I. H. Crian. 49.

Sultana, district Ilfov. -a.

Grey oinocho

(Pl. 49); height: 13.5 cm; in

assemblage from the 2nd century B.C.; the year 1965; M. Oltenita; Information B. Tonescu. -b. Bowl- the 2nd-the Ist century B.C.; B. Mitrea, Mat, WI, [1961], p.538 and fig. 6. Observation: Dacian settlemeni. 50.

imian, district Mehedinti, "Ostrovul simian". Ist century B.C.; Al. Tr. Severin (inv. 11865); 1953,

51.

P.

Bowl- the 2nd-the D. Berciu, Mat, I,

646.

imleu1 Silvaniei, district Sälaj.

Jug with raised handle;

height: 13.4

cm; Ist century B C. -Ist century A. D.; ARC; Dacian settlement; .

I. H. Crian, Ceramica, p.172, 276 no. 299 and pl. Lxv/1.

190

52.

Tilica (on the map no. 44), district Sibiu. lekythos (P1. 49);

"Cääna".

Fragmentary

the end of the 1st century B. C. -the beginning of the

ist century A.D. (cf. M. Bucova1, Necropole elenistice la Tomis, 1967, 53.

p.

73, a);

M. Sibiu;

Dacian settlement:

Tirnioara (on the map no. 45), district Timis. and glossed decoration;

height: 26 cm;

M. Timioara (i nv. 2292); 309 band p1. XCVI/2: 54.

Information N. Lupu. Vessel with two handles

the Ist century A.D. (?);

I. H. Crian, Ceramica,

observation:

p.

196, 277 no.

imitation of Roman form (?).

Tinosu (on the map no. 46), district Prahova.

-a.

Fragmentary vessel

painted with brown lines; the Ist century .A.D.; the year 1924; MNA (inv. 116621); Information Al. Vulpe. Dishes: -b -e. Fragmentary; the Ist century B.C.-the ist century A.D.;

R. Vulpe and Ec. Vulpe,

Dacia, I, 1924, p. 206 and fig. 29/13, 29, 31/ 5, 15. -.

Fragmentary;

Robinson,

p.

84, M2, M3 and pl. 18, 70);

116685, 116785);

Kantharoi: .-f

the middle of the Ist century A.D. (cf. H. S. the year 1924;

MNA (i nv.

R. Vulpe and Ec. Vulpe, op.cit., p.200.

Other

categories: -h -j. Fragmentary vessels; the Ist century B.C.-the Ist century A.D.; the year 1922; R. Vulpe and Ec. Vulpe, .cit.,

P.

20 3 and

fig. 31/9 ,33/4;

the ist century A.D.;

-k.

cit., P. 182 and fig. 31 /8 . -1. A.D. (cf. E. Bónis,

p.

Fragmentary lid;

1957;

M. PiatraNeani;

R. Vulpe

Observation:

Tlrgu Ocna, district Bacu (on the map no. 47) "Titelca".

p. 378. -b. 'Pottery"; Information N. Gostar.

-

the Ist century

the year 1922;

p.203 and fig. 31/5;

kantharos (P1. 49); height: 6.8 cm;

56.

the ist century B.C.

R. Vulpe and Ec. Vulpe, op.

56 and p1. XXII/i);

and Ec. Vulpe, settlement, (a -i). 55.

Bird's head;

the year 1922;

Dacian

-a.

Grey

the ist century A.D. - the year

A. Niu and M. Zamosjeanu, Mat, VI, 1959, the ist century B.C.-the ist century A.D.;

T?rgu Secuiesc, district Covasna.

-a. Grey situla;

height: 26 cm;

the Ist century B.C.-the ist century A.D.; M. Sf. Gheorghe (i nv. 1882/845); I. H. Crian, Ceramica, p. 187, 277 no. 312 and Pl. XCIX/4.

-b.

Grey saucer;

(cf. E. Bonis, p1. XIII/6);

height: 28 cm;

the Ist century A.D.

M. Sf. Gheorghe (inv. 1882/845);

Crian, Ceramica, p.189, 277 no. 312 and pl. Cl/4. (a-b): Dacian settlement. 57.

Turnu Severin, district MehedinJi. ist century B.C.; I, 1953, p. 644.

58.

Observation

Fragmentary bowl, the 2nd-the

M. Turnu Severin (inv. 11664);

Tigmandru, district Mure.

Two bowls:

D. Berciu, Mat,

one decorated with geometrical

patterns, and another with geometrical and vegetable patterns; 2nd-the ist centuryB.C.; 1967, p. 20; CLXX/I-4. 59.

B.C.;

Rep, ms;

I. H. Crian, Ceramica,

Vasilaji, district Ilfov.

the

I. Casan-Franga, ArhMold, V, p.

139 and fig. XL/2,5,

Fragmentary bowls;

the 2nd-the ist century

I. Casan-Franga, ArhMold, V, 1967, p. 19.

191

I. H.

60.

Vrd, district Sibiu.

-a.

Grey saucer;

centuryA.D. (cf. E. Bis, p1. VIII/8); I. H. Crian, Ceramica,

P.

height: 18.5 cm;

the ist

M. Sibiu(inv. 14855a);

189, 278 no. 327 and p1. XCIX/5.

-b.

Lid, the same references as a, but i nv. 14855 b-c. "Stamped sherds"; Rep, ms, observation: 61.

(a-c):

Dacian settlement.

Zimnicea (on the map no. 52), district Teleorman. the2nd century-the Ist century B.C.; I, 1950, p. 98.

-a. "Craters";

the year 1949;

I. Nestor, SCIV,

-b. Vessel decorateL. with two rows of rosettes and

with a relief-horseman facing right; Crian, Ceramica,

p.

the Ist century B.C. (?);

209 and fig. 115.

I. Casan-Franga, ArhMold, V, 1967,

P.

-c. 19.

I. H.

Fragmentary bowls; Observation (a-c):

Dacian settlement. 62.

Oltenia.

Grey pitcher with raised handle (Pl. 28);

height: 9.3 cm;

the 2nd century B.C. (cf. M. Bucoval, Necropole elenistice la Tomis, 1967,

p.

64, d);

M. Caracal;

192

Information

t. Chiu.

CATALOGUE OF IMPORTED VESSELS AND OBJECTS OF BRONZE

We have paid attention only to the vessels and objects of bronze whose types are dated before the Roman conquest of Dacia and those whose dating goes beyond the limit of the Ist century A.D., but have been discovered in Dacian settlements which come to an end during Trajants wars;

for this

reason there are sometimes some small discrepancies between the chronology mentioned in the text of the catalogue and that existing in the work or works indicated for references. The pieces have been listed on the basis of the following works: M. P. H. Boesterd, The bronze vessels in the Rijksmuseum G. M. Kam at Nijmegen, [Nijmegen], 1956. C. C. Edgar, Greek bronzes, LeCaire, 1904. H. J. Eggers, Der römische Import im freien Germanien, 1951. Idem, Zur absoluten Chronologie der römischen Kaiserzeit im freien Germanien, inJahrbMainz, 2, 1955,

pp.

196-244.

Idem, Römische Bronzegeffisse in Britannien, in JahrbMainz, 13, 1966, pp. 67-164. V. V. Kropotkin, Rimskie importnie izdeliya v vostocinoi Evrope (H v. do n.e.n.

-

V v.n.e.), Moskva, 1970.

H. Ktfthman.n, Beitrige zur spithel1enistischen und frtfhrömischen Toreutik, 1959. K. Majewski, Importy rzymskie w Poisce, Warszawa-Wroclaw, 1960. H. Menzel, Die römischen Bronzen aus Deutschland, Mainz, I, 1960; II, 1966. N. A. Onaiko, Anticinii import v Pridneprov'e iPobuj 'e v IV -il vv. do n.e., Moskva, 1970. V. Ondrouch, Bohaté hroby z doby rlmskej na Slovensku, Bratislava, 1957. A. Radnoti, Die römischen Bronzegefsse von Pannonien, in DissPann, Ser. II, no. 6, Budapest, 1938. S. Reinach, Bronzes figures de la Gaulle romaine.

Musse Saint-Germain-en-

Laye, Paris, 1894. A. deRidder, Les bronzes antiques duMuse du Louvre, Paris, 1913. H. Rolland, Bronzes antiques de Haute Provence (Basses -Alpes, Vaucluse), in Gallia, Suppl. XVIII, 1965. P. I. Rtls, The Danish bronze vessels of Greek, Early Campanian and Etruscan manufacture, in Acta Archaeologica, XXX, KØbenhavn, 1959, pp. 1-50. 193

T. Schreiber, Die alexandrinische Toreutik (Untersuchungen ttber die griechische Goldschmiedekunst in PtolemaE!erreiche, I. Theil), Abhandlungen der philologisch-historischen Classe der Ktlnigl. Sttchsischen Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften, 14, Leipzig, 1894. The list does not include all the Museum catalogues which have been consulted and smaller studies scattered in different specialist publications. To simplify the text and to save space for the chronology of bronze vessels, we make re­ ferences only to H. J. E ggers (Der rtlmische Import ..••), which remains the basic work for Roman bronze pieces. We have made references also to other authors only when there are no perfect parallels in the above-mentioned work. 1.

Barbo�i, district Gala}i "Tirighina". Vessels and objects of bronze, fragmentary; Dacian settlement; N . Go sta t, C etáti, p. 34 .

2.

Berghin, district Alba. Joint with dolphins, belonging to a situla; the 1st century B.C.-50 B.C. (cf. Eggers, type 18, pp. 160-161, pl. 4); Roman product: M. Sibiu (inv. A.6185); Information I. Paul.

3.

Birlále§ti, district Vaslui. Situla (Pl. 52); height: 19.4 cm; the 1st century B.C. (cf. Eggers, type 20, p. 161 and pl. 4); Roman product; MuzlstMold; Information �. Sanie.

4.

Bra�;ov, district Bra§OV. "Pietrele lui Solomon". Fragmenta of the lip of saucer decorated with ovolos; the first hall of the 1st century A.D. (cf. Eggers, type 92, p. 168 and pl. 9); Roman product; M. Brasov (inv. 1544, 1728, 1542, 2513, 2576); Dacian settlement; Information Fl. Costea.

5.

Bucure§ti. -�- "C�.j;elu Nou". Fragmentary handle of saucer; three prominences in the centre; the 2nd-the 1st century B.C.; Hellenistic product; Dacian settlement; V. Leahu, CAB, [1963], p. 32 and fig. 21/5. -�. "Herastrau". Fragm.entary situla; the first hall of the 1st century B.C.; D. Popescu, Dacia, XI-XII, 1945-47, pp. 38, 51; Observation: silver ornaments and 58 imitations of Thasian tetra­ drachms in the vessel.

6.

Calára�i, district IalomiF· "Grádi§tea Borcii"; "object of bronze" the 2nd century B.C. (?); Dacian settlement; R. Vládescu-Vulpe, BCMI, XVII, 1924, p. 86.

7.

Cap1lna, district Alba. "Gargalau". -�. Handle of situla; the 1st century B.C.-the 1st century A.D.; the year 1966; MIC; -�. Fragmentary joint (Pl. 52); the 1st century B.C.-the 1st century A.D.; the year 1966; MIC. -�- Fragmentary colander; the first half of the 1st century A.D.; -i· Rhyton ( ?) and "tubes" of bronze; the 1st century B.C.-the 1st century A.D.; M. Macrea and l. Berciu, Dacia, N.S., IX, 1965, p. 228; Observation (a-d): Dacian settlement.

8.

Cerbál, district Hunedoara. "Dosul P1rlit". Oinochot! (only the handle) (Pl. 39); the 1st century B.C.-�. 45 B.C. (cf. Radnóti, p. 147 and pl. 49/1, 1a, later dating); ms., V. Parvan, Getica,

ª�•

194

p. 618 and fig. 200.

Observation:

it contained Dacian ornaments and

491 Roman republican denarii (the last from 45 B.C.). 9.

Cetea, district Alba. Ist century A.D.;

-a.

MNA;

Little handle; Rep, ms.

saucer decorated with ovolos; Eggers, type 92, 2634); 10.

Information L. Chiu.

Saucers:

Eggers, type 91, product:

-1.

Roman product;

Joint (Pl. 51);

IVEIC (inv. IN 368);

the ist century B.C. (cf.

height: 4.2 cm;

length 4 cm;

Campanian

I. Glodariu, Apulum, WI/I, 1968, p.

355, no. 5 and pl. 1/7, 111/7 (with bibliography). (Pl. 51);

M. Aiud (inv.

Dacian settlement.

"Citadel" (the numeration with Arabic

168 and pl. 9);

p.

Fragment of the lip of

Observation:

Costeti, district Hunedoara. numbers).

-b.

the first half of the ist century A.D. (cf.

168 and pl. 9);

p.

the Ist century B.C. -the

the ist century B.C.

-

-2. Loose handle

the first half of the

Ist century A.D. (cf. Eggers, type 91 and 92, p. 168 and pl. 9); Roman product:

MIC.

-3.

Joint (Pl. 38, 51);

height:

3.1 cm:

the first half of the Ist century B.C. (cf. Eggers, type 92, and pl. 9); 5.5 cm;

Roman product;

-4.

MIC (i nv. IN 396);

no. 8 and pl. 1/8; height:

7.25 cm;

I. Glodariu, 2j.cit., casserole (Pl. 52);

I. Glodariu,

length 10.3 cm;

p.

356

Fixed handle (cf. Eggers, type

MIC (i nv. IN 372);

356 and p1. 1/3, 111/3.

p.

op.cit.,

-5.

the Ist century A.D.

Roman product:

-6.

Handle of

the ist century A.D. (cf.

Eggers, type 143, pp. 172-173 and pl. 12); 5itu1ae:

(cf. Eggers, loc.cit.);

111/8 (with bibliography).

100, p. 169 and p1. 10);

168

p.

Joint-palmette, length

the first half of the ist century A.D.

Roman product; (p1. 51);

MIC.

Roman product;

MIC.

-7. Joint in the shape of a heart with pin and hooks (Pl. 38);

height: 9.2 cm;

the end of the 2nd century-the beginning of the ist

century B.C., possibly only the end of the 2nd century B.C. (cf. Ktithmann, the

pp.

32-33);

MIC.

-8.

Intact, handle of iron (Pl. 52);

Ist century B.C. (of. Eggers, type 22, p. 161 and p1. 4);

Campanian product; Pl.

1/10, 111/10.

MIC;

I. Glodariu,

-9.Fragmentary;

p. 355, no. I and

the ist century B.C. (cf.

Eggers, loc.cit.), Campanian product; MIC; I, Glodariu, 2p.cit., p. 355, no. 2. -10. Fragmentary, with iron handle (Pl. 52); height: 20.2 cm (of. Eggers, type 38, product;

MIC (inv. IN 664);

163 and pl. 5);

p.

I. Glodariu,

p1. 1/11, rn/il (with bibliography).

Roman

P. 355, no. 3 and

-Il.

Fragmentary handle with

swan-heads (Pl. 52) (cf. S. Reinach, Bronzes figure's de la Gaulle romaine, Musée Saint- Ge rmain-en- Laye, Paris, 1894, 432);

MIC (i nv. IN 375);

pl. I/I, 111/1.

-12.

I. Glodariu,

.cit.,

p.

p.

335, no.

356, no. 12 and

Fragmentary handle with swan-heads (Pl. 52);

(cf. H. Holland, Bronzes antiques de Haute Provence (Basses -Alpes, Vaucluse), in Gallia, Suppi. XVIII, 1965, no. 296; .cit., 52); MIC.

p.

MIC. -15.

product(?);

356, no. 13 and p1. 1/2, 111/2.

I. Glodariu,

Handle of situla (Pl.

-14. Fragmentary handle with swan-heads (P1. 52); Joint with dolphins (P1. 52); MIC (i nv. 374);

and p1. 1/4, 111/4. product (?);

-13.

MIC;

I. Glodariu,

-16. Joint (Pl. 52);

MIC (inv. 373);

19

width: 9 cm;

Roman

.cit., p.356, no. 10

width: 9.1 cm;

I. Glodariu, 2.cit.,

p.

Roman 356, no. Ii

and p1. 1/5, 11/5.

-17.

Joint (P1. 52);

product (?) MIC.

-18.

Handle of pitcher (P1. 52);

width: 9.2 cm;

the Ist century A.D. (cf. Eggers, type 125, Roman product;

MIC (inv. IN 367);

no. 7 and p1. 11/8-9, IV/8-10. height: 10.5 cm;

ARC;

-21.

mask;

width:

product;

MC.

-25.

356,

p.

MIC.

-20.

-19.

Appliqué (?) (P1. 53);

I. Glodariu, 2E.cit., p. 356, no. 14 and p1.

4.4 cm;

MIC.

.cit.,

Other categories or uncertain:

Bottom of vessel;

appliqué (?) (Pl. 53);

171 and p1. II);

p.

I. Glodariu,

Piece of candelabrum (?) (Pl. 53); 11/7, IV/5.

Roman

height: 11.7 cm;

-23.

MIC.

MIC.

-22.

Fragmentary

Handle at the end with a human

-24.

Lip of saucer (?);

Roman

Fragments (14 pieces) of vessels;

MIC (inv.

IN 393, 394, 397, 404-407, 8030, 8048, 8130, 8148, 8176, 8189, 8340);

I. Glodariu,

statuette (?); of vessels;

.Eft.,

MIC (inv. IN 8195).

53);

-26.

-27 -31.

I. Glodariu,

Information H. Daicoviciu (31).

Fragments (lips, handles)

height: 13.1 cm;

.cit.,

-32.

pp.

MIC (inv. 356-357, no.

Handle of crater (Pl.

the ist century A.D. (cf. M. L. Barre,

Herculanum et Pompei, VII, Paris, 1840,

pp.

165-166, pl. 84;

Mau, Pompeji in Leben und Kunst, Leipzig, 1900, 208;

Fragmentary

the Ist century B.C.-the Ist century A.D.;

IN 306, 363, 364, 370, 386); 15-18;

357, no. 19.

p.

A.

373 and fig.

p.

R. Pernice, Bronzen aus Boscoreale, inArhAnz, 1900, pp.

177, 182-184 and fig. 8-9); p1. 1/6, m/6.

-33.

height: 9.2 cm;

I. Glodariu, 2j.cit.,

355, no. 6 and

p.

Vessel (it was used with tongs

P1. 53);

-

the Ist century A.D. (cf. R. Mé'nard and Cl.

Sanvageot, Vie prive des anciens, III, Paris,

192-193, fig. 237

pp.

and analogous pieces at Pompeii in Mus. Arch. Naz. (room XCIII) Napoli;

Campanian product:

no. 4 and pl. 1/9, 111/9.

MIR;

-34.

I. Glodariu, op.cit.,

Small bell (P1. 53);

p.

-

355,

the ist century

A.D. (cf. R. Forrer, Das rtSmische Strassburg-Argentorate, Band II, Strasbourg, Daicoviciu.

p.

498 and fig. 367 right);

Observation:

fragments are recorded; the Ist centuryA.D.; patina; 11.

loose handle (Pl. 51); 6.1 cm;

MIC;

Information H.

Dacian citadel;

2.

Not all

nos. 10-17, 19-31 the Ist century B.C.;

3.

nos. 1-6, 10-18, 20-21, 23-34, green

the pieces without references, information H. Daicoviciu.

Craiva, district Alba. width;

(-1-34.):

"Piatra Craivii".

Roman product;

with angular body;

-b.

Joint and

Joint-palmette (Pl. 51);

height:

the first half of the Ist century A.D. (cf.

168 and pl. 9).

p.

-a.

the superior part of the joint is 6.7 cm in

the 2nd century B.C.;

Eggers, type 92,

Saucers:

Roman product;

Casseroles:

-c.

Fragment

the end of the 2nd century B.C.

the first half of the ist century B.C. (cf. Radn6ti, pp. 11-12 and p1. I/I, XVIII/1). Situlae:

-f.

-d.

Fragment;

-e.

Fragmentary colander.

Fragmentary handle (Pl. 52);

width: 5.1 cm;

the end

of the 2nd century B.C.-the Ist century B.C. (cf. a similar piece at Popeti).

-.

Joint (Pl. 52);

width: 11.3 cm;

-h.

Handle;

Al. Popa and H. Daicoviciu, Celticum, XII, 1965, fig. 32 A/3. Handle (Pl. 52);

I. Berciu, Al. Popa and H. Daicoviciu, op.cit.,

p. 142 and fig. 24/5. 8.9 cm.

-i.

-i.

Observation:

Handle with swan-heads;

Fragmentary joint (Pl. 53);

height:

copper-rivetted on the upper part. Roman product. 196

-1.

-k.

Joint with dolphins

-

(P1. 52);

height: 11.8 cm;

the ist century B.C. -the first half of the

ist century A.D. (cf. Eggers, type 18, pp. 160-161 and p1. 4); product.

-jj.

Fragments of joint.

mentary joint (?) (Pl. 53); B.C.;

-n.

Other categories:

-o.

the end of the 2nd century B.C.

Bronze piece (Pl. 53);

-

height: 3.8 cm;

the end of the 2nd century B.C.-the Ist century A.D.; candelabrum (Pl. 53);

Frag-

the end of the 2nd century-the ist century

Handle with circular ribs;

the Ist century A.D.

-rn.

Roman

-p.

Chain of

the end of the 2nd century B C. -the 1st century .

B.C.; -r. Joint (?) (P1. 53); the Ist century B.C. (?). -s. Fragmentary handle (?); width 13 cm; -t. Fragmentary handle (?). -t.

Tube (P1. 53);

Tilica.

-u.

width 7.3 cm;

Piece of lamp (?).

preserved height: 16.5 cm; Observation:

similar pieces at

(a-v):

-v.

Popeti and

Pedestal of statuette (Pl. 53);

the Ist century B.C. (?);

Dacian citadel;

century B.C. -the Ist century A.D.;

nos. d-e, g-k, M. Alba Julia;

Roman product.

ii,

t-u, the ist

all pieces without

references, information Al. Popa. 12.

Crsani, district Ialomia. height: 9.1 cm;

-a.

Candelabrum with three legs (P1. 40);

the end of the 2nd-the Ist century B.C. (cf. D. Ivnyi,

Die pannonischen Lampen, DissPann, Ser. 2, no. 2, Budapest, 1935, p1. LXIII/5); the year 1923, MNA (i nv. I 2000); I. Andriesescu, Piscul Crásani, 1924, pp. 32, 85-87 and fig. 277 a-e.

-b. Head of statuette,

the end of the 2nd century-the Ist century B.C. J. Andrieescu, 2.cit., pp. 88-89 and fig. 286. Observation: (a-b); Dacian settlement 13.

Cristian, district Braov. (with handle): 17 cm;

Little pitcher with spout (Pl. 52);

height

the first half of the Ist century A.D., possibly

whole of ist century A.D. (analogous pieces at Pompei in MusArchNaz (rooms XCII-XCIII) 1969);

-

Naples;

Campanian product;

I. H. Cri9an, Ceramica,

the 3rd century B.C.);

p.

M. Braov (i nv.

136 and fig. 61 (it is dated from

Observation:

the handle is lost, but it is res-

tored in p1. XLV after a plaster-cast from M. Sibiu (i nv. A 6128).

14. 15.

Dalnic, district Covasna. Rep, ms.

Lamp (?);

Dipa, district Bistrija-Nâsud.

La Tene Age;

-a.

Dacian settlement;

Fragmentary casserole (Pl. 38);

preserved height: 8.5 cm; the first half of the Ist century A.D. (cf. Eggers, type 140, p. 172 and pl. 12); I. Glodariu 2/1.

-b.

-

Campanian product;

M. Bistria;

t. D5nil, Marmaia, II, 1971, pp. 94-95 and fig. i/i,

Pitcher, handle is lost (Pl. 39); height: 29.4 cm;

the ist

century A.D. (cf. H. J. Eggers, p. 106, no. 39 c, is dated according to the pitcher type 125; 289 a); cit.,

P.

Boesterd,

Roman product;

P.

82, no. 289 and pl. XVII (289,

M. Bistria;

94 and fig. 1/3, 2/2.

-C.

I. Glodariu St. D5nil5, opSaucer ( raised on tripod); (Pl. 38, 51); -

height: 9.3 cm; the ist century A.D. (in assemblage); M. Bistria; I. Glodariu t. Dänilä, .cit., the pieces in Museum-store. -

16.

p.

94 and fig.

Dun.reni (former Clrna) district Dolj. cone pitcher (Pl. 40);

height: 13.2 cm;

1 /2 , 2/3.

"Grindul Rostli".

Observation:

bitruncated

the first half of the ist century

B.C. (it contained a hoard of Roman Republican denarii dated according toSydenham, between 175/i68 and 55B.C. 197

For vessel, cf. C. C. Edgar,

Greek bronzes, LeCaire, 1904, p. 30, no. 27752); ment;

Gh. Popilian, Historica, I, 1970,

Dacian settle-

53-62 and information

pp.

Gh. Popilian. 17.

Geoagiu (?)‚ district Hunedoara. "objects of bronze";

1 km south-west of the village

Rep, ms. (with bibliography);

Observation:

in the vicinity of the castrum of Cigrnàu. 18.

Grditea Muncelului, district Hunedoara. Gräditii"; year 1952; handle:

Fragment of casserole; Roman product.

MIC.

DIODORI (Pl. 38);

Casseroles:

-a. "Dealul

the Ist century A.D.; -b.

"Fee1e Albe";

width 13.8 cm;

the

Stamped

height of letters: 0.3 cm;

the second half of the Ist century (cf. CIL X 8071, 27;

R. Mowat,

Marques de bronziers sur objets antiques trouvs ou apports en France, Vienne, 1884, excerpt, the year 1968;

MIC;

H. Daicoviciu and l. Glodariu, ActaMN, VI,

471-472 and fig. 11.

pp.

Eggers, type 142, P. 172);

Campanian product (Officina at Capua, v Boesterd, pp.

13-14, no. 37). 1969,

3, no. 2;

p.

-c.

"Valea Larg";

Fragmentary

pitcher with spout, profiled shoulder and conical body with pedestal; the handle is lost; (cf. Boesterd, categories:

preserved height: 25.5 cm; 65, no. 226 and p1. X);

p.

-d.

century A.D.;

"Dealul Grâditii";

the year 1952;

the Ist century A.D.

1VUC (IN 19686).

Other

Fragmentary vessel;

the ist

C. Daicoviciu and collaborators,

SCIV, IV, 1-2, 1953, p. 182.

Observation:

(a-d);

Dacian settlement;

a, c information H. Daicoviciu. 19.

Luncani, district Hunedoara. -a.

Loose handle;

"Piatra Roie".

Ist century B.C. (cf. Eggers, type 91, i an product;

MIC (inv. IN 4469);

p.

168 and p1. 9);

-b.

Iv/2.

-c.

Joint (Pl. 51);

the

Campan-

WI/I, 1968,

Lip with astragalos and ovolos;

the Ist century B.C. (cf. Eggers, loc. cit.); I. Glodariu,

2.35 cm;

I. Glodariu, Apulum

p. 357, no. 20 and pl. 11/3, IV/3. MIC (i nv. 4466);

Saucers and basins:

the opening at the extremities:

Campanian product;

E.cit., P. 357, no. 21 and p1. 11/2,

height: 4.7 cm;

the first half of the Ist

century B.C. (cf. Eggers, type 92, p. 168 and p1. 9);

Campanian

product;

357, no. 22

MIC (inv. IN 4467);

and p1. Il/i, IV/i.

-d.

I. Glodariu,

(cf. Eggers, type 93, p. 168 and pl. 9); IN 4478); Situlae:

I. Glodariu, -e.

.cit.,

p.

Fragmentary handle:

B.C. -the Ist century A.D.; I. Glodariu,

.cit.,

pedestal (Pl. 52);

p.

12.2 cm;

Roman product;

MIC (inv.

357, no. 23 and p1. 11/4, IV/4. width: 18.5 cm;

Roman product;

height: 5 cm;

Roman product;

p. 362, no. 27.

p.

the Ist century A.D.;

the Ist century

MIC (inv. IN 4531);

357, no. 25 and p1. 11/5, IV/6.

4.

Fretwork

the ist century A.D. (cf. Eggers,

type 27-30, pp. 161-162 and p1. IV; and p1. V);

.cit.,

Fragment of saucer;

Boesterd,

p.

MNA (inv. IV 410);

Other categories:

-.

39, no. 113-114 I. Glodariu, op.ct.,

Lamp (P1. 53);

length

the Ist century B.C.-the ist century A.D.; Roman product,

probably Campanian product; cit., pp. 357, 362. height: 5 cm;

-h.

MIC (i nv. IN 4473);

I. Glodariu, op

.

Candelabrum with three legs (pl. 53);

the Ist century B.C.-the ist century A.D. (cf. D.

Iványi, Die pannonischen Lampen, DissPann, sec. II, no. 2, Budapest,

198

1935, p1. LXIII/5);

MIC (inv. IN 4475);

pp. 114-117 and fig. 35-36). 15 cm;

-i.

C. Daicoviciu, Piatra Roie,

Lids with ribs (P1. 53);

and Cl. Sauvageot, Vie prive des anciens, VIII, Paris, 249);

Diameter:

the Ist century B.C. -the ist century A.D. (cf. R. Mnard Roman product;

MIC (i nv. IN 4477);

p. 357, no. 24 and pl. 11/6, IV/7.

-j.

Fragmentary vessels;

Ist century B.C. -the ist century A.D.; 4532, 4831,

4832).;

Dacian citadel;

the

MIC (i nv. 4530, 4557, a,

C. Daicoviciu, 22.cit.

VIII/7, XIV, XV/19, 20).

250, fig.

p.

I. Glodariu, op.cit.,

Observation:

,

pp. 93-95 and pl.

(a-j), all with green patina:

see also C. Daicoviciu,

.cit., pp. 87-88, 92-95;

C. Daicoviciu and collaborators, SCIV, I, 1, 1950, pp. 144, 146-147. 20.

Moigrad, district S1aj.

"Mág-ura".

-a -b.

the ist century B.C. -the ist century A.D.;

Fragmentary vessels; in Dacian graves;

M. Macrea and M. Rusu, Dacia, N. S., IV, 1960,

p.

214;

M. Macrea,

M. Rusu and l. Mitrofan, Mat, VIII, 1962, p. 488 and fig. 8/I. 21.

Ocnia, district Vllcea. Ist century A.D_;

22.

Bronze amphora;

the ist century B C -the .

.

Dacian settlement; Information Gh. Purcrescu.

Pecica, district Arad.

Saucers:

-a.

Joint, height: 4.3 cm;

the

ist century-the beginning of the 2nd century A.D. (dating according to the assemblage;

the type in Eggers, type 92,

Campanian product; no. 3.

-b.

MIC;

168 and pl. 9);

p.

I. H. Crian, ActaMN, VI, 1969, p. 97,

Joint of saucer (?) (Pl. 38);

height: 3.2 cm;

the ist

century-the beginning of the 2nd century A.D. (the same assemblage as -fl); Roman product; I. H. Crian, VII/4. Observation: Dacian settlement. 23.

Pescari (former Coronini),

P. 96, no. 2 and p1.

district Cara9-Severin.

pitcher with bitruncated cone body, vertical lip; height: 11.6 cm;

the handle is lost;

the 2nd-the Ist century B.C. (cf. V. V. Kropotkin,

p. 94, no. 808, fig. 57/3, 60/6); (inv. 1593);

Fragmentary

Italian product;

Information Fl. Mede1eJ;

M. Timioara

Observation:

it contained 178

drachmas of Dyrrhachium and Apollonia (Rep, ms.). 24.

Piatra Neam, district Neam. dolphins) of situla (P1. 52);

"Bitca Doamnei".

height: 12.4 cm;

-a.

Joint (with

the Ist century B.C.-

the first half of the Ist century A.D. (cf. Eggers, type 18, pp. 160161 and pl. 4, variant); Roman product; M. Piatra Neamj; Information S. Sanie. 11.9 cm;

-b.

Pitcher of gilt bronze (P1. 52);

the 2nd-the Ist century B.C. (cf. V. V. Kropotkin, P. 94,

no. 808, fig. 53/3, 60/6); 3194);

Italian product;

M. Zamo$eanu, Mat, VII, [19611,

Other categories:

-C.

M. Piatra Neam p.

Poiana, district Ga1aji.

-a.

(i nv.

339 and fig. 3/7.

Fragmentary vessels;

the Ist century A.D.; M. Piatra Neam; Observation: (a-c): Dacian citadel. 25.

height:

the Ist century B.C. -

Information S. Sante.

Palmette of the joint belonging to saucer;

the first half of the ist century A.D. (cf. Eggers, type 92, p. 168, and pl. 9);

J. Werner, AISC, 11, 1933-35, p. 166.

-b. Handle of casserole;

the first half of the ist century A.D. (cf. Eggers, type 140, p. 172 and pl. 12);

Roman product;

R. Vulpe and collaborators, SCIV, II, 1, 199

1951,

204 and fig. 23/8.

P.

-c.

Handle of patera;

the first half of

the ist century A.D. (cf. Eggers, type 154, p. 174 and p1. 13); Vulpe and Ec. Vulpe, Dacia, 1111-IV, 1927-32, -d.

Fragmentary handle;

R.

336 and fig. 112/11).

P.

theist century B C -theist century A. D.; .

.

MNA; R. Vulpe, SCIV, III, 1952, p. 202 and fig. 23/6; Observation: amphora ?. Other categories: -e. Lamp with crescent; theist century A. D. (cf. S. Loeschcke, Lampen aus Vindonissa, Zirich, 1919, type XVTII-XIX, pp. 453/265;

H. Menzel, Antike Lampen im

Rtmisch-germanischen Zentralmuseum zu Mainz, Mainz, 1954, P. 106, fig. 89/7;

analogous pieces at Pompeii, in MusArchNaz (room

XCIV) Naples; V. P.rvan, Getica, p. 717 and p1. XXI/2. -1. Handle; length: 16 cm; the Ist century B.C. -the ist century A. D. -

(?);

M. Tecuci;

sels;

Information Al. Vulpe.

y

.-i.

Fragmentary ves-

the ist century B.C. -the Ist century A.D.;

Vulpe,

R. Vulpe and Ec.

.cit., pp. 325, 336 and fig. 112/7-10, U.

Fragment-

-j.

ary lid (cf. form of lid in

C. C. Edgar, Greek bronzes, LeCaire,

1904,

Diameter: 5.5 cm;

p.

31, no. 27755);

the Ist century A. D.; fig. 113/34.

26.

-

-k.

the Ist century B.C.

R. Vulpe and Ec. Vulpe,

Bronze-sheet;

p. 337 and

the ist centuryA.D.;

Information S. Teodoru.

Observation:

Polovragi, district Gorj.

"Bronzes";

-

MuzlstMold;

(a-k): Dacian settlement. the Ist century B.C. (?);

Information Al. Vulpe. 27.

Popeti, district Arge. Ist century B.C.; 1955,

p.

256.

Situlae:

MNA;

-b.

-a-b.

Iron handle of situla;

the

R. Vulpe and collaborators, SCIV, VI, 1-2,

Fragmentary handle with swan-heads;

the ist

century B.C. (?) (cf. S. Reinach, Bronze figures de la Gaulle romaine. Musée Saint- Ge rmain-en- Laye

Paris, 1894,

MNA; R. Vulpe, Mat, VI, 1959,

p.

of another type;

the Ist century B.C.;

Joint with dolphins (Pl. XXXIII);

p.

335, no. 432);

314 and fig. 12/6.

-c.

MNA (i. I 6056).

height: 13.8 cm;

Similar but -d.

the ist century

B.C. -the first half of the ist century A. D. (cf. Eggers, type 18, pp. 160-161 and p1. 4);

Roman Product;

[1961], p. 333 and fig. 9/1.

MNA;

R. Vulpe, Mat, VII,

Pitchers or amphorae:

-e.

Handle

with vertical ridges and with arms ending in the shape of bird's heads (Pl. 39);

preserved height: 17.3 cm;

M1TB (inv. 14746).

Handle with vertical ridges and arms ending in the shape of bird's heads (Pl. 40, 52); height: 12.5 cm; the ist century B.C. (?) (cf. H. Rolland, Bronzes antiques de Haute-Provence (Basses Alpes, Vaucluse), in Gallia, Suppl. XVIII, 1965, 304);

MNA.

Other categories:

-g.

and collaborators, SCIV, VI, 1-2, 1955, -i.

Little handle;

-k. Joint; 4.8 cm;

-r.

height: 2.8 cm;

MNA.

11.7 cm; -0.

-rn.

142-143, no.

p.

256.

-h.

MNA.

MB (i nv. 14682).

R. Vulpe

"tray"ibid.

Small handle; height: 3.2 cm; MNA. -1. Bird's head (Pl. 54); height:

Cylinder with circular ribs (P1. 41);

Fragmentary joint; Lamp;

-j.

MNA.

pp.

"Handles of vessels";

-n.

MNA.

Fragmentary vessel;

-.

length:

MNA.

Fragmentary vessel;

MNA.

the handle is composed of two snakes with knotted tails

and the heads propped onto the body of the vessel; with lid (P1. 53);

length: 19 cm;

200

the hole for oil

the Ist century A.D.;

MNA.

-s.

Applique of handle (?)

Pl. 54;

-

the Ist century B.C.;

MNA (inv.

11917). R. Vulpe, Mat, VIII, 1962, P. 460 and fig. 3. Addenda. -t. Joint of saucer; the first half of the Ist century A.D. (cf. Eggers, type 92,

p.

168 and p1. 9);

Roman product;

D. Berciu, Apulum

X,

1972, pp. 661-668 and fig. I. Observation: (a-t): Dacian settlement; Not all fragments are registered; nos. e, g-p the end of the 2nd century-the Ist century B.C.; green patina (d, m, r, s); nos. a, -

c-d, 1, i-i, n-r, information Al. Vulpe, e, m, information M. Turcu. 28.

Poroschia, district Teleorman.

Vessel of

tcoppert?

with coins (12

Thasian tetradrachms); the middle of the 2nd century-the beginning of the ist century B.C.; I. Spiru, SCN, m, 1960, p. 553, no. 1. 29.

Rctu, district Bacu.

-a.

Cauldron (Pl. 38);

height: 19.5 cm;

the second half of the ist century B. C . -the first half of the ist century A.D. (dated according to the assemblage); Roman product; M. Back; Al. Vulpe and V. Cpitanu, Apulum IX, 1971, pp. 156, 161-162 and fig. 1-2. -b. Vessel (crater ? stamnos ?); P1. 40; diameter above; 38.7 cm; the ist century B. C . -the first half of the 1st century A.D. (cf. Eggers, type 95, pp. 168-169 and p1. 9); Roman product; M. Back; Al. Vulpe and V. C.pitanu, 2j.ct., pp. 156, 158, 162 and fig. I above. Observation: in a cremation grave. 30.

Sibiu, district Sibiu. Quarter Guteria. "Fundtur". -a. Saucer (Pl. 38); height: Ii cm; the first half of the Ist century A.D. (cf. Eggers, type 92, p. 168 and pl. 9); Roman product; M. Sibiu (inv. A 6236); K. Horedt, StComSibiu, 12, 1965, pp. 36-37, no. 2, fig. 1/2, /1-2, 3/2. Other categories: -b. Cauldron with the handles and the joints of iron (Pl. 38); height: 20.5 cm; the end of the Ist century B .C. (?);the first half of the Ist century A.D.; M. Sibiu (i nv. A 6237); K. Horedt, 22.cit., p. 36, no. 1, p. 43, fig. 1/3, 2/3, 3/3. -c. Massive handle; the same dating as a and b; K. Horedt, E.cit., P. 36. d. Observation: the joint and the handle of a or of another vessel?

Vessel of iron (Pl. 40); height: 15 cm

(without feet); the same date as above; M. Sibiu; K. Horedt, p. 37, no. 3, p. 43, fig. 1/1, 3/1; imported (?). Observation: (a_*) Dacian settlement; vessels in Museum store. 31.

§imleu Silvaniei, district Slaj. century A.D.; Rep, ms.

32.

Tilica, district Sibiu. "Cna". Situlae: -a. Intact, with trapezoidal joint; the Ist century B.C. (cf. Eggers, type 20, p. 161 and pl. 4);

Roman product.

Lid;

the Ist century B.C.-the ist

-b. Joint with dolphins (P1. 39); height:

11.2 cm; the ist century B.C.-the first half of the Ist century A.D. (cf. Eggers, type 18, pp. 160-161 and p1. 4); Roman product; -c. Fragmentary handle and a joint (P1. 39); the Ist century B.C.the Ist century A.D. (cf. for handle in S. Reinach, Bronzes figuresde la Gaulle romaine. Musge Saint-Germain-en-Laye, Paris, 1894, p. 335, no. 432); Roman product; -d. Fretwork pedestal (Pl. 39);

length: 4.9 cm;

(cf. Eggers, type 24,

pp.

the first half of the ist century A.D. 161-162 and pl. 4);

201

Roman product.

-e. Iron handle of situla; the ist century B.C. -the ist century A.D.; Other categories: -1. Cylinder with circular ribs (Pl. 41); length: ii. .3 cm; the ist century B.C. -the ist century A.D. Observation: cf. the piece from Pope9ti rn. -g. Fragmentary vessels, the ist century B.C.-the ist century A.D.; green patina (! -d, ); Observation: (a-g): Dacian citadel; M. Sibiu; Information N. Lupu. 33.

Tinosu, district Prahova. -a. Calyx of candelabrum with green patina (Pl. 40, 53); the height of both mounted pieces: 13.3 cm; the ist century A.D. (identical piece at Pompeii, in MusArchNaz (room XCIV Naples); Campanian product; MNA (inv. 2695 a-p); -

R. Vulpe and Ec. Vulpe, Dacia, I, 1924, pp. 180, 215-218, fig, 45, 46. -b -e. Fragmentary vessels; the Ist century B.0 -the ist century A.D.; R. Vulpe and Ec. Vulpe, .cit., pp. 180, 217, fig. .

41/6, 7; 34.

43;

49/2;

Observation (a

-

e):

Dacian settlement.

Ulmeni, district Ilfov. Casserole with the body narrower at the base, with stamp (obliterated) (Pl. 38). Width 29.9 cm; the Ist century -

possibly the beginning of the 2nd century A.D. (cf. Eggers, type 144, pp. 172-173 and p1. 12); M. 01teni3a; S. Morintz and B. lonescu, SCIV, 19, 1, 1968, p. 1C9, fig. 13; Observation: in zone inhabited intensively by the Dacians. 35.

Dacia (probably intra-Carpathian). Joint of saucer (Pl. 38); the first half of the Ist century A.D. (cf. Eggers, type 92, p. 168 and p1. 9); AEC (i nv. 8109);

36.

K. Horedt, StComSibiu, 12, 1965,

p.

42 and fig. 4/2.

Hunedoara (the former district) or intra-Carpathian Dacia. Vessel (containing silver ornaments): the Ist century B.C. -the Ist century A.D.;

MNMBp;

Rep, ms.

202

..

CATALOGUE OF PIECES IMITATING IMPORTED VESSELS OF BRONZE

In Dacia there are very few vessels intended to take the place of imported products and at present we know of such pieces only the area of the Dacian citadels of the Orätie mountains.

The existence of work-shops, crucibles,

bullion or of "drops" of bronze does not mean that the pieces intended to form part of brone vessels wete necessarily cast in these places, since bronze ornaments (bracelets, fibulae, harness mounts) occur frequently in the GetoDacian settlements.

We will present in the following, as examples, objects

of bronze and iron intended to replace broken pieces of imported vessels and iron vessels inspired from Hellenistic-Roman models. 1.

Costeti (on the map no. 1.0), district Hunedoara. "Citadel". -a. Joint of bronze (Pl. 54); height: 4.8 cm; the Ist century B C. -the ist century A.D.; MEC (i nv. 366). -b. Handle of iron; the Ist century B.C. -the ist century A.D.; ARC (inv. IN 371). -c. Handle .

of iron (Pl. 54); length: 13.8 cm; the ist centuryB.C. -the ist century A.D. (cf. a similar handle, but of bronze in C. C. Edgar, Greek bronzes, LeCaire, 1904, p.80, no. 27958); MEC. -d-e. Vessels of iron with handles ending in swan's heads (Pl. 54); the Ist century B. C. -the Ist century A.D.; MIC; -f. Fragmentary vessel of iron (Pl. 54); preserved height: 7.1 cm; the Ist century B. C the Ist century A.D. ARC. Observation (‚ ): Dacian citadel. Information H. Daicoviciu. .

-

-

2.

Gräditea Muncelului (on the map no. 18), district Hunedoara. "Dealul Gráditii"; Neck of bronze jug with defect of casting; the ist century A.D.; C. Daicoviciu and collaborators, SCIV, VI, 1-2, 1955, p. 209, 211, 231-232.

3.

Luncani, district Hunedoara.

"Piatra Roie".

Little plate of bronze

in the shape of oak tree leaf (joint ?) length: 5 cm; MEC (inv. 4969); Information H. Daicoviciu.

203

CATALOGUE OF SILVER PIECES

The catalogue includes only the silver vessels discovered in Dacia, with one exception. 1.

Bucure9ti (on the map no. 5).

Hoard, conical cup with

t?Herstrut.

two fine grooves inside under the lip (Pl. 41);

height: 11 cm;

the

Ist century B.C. (cf. for form I. Velkov and H. M. Danov, Izvestia, XII, 1938,

442-443 and fig. 238.

pp.

2nd century B.C.

D. E. Strong, pp. 108-109 and fig. century B.C.); Observation:

One piece from the end of the

mV. V. Kropotkin,p. 85, no. 718 and fig. 45/3; 24/a; the end of the 2nd-the Ist

D. Popescu, Dacia, XI-XEI, 1945-47,

in hoard;

35;

p.

ornaments, 59 imitations of Thasian tetra-

drachms and a situla of bronze. 2.

Calafat (on the map no. 35), district Dolj. Cetate.

Between Calafat and Cetate.

Saucer with relief-decoration (Pl. 45);

the middle of the

ist centuryA.D. (cf. D. E. Strong, p.140); the year l9ü3; Tocilescu, ArchAnz, 1904, Heft 1/4,

pp.

232-242;

185;

p.

Gr.

D. Tudor, Germania, 37, 1959.

Observation:

the vessel belonged to a hoard

comprising three bracelets of gold, one bracelet of electrum, two rings and two hair pins of gold. 3.

Costeti (on the map no. 10), district Hunedoara.

Iron handle (of

Weapon ?) decorated at end with a zoomorphic representation in silver (Pl. 41);

length of iron rod: 11.7 cm;

plate) is 3 c M. Deva; 4.

in height;

the statuette

the ist centuryB.C. -the ist century A.D.;

C. Daicoviciu, in IstRom, I, 1960,

326.

p.

Stncr.ieni (on the map no. 36), district Harghita. andezit". side; -c.

Hoard.

-a -b.

"Cariera de

Cups with gilded lips in inside and out-

decoration with incised parallel lines (Pl. 41); Fragmentary cup, the letters

(Pl. 41);

(including the

height: 6.2 cm;

7rE "en pointill" under the lip

diameter of the mouth: 15.1 x 16.1 cm.

-d -e.

gilded groove under the lip of 0.3 cm in width (Pl. 41); cm;

Cups;

a

height 10.1

cf. form in I. Velkov and H. M. Danov, Izvestia, MI, 1938,

pp. 442-443 and fig. 238: bronze;

at Bohot, 10 cups of silver and a situla of

others 12 at Karaagaci-Sufular.

It seems that the situla

from Bohot has a profile which is characteristic of the Ist century B.C.;' one piece from the end of the 2nd century B.C. p.85, no. 718 and fig. 45/3;

the end of the 2nd-the Ist century B.C.; portion is gilded (Pl. 42); pedestal and handles; height: 13.1 cm. 11 .5 cm; pottery,

in V. V. Kropotkin,

D. E. Strong, pp. 108-lø9 and fig. 24 /a : 4

-.

Cups:

height 10 and II .2 cm.

-h.

the decorated Cup with

the decorated portion is gilded (Pl. 42);

-i. Cup with pedestal and handles (Pl. 42, 54); height:

cf the cups with handles in the shape of bird's heads, in in metal,

in silver from the Ist century A.D. 204

in D. E.

Strong, pp. 133-135 and fig. 27/c;

handle without the little plates

existing below it, also in Eggers, type 168, from the first half of the Ist century A.D. cups type 170 and 171, A.D.;

p.

p.

177 and pl. 14, dated

The form is closer to the

177, pl. 14, datable from the Ist century

other pieces, but without "knot" at pedestal, from the ist

century A.D.,, at V. V. Kropotkin, 86, no. 729 and fig. 7, 9). (Pl. 43, 44, 54);

85, no. 727 and fig. 45/2, p.

p.

-j. -M.

Cups with pedestal and handles

height: 12.4, 13.1, 10.1 cm (a handle and the

lower part of the pedestal are missing) 6 cm (only a part of the body and fragments of the handles are preserved);

type 170 and 171,

P.

Cup with pedestal (fragmentary) and handles; are gilded (Pl. 44); types).

-0.

in

Eggers, -n.

the decorated parts

height 15.7 cm (cf. Eggers, the above mentioned

Cup with handles and pedestal;

are gilt (Pl. 45);

cf. forms

177, p1. 14, but without handles with knot.

height: 15.3 cm.

the decorated parts

General observations: discovered

with a silver fibula of late La T'ene type, two bracelets, one imitation Thasian tetradrachm and one drachma of Dyrrhachium. the Ist century B.C. MIR; 158-206;

Dating:

D. Popescu, Dacia N. S., II, 1958, PP.

idem, InventariaArchaeologica, Roumanie, fasc. 3, 1967.

Designs after D. Popescu. 5.

Surcea (on the map no. 37), district Covasna.

Hoard.

-a -d.

Base

of cup-pedestals, decorated with acanthus and lotus leaves. Observation:

discovered with two phalerae, one silver bar and six

small anvils;

the Ist century B . C.;

MIR;

N. Fettich, Acta

Archaeologica, 111, Budapest, 1953, pp. 128-144. 6.

Vedea (former Merii Goala, on the map no. 38) district Teleorman. Hoard.

-a. hemispherical cup.

-b. Pitcher; the handle is lost; "La

Vârzárie"; the point on the vessel where it was joined has traces of soldering (Pl. 41); height: 9.8 cm; the 2nd-the Ist century B.C. (cf. form of bronze in V. V. Kropotkin,

p.

94, no. 808 and fig. 57/3, 60/6);

D. Popescu, Dacia, VII-VIII, 1937-40, pp. 183, 186-187 and fig. 8; Observation: 7.

ornaments in the hoard.

Oltenia (?). Conical cup with two ribs on the inside; (Pl. 41); height: 7.3 cm; the end of the 2nd-the ist century B.C. (cf. the references of 1). D. E. Strong,

pp.

108-109 and fig. 24 /a ; MNA;

XE-XII, 1945-47, p. 55 and fig. 11/I.

205

D. Popescu, Dacia,

CATALOGUE OF VESSELS AND OBJECTS OF GLASS The catalogue comprises vessels and other objects of glass, such as tubes, rods etc. but not glass beads. The reader must be warned that the presence of air bubbles or airfilaments in the glass paste of some pieces included in the catalogue does not always demonstrate a later date;

such products also existed in the period

Augustus-the Ist century A.D., when glass-ware was characterized especially by the purity of the paste. But if a vessel of glass with air-bubbles was considered an inferior product in Alexandria, Rome or in Italy when compared with the most perfect specimens, it would still be a luxury in Dacia or in the other regions situated near the boundaries of the Roman Empire. The numerous small fragments of the sides of glass vessels discovered in the great Geto-Dacian settlements which have been excavated are not catalogued. The classification of the glass vessels has been made according to the standard works and the catalogues of different museums. The following authors have been constantly con sulted. A. M. Berryer, La verrerie ancienne aux Muses Royaux d'Art et d'Histoire, Bruxelles, 1957. C. C. Edgar, Graeco-Egyptian glass, LeCaire, 1905. Idem, Graeco-Roman glass, Le Caire, 1905. H. J. Eggers, Der römische Import im freien Germanien, 1951. C. Isings, Roman glass from dated finds, Groningen-Djakarta, 1957. A. Kiss, Das Glas im Altertume, I-III, Leipzig, 1908. J. Morin, La verrerie en Gaule sous l'Empire romaine, Paris, 1913. M. Vanderhoeven, Verres romains (Ier...flJe siecle), des Muses Curtius et duVerrea Li ege

Liege, 1961.

The bibliographical references for the classification of pieces are limited to C. Isings and only when a form is not mentioned by this author, or is too far removed from that discovered in Dacia will we make reference to other authors. I.

Barboi, district GalaJi. Fragmentary greenish ribbed dish with airbubbles; the Ist century A.D. (cf. Isings, form 3 a, pp. 18-19); M. GalaJi;

2.

Dacian settlement;

information I. T. Dragomir.

Boroda, district Bihor. Fragment of bluish cup with air-bubbles; the second half of the Ist century A.D. (cf. Isings, form 38, pp. 5354); Dacian settlement; information S. Dumitracu. 206

3.

Bucureti.

-a.

Fragmentary bowl;

yellow-green moulded glass;

the first half of the Ist century A. D. (cf. Isings, form 1, pp. 15-16); M1VIB (inv. 15818).

-b.

Fragmentary ribbed dish (?);

the first half of the Ist century A.D.;

yellow-green;

M1VIB (i nv. 3068/957).

Fragmentary yellow-green vessels with air-bubbles;

-c -1.

the first half of

the ist century A.D. MMB (i nv. 14801-2, 15814, without number). -g.

Three fragments of sides of millefiori dishes;

A.D. (cf. Isings, form 3, pp. 18-19; 4, pl. I); MMB (i nv. 14805-7). M. Turcu. 4.

without air-bubbles; century A.D.; settlement.

Checea, district Timi.

6.

MIC;

"Glass";

mentary

blue vessels;

-a.

MIC (i nv. IN 802). -c.

the year 1957; p.

332. -e.

-f. Fragmentary yellow-

blown glass with air-bubbles (about 15);

the end of the Ist century A.D.; AEC; Observation:

C. Daicoviciu and collaborators,

(a-f): Dacian citadel;

Millefiori fragment;

a-c, e: H.

the ist century A.D.

I. Andrie, escu, PiscuiCrasani, 1924, p. 82 and fig. 263-264.

Grditea Muncelului, district Hunedoara. Cylindrical bottle with bluish tint (Pl. 54); glass;

"Dealul Gräditii".

-a.

height: 22.3 cm; blown

the second half of the ist century A.D. (cf. Isings, form 51 b,

p. 68);

N:[C;

p. 169.

-b.

C. Daicoviciu and collaborators, SCIV, VI, 1-2, 1955, Handle of yellowish bottle with air-bubbles (Pl. 54);

blown glass; 51 a,

Isings, form

maroon-yellowish with brown veins;

MIC (i nv. IN 318).

Crsani, district Ialomia.

blown

-d. Fragments of millefiori ves-

the ist century B.C. -106;

green and transparent vessels;

8.

Fragmentary dish;

C. Daicoviciu and collaborators, Mat , VT, 1959,

the ist century A.D.;

-b. Frag-

.

MIC.

Fragmentary millefiori vessel;

(?);

Dacian

the end of the ist century B.C -the first

sels (approximately 6);

7.

theist

yellowish-green fragment with

NEC (inv. IN 8175).

.cit., p. 335. Daicoviciu.

Fragmentary

the end of theist century A.D.;

the second half of the Ist century A.D. (Cf.

44, pp. 59-60); MIC;

-b.

Observation (a-b):

the ist century A.D.;

half of the Ist century A.D.; glass;

MIC.

Rep, ms.

Costeti, district Hunedoara. air-bubbles;

11, no.

Information,

yellow-green and with bluish tint;

the year 1966;

M. Timioara (?);

(a-g);

p.

-a. Fragmentary bluish vessel

theist century B.C.;

vessels (9-10 pieces);

5.

Observation:

Càp'ulna, district Alba. "Gärgälu".

the Ist century

cf. Vanderhoeven,

pp.

the second half of the Ist century A.D. (cl. Isings, form

67-68);

with bubble;

NEC.

-C.

blown-glass;

"Cãpräreaa";

yellowish unguentarium

the end of the ist century A.D. ;I06 (cf.

Isings, form 82 Al, pp. 97-98);

the year 1971;

green or with bluish tint fragments (about 40); century A.D.;

MIC (those after the year 1950);

collaborators, SCIV, VT, 1-2, 1955, Acta MN, III, 1966, p. M.

p.

NEC.

-d.

blown-glass;

yellowthe ist

C. Daicoviciu and

196, p1. I, 208;

S. Jak,

Observation: (a-d): Dacian settlement.

207

9.

Luncani, district Hunedoara. "Piatra Roie".

-a -b.

Fragmentary

vessels; the Ist century A.D. (?); MC; C. Daicoviciu, Piatra Roie, p. 95. -c. Fragmentary millefiori dish (maroon and white are predominant) (P1. 54); the second half of the Ist century A . D. (cf. Isings, form 42a, p. 58); MIC (inv.4565); C. Daicoviciu, p. 95, p1. XLv/II. -d. Fragments (about ii) of yellowish-green vessels;

10.

the ist century A.D.; Dacian citadel.

MIC;

Pecica, district Arad.

-a.

Information H. Daicoviciu. Fragmentary cup;

Observation:

blown glass;

the

second half of the ist century-the beginning of the 2nd century A.D. (cf. Isings, form 12, pp. 27-30); MC; I. H. Crian, ActaMN, VT, 1969, no. 10 and p1. 11/2.

-b.

Bottom of cup (?);

the end of the ist

century the beginning of the 2nd century A.D.; AEC; I. H. Crian, .cit., p. 97, no. 6and p1. 111/6. Observation: Dacian settlement. 11.

Poiana, district Galati. (the numeration with Arabic numbers). -1• Lip of bowl (?); blue with little white veins (Pl. 54); blown glass; the end of the Ist century B.C. -the first half of the Ist century A.D.; MNA (i nv. 11 6171). -2 -3. Millefiori dishes; white on blue (Pl. 54); moulded glass; the first half of the ist century A.D. (cf. Isings, form 3a, pp. 18-19); MNA (inv. 6170, 6185). -4. Fragmentary millefiori vessel; blue with white dots (Pl. 54); moulded glass; the first half of theist century A.D.; MNA (mv. II 6374). -5. Fragmentary miilefiori vessel; yellow background with light-yellow and white stripes (P1. 54); the ist century A.D.; MNA (inv. 11 6178). -6. Fragmentary blue cup with white lines (P1. 54); the ist century A.D. (cf. M. Bucovalà, Vase antice de sticM la Tomis, [19681, pp. 39-40, no. 32); MNA (i nv. 11 6373). -7. Idem but with yellowish background (Pl. 54); the same date and references; MNA (i nv. 11 6i68). -8. Fragmentary blue dish (Pl. 54); moulded glass; the end of the Ist century B.C. the first half of the Ist century A.D. (cf. Isings, form 3b, pp. 19-20); -

MNA (i nv. II 6179). -9. Fragmentary vessel; moulded glass; the first half of the ist century A.D.; MNA (inv.fl 6180). -10-il. Fragmentary bluish dishes; moulded glass; (Plate 54); the first half of the ist century A.D. (cf. Eggers, type 183, p. 178 and p1. 14); MNA (i nv. II 6184, 6386). -12 -13. Fragmentary blue vessels; moulded glass; the first half of the ist century A.D.; the year 1968; MuzlstMold; Information S. Teodoru. -14. Fragmentary yellow vessel; moulded glass; the first half of the Ist century A.D.;

MNA (i nv. 11 6174).

-15. Fragmentary blue cup (Pl. 54); the ist century A.D. (cf. M. Bucovalâ, loc.cit.); the year 1968; MuzlstMold; Information S. Teodoru. -16. Analogous fragment to the last; R. Vulpe and Ec. Vulpe, Dacia, UI -TV,

p.

235 and fig. 105/56.

-17.

Fragmentary

opaque dish; the ist century A.D.; (cf. Kisa, I, p. 83 and fig. 42); the year 1950; MNA (i nv. II 6181). -18. Fragmentary handle with bluish tint; rare bubbles; the ist century A.D. (cf. Isings, the handle of the bottle of form 52 c, p. 71); MNA (i. II 6169). -19. Fragmentary greenish handle with rare bubbles; the Ist century A.D.; MNA (i nv. II 6175). -20. Fragment of glass kantharos with occasional bubbles; the ist century A.D.; MNA (i nv. II 6183).

208

-21. Idem, but greenish;

theist century A.D.; Teodoru;

-22.

the year 1968;

Idem, colourless;

the year 1968;

MuzlstMold;

lip with rare bubbles; Mold;

-24.

-23.

Greenish

the year 1968;

Muzlst

Fragmentary vessel with bi -

theist century A.D.(?);

type "I"); M. Tecuci.

Information S.

Information S. Teodoru.

theist century A.D.;

Information S. Teodoru.

lobate handle;

MuzlstMold;

the end of theist century A.D.;

(cf. handle

Morin,

39,

p.

-25. Fragmentary greenish vessel; moulded glass;

the Ist century A.D.; MNA (i. II 6167). -26. Grooved yellow stick, with white lines (Pl. 54); the Ist century A.D. (cf. Isings, form 79 pp. 94-95);

MNA (inv. II 6375-6).

ist century A.D.;

-27.

Fragmentary vessels;

MNA and M. Tecuci.

-28.

the

Fragmentary yellow-

ish dish, with bubbles (Pl. 54);

the second half of the Ist century

A.D.;

Handle of kantharos;

54);

MNA (inv. 6372).

-29.

the ist century A.D. (cl. Kisa, I,

p.

greenish (Pl.

69, fig. 35);

Fragmentary bluish glass, with relief buds (Pl. 54);

MNA.

blown glass;

the second half of the ist century A.D. (cf. Isings, form 31, 46);

MNA (inv. II 6172-3).

ish (Pl. 54); -33.

-3i -32.

45-

pp.

Similar to the last but yellow-

the same dating and references;

MNA (inv. II 6176, 6177).

Bottom of cylindrical bottle, colourless, with air-bubbles;

second half of the Ist century A.D.; Information S. Teodoru. of

-30.

)

p.

Alexandrian;

moulded glass;

MNA (i nv. II 6007);

202 and fig. 23/3.

Observation:

Dacia, 111-TV, 1927-32,

p.

325;

190, 205, 209;

pp.

the Ist century

R. Vulpe, SCIV, rn,

Dacian settlement; no. I-

ii, 14, 17-20, 24-32 Information Al. Vulpe; II, 1, 1951,

the

MuzlstMold;

Scarab with hieroglyphs in the shape

on the bottom (Pl. 54);

B.C. (?); 1952,

-34.

the year 1958;

R. Vulpe and Ec. Vulpe,

R. Vulpe and collaborators, SCIV, R. Vulpe, Dacia, N. S., I, 1957,

pp. 150, 154. 12.

Popeti, district Ilfov. on each side;

-a.

Quadrilateral bottle with two relief ribs

height: 25.6 cm;

the Ist century B C. (cf. C. C. .

Edgar, Graeco-Egyptian glass, Le Caire, 1905, and p. 83, no. 32790); a two-piece mould;

the year 1961;

MNA.

pp.

62-63, no, 32702

Observation:

probably of Alexandrian provenance.

made in

-b.

Cylindrical bottle with rows of relief square prominences on the body; height: 21.3 cm; -C.

the Ist century B.C. (?);

Fragmentary yellowish dish (Pl. 54);

century B.C. (cf. Kisa, I,

p.

theist century B.C.;

moulded glass;

83 and fig. 42);

R. Vulpe, Mat, VII, [1961], p. 330. vessel, opaque;

the year 1961;

the year 1957;

MNA.

-e.

Fragmentary blue

the year 1958;

moulded glass;

MNA.

-g.

ist century A.D.; vessel;

pp.

18-19);

-h. Fragmentary vessel with rosy

the end of the ist century B.0 .-the beginning

of the Ist century A.D.; greenish vessel;

-f.

Fragmentary ribbed yellow-brown dish;

the same date and references. tint and rare bubbles;

MNA.

the end of the ist

century B.C.-the Ist century A.D. (cf. Isings, form 3a, the year 1961;

the ist

the year 1958; MNA;

-d. Fragmentary bluish vessel;

theist century B.C.;

Fragmentary ribbed blue dish;

MNA.

the year 1958;

MNA.

-i.

Fragmentary

the end of the Ist century B.C -the beginning of the .

the year 1958;

MNA.

-j.

the beginning of the ist century A.D.;

209

Fragmentary millefiori MrvrB (i nv. 14809).

-k. Greenish dish; moulded glass; the first half of the Ist century A.D. (cf. Isings, form 3b, pp. 19-20); MMB (i nv. 14799). -.1 -n. Fragmentary vessels (Pl. 54); the first half of the ist century A.D.,; 1'vIMB (inv. 14803, 14804, 14808).

-o.

Fragmentary less coloured

vessel with rare bubbles; the first half of the Ist century A.D. (?); the year 1958; MNA. Fragmentary transparent dish, with ribs; moulded glass; the first half of the Ist century A.D. (?); the year 1957; MNA; -r. Fragmentary vessel with rare bubbles; the first -.

half of the ist century A.D.;

the year 1958;

MNA. -s.

Fragmentary,

transparent, yellowish vessel with rare bubbles; the first half of the Ist century A.D.; the year 1958; MNA. Fragmentary less coloured dish with ribs; the first half of theist century A.D.; the -.

year 1961; MNA. -t. Amulet representing the God Men; theist century B.C.; the year 1957; R. Vulpe, Mat, VI, 1959, p. 314 and fig. 14/I; Observation: Alexandrian product. . Ring; theist centuryB.C.,; the year 1958; R. Vulpe, Mat, WI, [1961], p. 331. Observation (a-j): Dacian settlement; a-b, d-i, oInformation Al. Vulpe; i-n Information M. Turcu. See also the references -

-

of R. Vulpe, SCIV, VT, 1-2, 1955, p. 256; 13. 14.

Mat, VI, 1959;

p.314.

Röctu, district Bacäu. Fragmentary vessels; probably the Ist century A.D.; V. Cpitanu and V. Ursachi, Carpica, II, 1969, p. 96. Tinosu, district Prahova. lefiori lip;

27 fragments;

among them:

-a. Mii-

the ist century A.D.; R. Vulpe and Ec. Vulpe, Dacia, I,

1924, p. 210 and fig. 42, 49/11. -b. Handle of bottle; theist century A.D.; R. Vulpe and Ec. Vulpe, 22.ct., p. 210 and fig. 43 left above. -c. Fragments of millefiori vessels; R. Vulpe and Ec. Vulpe, 2p.cit., p. 211. -d. Fragrnentary green and transparent vessels;

R. Vulpe and Ec. Vulpe, loc.cit.

Dacian settlement; 186. 15.

Observation (a-d):

others mentioned in 2Q.cit., pp. 180-181, 184-

Ulmeni, district Ilfov. Greenish unguentarium with bubbles (Pl. 54); blown glass; the ist century-the beginning of the 2nd century A.D. (cf. Isings, form 82 Al, pp. 97-98); M. Oltenia; B. Tonescu, SCIV, 19, 1968, p. 109.

16.

Valea Izvoarelor (former Beeneu), district Mure9. ?tTeleaculMic". Fragmentary vessel; probably the Ist century A.D.; Dacian pottery;

17.

S. Morintz and

M. Sf. Gheorghe;

Information Z. Szkely.

Zimnicea, district Teleorman.

Fragmentary bowl;

B.C. (?); I. Casan-Franga, ArhMold, V, 1967, Observation: unknown provenance.

210

p.

the Ist century 14 and fig. 6/29;

MISCELLANEOUS

This section in the catalogue includes Hellenistic and Roman imported products of various uses; some special ornaments, toilet-articles etc. but not personal ornaments made of metal (bracelets, fibulae). A. 1.

TOOLS Gr.ditea Muncelului, district Hunedoara. "Dealul Gradistii". The room B on the terrace O.P. -a. A rectangular cartouche with the stamp HERENNI (Pl. 55) on the centre of the blade; the opening: 21.2 cm; the letters are of 0.3 cm in height; the ist century A. D. -106; a family of Herennii come from Aquileia: A Calderini, Aquileia Romana, Milan, [1930], pp. 505-506; among them L. Herennius M.f. Faber Aciarius

-

A. Calderini, op.cit., pp. 311, 314; G. Brusin, Aquileia e Grado, Padua, 1956, p.301); the year 1952; MIC (inv. 58-80); C. Daicoviciu and collaborators, SCIV, IV, 1-2, 1953, pp. 182-183. -b. "The workshop situated on the terrace VIII"; identical to the last from the point of view of the form; the trace of the cartouche of the stamp in the centre of the blade (Pl. 55); the opening: 21.6 the ist century A.IJ.-106; the year 1951; MIR; C. Daicoviciu, SCIV, III, 1952, p. 301, fig. 22 left above; observation: the identical form, identical dimensions and the existence of the stamp-cartouche demonstrates a provenance from the same workshop. Observation: Dacian settlement;

it is possible that at Grãditea Muncelului there

are also other imported pieces among the hundreds of iron tools, but owing to their resemblance to those made in Dacia and having no characteristic details, they cannot be determined. B.

ORNAMENTS AND TOILET-ARTICLES

1.

Ceteni, district Arge. "ornament" of gold; the 2nd-the Ist century B.C.; the year 1967; Dacian settlement; D. Popescu, SCIV, 19, 1968, p. 693, no. 110.

2.

Cernatu, district Covasna. Gem; the 2nd century B.C.; settlement; Information: Z. Szke1y.

3.

Poiana, district Galai. -a. Amulets of glass and cornelian; the year 1950; R. Vulpe and collaborators, SCIV, II, 1, 1951, p. 208. -b. Rings with precious stones or gems, one (of cornelian) with the inscription 1JANLAOY retrograde; ring of bronze with glass-

Dacian

-

gem;

the Ist century B C -the ist century A. D.; .

.

the year 1950; R.

Vulpe and collaborators, SCIV, II, 1, 1951, pp. 190-191. -c. little cylindrical boxes of bone; the Ist century B.C. -the Ist century A. D.; the year 1950;

R. Vulpe and collaborators, op.cit., 211

p.

215 (a box-

lid on the fig. 29/7); Observation (a-c): 4.

R. Vulpe, Dacia, N. S., I, 1957,

150.

Dacian settlement.

Popeti, district Ilfov. head);

p.

Little chain with amulet of gold (Medusa's

the Ist century B.C.;

the year 1961;

Dacian settlement;

D. Popescu, SCIV, XIII, 1, 1962, P. 207. C.

MI RRORS They belong to the discoidal type and are made of white metal with or

without handle.

They were produced in different centres of the classical

world from the end of the 2nd century B.C. to the Ist

century A.D.;

conse-

quently their dating is according to the settlement where they were found. I.

Braov, district Braov.

To the west of "Schei";

the Ist century B.C.-the Ist century A.D.; Rep, ms. 2.

Costeti, district Hunedoara. citadel;

3.

"mirror of bronze";

Dacian settlement;

Fragmentary mirrors.

MIC;

Dacian

Information H. Daicoviciu.

Grtdi tea Muncelului, district Hunedoara.

"Deaiul Gràdi tii".

-a.

Fragment; the ist century B.C. -the Ist century A.D.; the year 1954; MIC; C. Daicoviciu and collaborators, SCIV, VI, 1-2, 1955, P. 207. -b. With handle (now broken); century A.D.; 4.

5.

(Pl. 55);

MNA (inv. IV 437).

Pecica, district Arad.

Fragment;

the ist century-the beginning of I. H. Crian,

Piatra Neam, district Neam. "Bltca Doamnei".

Fragment;

century B.C.-the Ist century A.D.;

Piatra

Dacian citadel;

oimului, district Neam. -a -b. Fragments; the ist century B.C.-

VIII, 1937-40,

Dacian settlement; R. Vulpe, Dacia, VII-

57, no. 2;

p.

Poiana, district GalaJi. (Pl. 55); 6117);

the year 1967;

the Ist

Information S. Same.

the Ist century A.D.;

7.

Dacian settlement.

the 2nd century A.D.; MIC; Dacian settlement; ActaMN, VI, 1969, p. 97, no. 4.

M. Piatra Neam; (3.

the ist century B.C . -the ist

Observation:

Information V. Mihàilescu-Btrliba.

-a. Fragmentary. With handle (now broken)

the Ist century B. C . -the Ist century A. D.; MNA (inv. II

Information Al. Vulpe.

the same dating;

-b.

Intact and fragmentary mirrors;

MNA, M. Tecuci, MuzlstMold;

Dacian settlement;

R. Vulpe and Ec. Vulpe, Dacia, III-IV, 1927-32, p. 334 and fig. 113/ 40-44, 46-48, R. Vulpe and collaborators, SCIV, II, 1, 1951, pp. 187, 190, 205, fig. 25/7; N. S., I, 1957, 8.

p.

150;

R. Vulpe, SCIV, ifi, 1952, p. 198; Dacia,

Information S. Teodoru, Al. Vulpe.

Popeti, district Ilfov. -a -e. Intact and fragmentary mirrors; ist century B.C. -the beginning of the Ist century A.D.; MNA; Dacian settlement; pp. 247, 256; Vulpe.

the

R. Vulpe and collaborators, SCIV, VI, 1-2, 1955,

R. Vulpe, Mat, VI, 1959, p. 314.

212

Information Al.

9.

10.

Siráel, district Bistria-Näsàud. "Citadel". fragmentary; the 2nd century B.C. -the Ist century A.D.; the year 1968; MEC; Dacian citadel. Tinosu, district Prahova.

Intact mirror and 5fragmentary mirrors;

the Ist century B.C.-the Ist century A.D.; the year 1922; Dacian settlement; R. Vulpe and Ec. Vulpe, Dacia, I, 1924, pp. 173, 217 and p1. 47/2, 48/8. II.

Tlrgu Ocna Tiseti, district Bacu. "Titelca". Fragmentary; the ist century B.C. -tbe Ist century A.D.; the year 1957; A. Niu and M. Zamoteanu, Mat, 1959, p. 378 and fig. 4/3.

U.

Zimnicea, district Teleorman. Mirror of bronze; the Ist century B.C. (?); the year 1949; I. Nestor, SCIV, I, 1, 1950, p. 98.

D.

-

OTHER CATEGORIES

1.

Bradu, district Bacu. Pincers of bronze; the ist century B.C. the Ist century A.D.; V.Ursachi, Carpica, [Bacu], 1968, p. 177 and fig. 53/30.

2.

Grditea Muncelului, district Hunedoara.

-

"Dealul Grdi tii".

Medical pouch (Pl. 55); in casket: pincers of bronze (identical piece at Pompeii, in MusArchNaz (room XCV) Naples), one scalpel of iron five small vessels, a plate of volcanic ash. The following are certainly imported pieces: pincers, scalpel, the plate of volcanic ash; -

probably also the casket.

The ist century A.D.;

the year 1955;

MIC (inv. 146-151); Dacian settlement; C. Daicoviciu, N. Gostar, I. Crian, Mat, 111, 1957, pp. 260-263 and fig. 2. 3.

Luncani, district Hunedoara. "Piatra Roie". Plate of alabaster; the Ist century A.D.; MEC (i nv. IN 4956); Dacian citadel; C. Daicoviciu, Piatra Roie, p. 90; Observation: imported ?

4.

Poiana, district Galai. -a. Fragmentary pincers(?);

the Ist century

B.C.-the Ist century A.D.; R. Vulpe and Ec. Vulpe, Dacia, UI -TV, 1927-32, p. 334 and fig. 111/16. -b -c. Plates of marble; the ist century B C -the Ist century A D. (?); R. Vulpe and Ec. Vulpe, .

.

.

!aE.cit. , p. 343 and fig. 125/1; R. Vulpe and collaborators, SCIV, II, 1, 1951, p. 205. -d. "Base of terracotta statuette"; fragmentary; thelstcenturyB.C. -the Ist century A.D.; the year 1950; R. Vulpe and collaborators, Dacian settlement. 5.

.ct.,

p.

190.

Observation (a-d):

Pope ti, district Ilfov. -a. Fragmentary vase of marble; the ist century B.C.; the year 1957; R. Vulpe, Mat, VI, 1959, p. 314 and fig. 12/10. -b. Fragmentary mortar of marble; the ist century B.C.; the year 1962; D. Popescu, SCIV, XIV, 1963, p. 456, no. 52. Observation (a-b): Dacian settlement.

213

LIST OF LOCALITIES

The Miscellaneous Section of the catalogue has been organized according to the categories of products; for this reason, the order of the localities is alphabetical only within each category of products. We list below the alphabetical order of localities and their corresponding number on the map. Bradu Braov

15 5

Cernatu Ceth.eni Costeti

2 I 6

Grditea Muncelului Luncani Pecica

7 16 8

Piatra Neamj Piatra oimului Poiana Popeti

9 10 3 4

Sara - el Tinosu TirguOcna

11 12 13

Zimnica

14

214

CATALOGUE OF THE COIN FINDS

This section begins with the Greek coins issued in different cities and regions or in the Mediterranean basin, and in the Aegaean and Black Sea, continuing with the issues of Macedonia after 158 B.C., of Thasos, of Dyrrhachium and of Apollonia and ending with the Roman Republican and Imperial denarii struck until the beginning of the 2nd century A. D. The localities of imitative coin finds, regardless of whether the imitation was made in Dacia or in its neighbouring territories, will be listed after every category of coins in a special paragraph.

Of course, the Dacian issues inspired from

the coins of Philip II and Alexander the Great, at least for the early period, are missing from the catalogue. We will present details concerning the finds only to the extent of the existing information and in the following order: locality, find-spot, the character of the find (hoard or single coins), the total number of recovered coins, the composition of the find, the dating of the coins (in cases where the dating is very approximate as in the case of the coins of Dyrrhachium and -

Apollonia in order to save space we only give the upper and lower limits), the year of the discovery, the present location, special notes, the basic spe-

cialist literature and observations. We will indicate for the Roman coins (when they are known), the years of issues (in the case of hoards, the year or the years of the first and of the last coin) and in parenthesis, the catalogue,on which the identifications are based.

The majority of the identifica-

tions of the Imperial coins are based on H. Cohen, Description historique des monnaies frappes sous 1' Empire Romain communement appel1s m6dailles imperiales 2 ,I-Vu, Paris, 1890-92). The following abbreviations have been used in the catalogue: Ap.

=

B

=

d dh dhe

=

di dii

=

= =

=

dir dr Dyrr.

=

G,

=

im

=

=

=

Apollonia E. Bahelon, Description historique et chronologique des monnaies de la Rpublique Romaine vulgairement appelles consulaires, I-lI, Paris, 1885-1886. Roman denarius drachma drachmae Roman imperial denarius Roman imperial denarii Roman Republican denarii Roman Republican denarius Dyrrhachium H. A. Grueber, Coins of the Roman Republic in the British Museum, I-Ill, London, 1910. imitation(s), counterfeit(s)

215

MP

=

Macedonia Prima

S

=

Th

=

Thasian(s)

tr

=

tetradrachm

tre

=

tetradrachms

E. A. Sydenham, The Coinage of the Roman Republic, London, 1952.

Four maps with coin-finds are annexed to the catalogue; the first three maps are for the Greek coin-finds (Pl. 11 in the catalogue under no. I-XXJX; P1. 12 no. XXX-XXXJ; Pl. 13 XXXII-XXXJII and the last map is of the Roman coin-finds (Plate 14, no. XXXW). The numbers, In Arabic numerals, correspond to the number marked on the maps. In cases where a locality is mentioned more than once in the catalogue it occurs on the map with the number corresponding to the first mention in the section of the catalogue with which the map deals.

A.

I. I. IL 2. 3.

GREEK COINS

The issues of Abdera Bretea, corn. Denta, district Timi. Single find; 3;! Abdera, IAthens, I Corcyra; I. Winkler, p. 158, no. 2b. The issues of Amisus Cooveni(?) district. Dolj.; Single find, 1;dh: the 4th century A.D.; B. Mitrea, SCIV XIII, 1962, p. 217, no. 5. Popepti, corn. Mih.i1teti, district Ilfov.

Single find; a) 1; bronze;

Amisus (from the period of Mithridates Eupator); b) 1; tr; Maroneia (used as amulet); c) bronze: Mesambria; d) 1; tr; Odessus; the ist century B.C.; e) 7; tre. Th; 1) 1; im. tr. Th.; g) Hoard?; 20; tre. Th.; h) 1; dh; Dyrr.; i) 2; dhe; Ap.; j) about 12; dir. (infra, no.

XXXIV, 228, a.) k) 6 illegible; the year: 1954, 1955, 1958, 1962 and before; MNA; Dacian settlement; R. Vulpe and collaborators, SCIV, VI, 1-2 1955, p. 258; R. Vulpe, Mat., III, 1957, p. 234; VII, (1961), p. 333; VIII, 1962, p. 458; St. Corn. Piteti, 1968, p. 49; B. Mitrea, p. 68, no. 33; SCIV, XV, 1964, p. 571, no. 9.

III.

Issues of Athens

4.

Bretea, Supra, no. 1, 1.

5.

Novaci, corn.

ihi1eti, district, ilfov. Single find: a) 1; bronze;

Athens (322 -229 B. C.); b) 1; bronze; Thessaloiica (post 220 B. C. c) I; tr; Th; d) 1; dh; Dyrr.; e) 3; 2 dir., I di (infra. no. XXXW, 196); B. Mitrea, SCIV, XI, 1960, p. 190, no. 3. p. 192, no. 10; C. Preda, SCN, III, 1960, p. 467-468, 473. 6.

N. 7.

Värt1, district. ilfov. Single find; 1; 1. Winkler, p. 102, no. 30. Issues of Bithynia Crbuneti (?)‚ city Tg. Crbuneti, district Gorj. Single find; 1; bronze; Prusias 183 (?)-149 B.C.; MNA; B. Mitrea, SCIV, 18, 1967, p. 193, no. 14.

216

V. 8.

Issues of Bylils Timioara, district Timi. In city; single find; 1; bronze; 260-168 B.C.;B. Mitrea, SCIV, XV, 1964, p. 571, no. 13.

VI. 9.

Issues of Byzantium Brincoveanu, corn. Odobeti, district DImbovija. In village; hoard; 93; 86; 1tr. Byzantium, 1 tr. and Iim. tr. Odessus (infra. no. XEx, 70) tre. Th, MP, im. tre. Th, MP; the year 1967, MNA; B. Mitrea, 5GW, 20, 1969, p. 162, no. 4.

10.

Bucharest 'Celu'; single find; 1; bronze; post 221 B.C.; MIVtB; Dacian settlement; B. Mitrea, SCIV, XII, 1961, V. Leahu, CAB, (1963), p. 34.

11.

VII.

p.

145-146, no. 2;

Moigrad, corn. Mirid, district Slaj. a) Single find; 1; bronze; 221 B.C. V. Luccel, Catalog Zlau, p. 5, no. 5; b) Hoard, about 1000 dhe. Corcyra, Dyrr., Ap, 1 dr.; about year 1907; MIC (dr); Dacian settlement; Rep., ms. Issues of Callatis

12.

Canlia, corn. Lipnia, district Constanta. Single find; 1; bronze; the period of autonomy; B. Mitrea, SCIV, 16, 1965, p. 608, no. 5.

13.

Ciorani, corn. Pufeti, district Vrancea. Single find; 1; bronze; the 3rd century B. C.; I. Winkler, p. 158, no. 7.

14.

Poiana, corn. Nicoreti, district Galai. Single find?; dhe. and bronze Callatis and Histria; the year 1951 and before; R. Vulpe, SCIV, HI, 1952, p. 202; Dacia, N.S. I, 1957, p. 154. ‚

15.

Racovia, corn. Voineasa, district Olt.

Single find; 3; bronze; the

period of autonomy; MNA; B. Mitrea, SCIV, XV, 1964,

p.

571, no. 10.

16.

Radovanu, district ilfov. Single find; 1; bronze; the end of the 2nd century B. C.; M. Oltenia; Information N. lonescu.

17.

Satu Nou, corn. Oltina, district Constanja. Single find?; 'coins' Callatis, Tomis and 2bronzes Histria; the period of autonomy; B. Mitrea, SCW, 16, 1965, p. 608, no. 4.

VIII.

Issues of Corcyra

18.

Bretea, Supra, no. I, 1.

19.

Caol. corn. Roia, district Sibiu. Mitrea, p. 89, no. 23.

20.

Cisndie, district Sibiu.

Single find; 1; the year 1844; B.

The hill 'G3tzberg', between cisndie and

Sadu; hoard; ca 500 bronze; 498 Corcyra, 2 Panormus, 2Pharus; the year 1836; B. Mitrea, p. 89, no. 22; Rep. ms. ‚

21.

Moigrad. Supra, no. VI, 11.

217

IX. 22.

Issues of Cyzicus Curcani, district flfov. Hoard; 36; bronzes: the 2nd-the Ist century B.C.; the year 1935; C. Preda, SCIV, 17, 1966, p. 363 sqq.

X. 23.

Issues of Erythreia Dumbrávenl, district Sibiu. Winkler, -

24.

Guteria

Single find; 2; 1 silver, i bronze; I.

160, no. 13.

p. -

see Sibiu.

Sibiu, district Gusjerija, the hill 'La

fmntlna

rece'; single find; 2;

bronzes; Rep., ms.; M. Rusu; SCCluj, Ser. III, VI, 3-4, 1955, p.92. XI. 25.

Issues of Egypt V1sea, corn. Jucu, district Cluj.

Single find; 1; tr.: Ptolemaios

XIII Auletes (81-52 B.C.): E. Chirilä, ActaMN, VI, 1969, p. 475, no. 4. XII. 26.

Observation: imitation?

Issues of Histria Barboi, city Galai, district Galati 'Tirighina';

Single find; Ia few'

the 2nd-the Ist century B.C.; 'coins' Tornis; the Ist century B. C. the Ist century A. D. and Maroneia;

N. Gostar, Apulum, V, 1965, p. 145; Cetäi, 27.

-

the 2nd-the ist century B. C.

Beneti, corn. Tanacu, district Vaslui.

p.

34.

Single find?; I. Winkler,

p. 158, no. 1. 28.

Bereti, district Galaçi.

In the North-West of the rural quarter;

single find; 1; dh: Pinck 416; MuslstMold; B. Mitrea, SCIV, XV, 1964, p. 569, no. 1. 29.

Bistreu, district Olt. Single find; i; dh; C. Preda and B. lonescu, RevMuz, ifi, 1, 1966, p. 68.

30.

Birlad, district Vaslui.

Single find; 2; dhe

Pinck 416; Mitrea, SC IV,

16, 1965, p. 606, no. 1. 31.

Brila, district Br aila.

Single find; 1; dh; C. Preda and B. lonescu,

RevMuz, III, 1966, no. I, 32.

p.

68.

Canlla (on the map, no. 12) corn. Lipnia, district ConstanJa.

Single

find; 1; dh; CahNum; B. Mitrea, SCIV, XI, 1960, p. 190, no. I. 33.

Cbet1, corn. Podu Turcului, district Bacâu 'Cociuba'; ca 25-30 13; dhe: Pinck 416,417,419, 421,435,436,439; the year 1962; M. Gh. Gheorghiu-Dej(9), MNA (4); B. Mitrea, SCIV, XV, 1964, p. 569, no. 3.

34.

Clrai, district Ialomija.

a) In the city: single find; i; dh; B. Mitrea,

SCIV, XLI, 1961, p. 146, no. 3; b) 'Gräditea' ;single find; 1; dh; V. CulicA, SCIV, 19, 1968, p. 143. 35.

CostetI, corn. Oràtioara de Sus, district Hunedoara.

a)

'Cethjuia';

single find?; dhe. Histria and Mesambria; MIC; Dacian citadel; V. Parvan, Getica,

p.

468, 606; M. Macrea, ArSC, LI, 1933-35, p. 147, sqq;

218

B. Mitrea;

p.

41; information, H. Daicoviciu;

b) on the road of

access to one of the citadels (probably Coste,ti); single find; 1; bronze; V. Prvan, La pntration, p. 46. 36.

Cremenari (?)‚ corn. Galicea, district Vilcea. Hoard; ca 3kg; 6; 4 dhe Histria, 2dir (infra. no. XXXW, 91); the year 1946; 0. iliescu, SCN, II, 1958, P. 449-450, no. 5. Observation: the information is not certain; possibly that they come from Budeti, district Vilcea.

37.

Criv, corn. Budeti, district ilfov. 'Ciricile' ;hoard?; 8;7 dhe Histria, 1 im. dac. Philip II: the second half of the 4th century B.C.; the years 1950-52; C. Preda and M. lonescu, RevMuz, III, 1, 1966, p. 67 sqq.

38.

Focanl, district Vrancea. Between Focani and Galai; single find; 1; dh; B. Mitrea, SCIV, 19, 1968, p. 171-172, no. 7.

39.

Giurgiu, district ilfov.

In the city; single find; 1; dh; Gh. Rdulescu

and M. lonescu, SCN, I, 1957, Grãditea see Clrai -

40.

p.

466.

-

Luncani, corn. Boorod, district Hunedoara 'Piatra Roie' ;Single find;? dhe Histria, Mesambria, i im. tr. Th; M1C1 Dacian citadel; C. Daicoviciu and collaborators, SCIV, I, 1, 1950, P. 146; C. Daicoviclu, Cetatea dacicã de la Piatra Role, 1954,

pp.

75-76.

41.

Murgeni, district Vaslui. 1967, p. 193, no. 13.

Single find; 1; dh; B. Mitrea, SCIV, 18,

42.

Poiana, Supra, no. VII, 14.

43.

Satu-Nou a) Supra, no. VII, 17; b) 'Valea lul Voicu'; single find; 1; dh; the year 1958; B. Mitrea, SCIV, X, 1959, p. 157, no. 4.

44.

Splru Haret, corn. Bertetii de Jos, district Brälla. 1; bronze; r. Winkler, P. 162, no. 25.

45.

Ungureni, corn. Gr.iceana, district Bacu.

Single find;

a) Single find; 1; B.

Mitrea, SCIV, XII, 1961, p. 147, no. 13; b) 'Fundul Pleului' single find; 4; 2dhe Histria 2 dir.; the year 1963; B. Mitrea, SCIV, 19, 1968, P. 173, no. 18. 46.

Vaslui, district Vaslui. Single find; 1; dh: the 4th-3rd century B. C.; I. Winkler, P. 162, no. 28.

47.

Vaslui (the former district).

Xffl. 48.

XIV. 49.

Single find?;

I. Winkler,

p.

162, no. 29.

Issues of illyricum Deva, district Hunedoara. Hoard; 130; the 3rd-the 2nd century B. C. I. Winkler, p. 160, no. 12. Issues of Issus Potoc, corn. Sasca Montana, district Cara-Severin. Hoard; 20; 1. Issus, I Scodra, the rest Dyrr. and Ap.; the year 1862; M. Vienna; Rep, ms.

219

XV. 50. 51..

Issues of Maroneia Barbo9i, Supra, no. XII, 26. Boneagi, corn. Dorobanju, district ralomija 'Virtop' or IComuna Veche' ;hoard; 31; 1tr. Maroneia: the second century B. C. 30 tre. Th.; the year 1962; M. Cälärai; Dacian pottery; B. Mitrea, SCIV, XIV, 1963,

52.

p.

467, no. 1; A. Atanasiu, RevMuz, N, 1967,

Focani (on the map no. 38), district Vrancea. I. Winkler, p. 160, no. 14.

54.

Furculeti, district Teleorman.

Single find; 1; tr.;

Hoard; 61; 1tr. Maroneia, 20 tre.

Th, 40 dhe. Dyrr.; CabNum B. Mitrea, $CW

XI, 1960,

p.

191, no. 6.

Jigodin the city Miercurea Ciuc. district Harghita 'Codor' ;hoard; 19; Itr. Maroneia, itr. MP, 15 tre. Th; M. Sf. Gheorghe; Rep, ms. Mierläu, district Bihor. In the village; single find; 1; 'coin' M. Oradea; B. Mitrea, SCW, 19, 1968,

57.

98, no. 10.

p.

53.

56.

52.

Celei, district Olt. hoard; 17; 1tr. Maroneia, 13 tre. Th. 2im. tre. Th. Iim. (of what coin?); M133; I. Winkler,

55.

P.

Oradea, district Bihor.

p.

172, no. 10.

a) In the city; 1; single find; b) in the sur-

roundings; single find; 1; 'coin'; The collection of the lyceum no. I Oradea; B. Mitrea, SCW, 16, 1975, p. 608, no. 9. 58.

Pianu de Sus, corn. Pianu, district Alba. Mitrea, p. 89, no. 31.

Single find; 1; tr.; B.

59.

Popeti, Supra, no. II, 3, b.

60.

?ngeorzu Nou, corn. Lechina, district Bistrija-Näsäud, 'La Spini'; hoard; 96; 1tr. Maroneia, 95 tre. Th, im. tre. Th; the year 1902, Rep. ms.

xvr.

Issues of Mesambria

61.

Coste9ti, Supra, no. XII, 35.

62.

Cucerdea, district Mures. The hill of Podel, near the precipice PIriul Mare'; single find; 1; 'coin'; the year 1944; Dacian (?) pottery; Rep, ms.

63.

Luncani, Supra, no. XII, 40.

64.

Media, district Sibiu.

In the city; single find? 'coins' of Mesam-

bria and Thasos; B. Mitrea, SCW, 20, 1969, 65.

Orlea, district Olt.

66.

Popeti, Supra, no. II, 3, c.

67.

p.

163-164, no. 9.

Single find; 1; bronze; I. Winkler, p. 162,no. 21.

Reca, corn. Dobrosloveni, district Olt.

Single find; 1; bronze; the

period of autonomy; B. Mitrea, SCW, 15, 1964,

220

p.

571, no. 11.

XVIL 68.

Issues of Thracian Mesambria Tlrnävioara the city Copp Mc, district Sibiu, 'Cetuia'; Single find; 1; bronze; the Ist century B.C.; ActaMN, IV, 1967, p. 456, no. 4.

XVIII. 69.

XIX.

E. Chirila and collaborators,

Issues of Nicaea Hunedoara, district Hunedoara. Hoard?; INicaea, 19 dhe. Dyrr., 5Ap., 1006 dir. (infra. no. XXXW, 149, a); B. Mitrea, p. 88, no. 17, p. 105, no. 36; I. Winkler, p. 112, no. 25. Issues of Odessus

70.

BrIncoveanu, Supra, no. VI, 9. tr.: the 2nd century B.C.

71.

Cetäçeni, district Arges.

Singl e fi nd; 1; bronze: the phase of

autonomy; B. Mitrea, SCIV, xrv, 1963, p. 467, no. 3. 72.

Popetl, Supra, no. II, 3, d.

73.

Zlmnicea, district Teleorman, 'Citadel'; single find; 3 or 5; bronzes; the 3rd the 2nd century B.C.; the year 1949; MNA; I. Nestor, SCIV I, 1, 1950, p. 94-95,;B. Mitrea, SCIV, 16, 1965, p. 244, 252-253. -

XX. 74.

Issues of Olbia Folteti, district Galaji.

Near railway station; single find; 1; bronze;

the year 1937; I. E. Dirnian, SCIV, VI, 1-2, 1955, p. 306. XXL 75.

Issues of Paeonia Cälina, corn. Prundeni, district Vllcea, 'Linoiu' tr.,: the king Patraos; B. Mitrea, SCIV, XII, 1961,

76.

Richitele, district Arges, Single find; 1; tr.

‚

single find; 1; p.

146, no. 4.

the king Patraos; B.

Mitra, SCIV, XI, 1960, p. 190, no. 2. XXII.

Issues of Panormus

77.

Cisndie, Supra, no. VIII, 20.

XXlTI. 78.

XXIV.

Issues of Panticapaeurn Timioara (on the map no. 8) district Timi, Str. Plugarilor no. 46; hoard?; 9; 1Panticapaeum: post Alexander the Great; B. Mitrea, SCIV, 16, 1965, p. 609, no. 14. Issues of Pharus

79.

asndie, Supra, no. VIII, 20.

XXV.

Issues of Priene

80.

Tulghe, corn. MJre,u Mare, district Maramure; Hoard; 105; 1 Priene, 104 Dacian coins; the second half of the 3rd century B. C. I. Winkler, p. 162, no. 26. 221

XXVI.

Issues of Scodra

81.

Potoc.

XXVII.

Supra, no. XIV, 49.

Issues of The ssalonica

82.

Novaci.

XXVIII.

Supra, no. III, 5, b.

Issues of Tomi

83.

Barbo9i.

Supra, no. XII, 26.

84.

Radovanu (on the map no. 16), district Ilfov. the year 1963;

85.

Dacian settlement;

Single find;

Ibronze;

Information B. lonescu.

Rosei, district Ia1omia.

Single find;

autonomy;

the year 1940;

B. Mitrea, SCIV, 17, 1966, p. 418, no. 5.

86.

Satu Nou.

Supra, no. VII, 17.

87.

TIrgoru Vechi, the city of Ploeti, district Prahova. 1; bronze; the period of autonomy; XIV, 1963, p. 467, no. 7.

XXIX. 88.

bronze;

the period of

the year 1962;

Chilioara, com. Coeiu, district S.iaj.

XXX.

the year 1844;

B. Mitrea, SCIV,

Hoard;

133;

1 Valent. Hipp.

Rep, ms.

Issues of Macedonia after the year 158 8. C.

1.

Arad, district Arad.

2.

Bicsad, district Covasna.

3.

Bogai, districiArge. B. Mitrea,

p.

Single find;

Single find;

Hoard;

68, no. 29,

1. tr.;

p.

Rep, ms.

i tr.;

I. Winkler, p. 108, no. 2

tre. MP and Th;

the year 1913;

76, no. 13.

Boiu Mare, district Mararnure. "The mountains of Dobulor"; (?);

tre. MP and dir.; B. Mitrea,

p.

5.

Bxmncoveanu. Supra, no. VI, 9.

6.

Bucovâ, district Dolj. Hoard; ?; I Th); I. Winkler, p. 108, no. 5.

7.

Bucureti. The "23 August" stadium; MNA; -

hoard

76, no. 8.

tre. MP and Th;

Single find;

MNA (1 MP,

I piece of bronze:

142-141 B.C. (identification according to E. Chiril);

8.

Single find;

Issues of Valentia Hipponium;

132 dir.;

4.

1;

the year 1953;

B. Mitrea, SCIV, 16, 1965, p. 606, no. 3.

Clugârija

-

see Meriani.

Cprioru, corn. Tätarani, district Dimbovita. "Siminoc"; hoard: 101; tre.; 97 MP, 4 Th; the year 1956; M. Tirgovite (97), MNA (4); E. Chiril G. Mihescu, op.cit. -

9.

Chitid, corn. Boorod, district Hunedoara. tre ("perhaps also imitations");

10.

Cluj, district Cluj.

1; M. Deva;

The hill "Plea"; hoard; Rep, ms.

Hoard; 12 tre MP and Th; B. Mitrea, 222

p.

67 no. 23.

11.

Cojasca, district Dimbovia.

Hoard; c. 120-150;

im. 12 Dacian; the year 1936, Cab-Num.; 0. Iliescu, SCN, IV, 1970, p. 485. 12.

p.

108, no. 8;

Conjeti, district Teleorman. a) Hoard; 11 tre; I. Winkler, p. 108, no. 9, b) in the village; Hoard (?); Itr. MP, dhe Ap. and Dyrr., 1 dr. "others";

13.

tre.; 38 MP, 14Th,

I. Winkler,

Dacian settlement;

B. Mitrea, SCN, II, 1958, pp. 173, 184.

Cugir, district Alba. a) on "the Hill of Citadel"; single find (?); 8 tre MP, (?) Th, IDacian, 2 dii (Domitian); the year 1937; Rep, ms.; b) Hoard; Im. Th; B. Mitrea, p. 43, no. 7, p. 66, no. 8; C)

at the foot of "the Hill of Citadel";

Philip U; 95-99.

the year 1955;

hoard; (?) 9; 8 tre. MP, 1tr.

M. Deva;

0. Floca, SCN, II, 1958, pp.

14.

Deleni, corn Teslui, district Olt. Single find; 2; 1 tr. MP, 1 dr. (infra, no. XXXIV, 106); I. Winkler, p. 132, no. 58.

15.

Hichiu, district Braov. i tr.; Rep, ms.

16.

HIrova, district Constana. 1965;

17.

To the west of the village;

Hoard;

B. Mitrea, SCIV, 18, 1967,

single find;

9; 3 tre. MP, 6 Th;

p.

the year

193 no. 11.

Hunedoara, district Hunedoara. The field of the ironworks; hoard; 44; 1 tr. MP, 4 d. (infra, no. XXXIV, 149); c. the year 1911; MIC (5);

I. Winkler, SCN, II, 1958,

pp.

403-404, no. V.

18.

Jigodin, Supra, no.XV, 55.

19.

Laslu Mic, corn. Suplac, district Mure.

20.

Merenli de Sus, corn. Mereni, district Teleorman; "Dreaju". Hoard ?; the year 1962; Ml'VIB (6); B. Mitrea, SCIV, XIV, 1963, p. 467, no. 6.

21.

Meriani (former Clugrija), corn. Bbia, district Teleorman. "Bäloiu"; hoard; 14; 10 tre. MP, 4 Th of which 2 im; MNA; Dacian

Hoard;

settlement (?); B. Mitrea, SCIV, XV, 1964, SCIV, 17, 1966, pp. 372-374. 22.

Nucet, corn. Chiojdeanca, district Prahova. tre. Th; Cab. Num.; I. Winkler, Mih.escu, p. 33, no. 22.

p.

p.

tre.; Rep, ms.

569, no. 4;

C. Preda;

Hoard; ?; I MP, "a few"

108, no. 15;

E. ChiriTh

-

G.

23.

0cniJa, corn. Teaca, district Bistria-Ns1ud. Rep, ms.

Single find; i tr.;

24.

Orbeasca de Sus, coin. Orbeasca, district Teleorman. 1 tr.;I. Winkler, p. 108, no. 17.

25.

Petelea, district Mure. Hoard; 200; 2 tre., 198 im.; M. Sibiu (1); I. Winkler, p. 108, no. 18; N. Lupu, SCN, I, 1957, p. 41 sqq.; E. ChiriTh. G. Mihescu, p. 33, no. 25.

Single find;

-

-

26.

Protea Mare

-

see ttrnava.

Rahu the city of Sebe, district Alba. 223

Single find;

a) tre. MP, dhe.

Dyrr.; Rep., ms.; b) I Daciantr., um. Th; 19; p. 75, no. 1. 27.

Roiorii de Vede, district Teleorman.

B. Mitrea,

a) "In orchards";

i tr.; the year 1909; b) i im.; the year 1930; B. Mitrea, SCIV, 16, 1965, P. 608, no. 11. 28.

Seleu, corn. Dane, district Mures.

29.

Slnpetru, district Braov. "La Grind". MP, 56 im. tre Th.;

the year 1959;

p.

67, no.

single find;

M. Roiorii de Vede;

Hoard (?);

tre.; Rep., ms.

Hoard;

59; 2 tre MP, i im.

M. Braov;

E. Chiri1. and

I. Pop, Apulum, WI/I, 1958, p. 145 sqq. 30.

Suatu, district Cluj. Hoard; 1863; MNMBp. (6), MIC (6);

31.

Tlrnava (former Protea Mare), district Sibiu. Rep, ms.

32.

Vrrnaga (?)‚ corn. Certeju de Sus, district Hunedoara. 5;

33.

1 tr. MP, 3 tre Th, i dr.;

13 tre. Th;

CabNum.;

a.

p.

Transilvania.

c. 280;

135; 122 tre MP,

I. Winkler, p. 108, no. 24;

b) Single find;

37.

Cojasca.

i tr.;

108, no. 25. Hoard;

Imitations of Macedonia Brincoveanu.

?;

tre. MP, Th.;Rep., ms.

Prima tetradrachins

Supra, no. VI, 9.

Supra, no. XXX, 11.

Mura Mica, corn. Gorneti, district Mure. tre. MP, 120 im. tre. Th; Rep., ms.

39.

Hoard; ?

B. Mitrea, SCIV, 18, 1967, p. 195, no. 26.

36.

38.

a) Hoard;

Vitneti, corn. Purani, district Teleorman, Single find; I. Winkler,

35.

Single find; i tr.;

Rep., ins.

Viioara, district Teleorman. i tr.; MMB;

34.

12; 2 tre MP, lø tre Th.; the year Rep, ms.

the year 1903;

Hoard;

167; 39 im.

MNMBp (the majority);

Nicolae Blcescu, corn, C1mui, district Teleorman. "The plain of Cioarei"; XXXIV, 194);

hoard; MNA;

C. 100;

1 im. tr. MP, 13 dir. (infra, no.

I. Winkler, p. 108, no. 14;

B. Mitrea- SCN,

II, 1958, pp. 164-166. 40.

Petelea.

Supra, no. XXX, 25.

41.

Poiana, corn. Nicoreti, district Galai.

Single find;

hoard; ?;

im. tre (MP ? or earlier ?); R. Vulpe, Dacia, N. S., I, 1957, 42.

Roiorii de Vede.

43.

Slnpetru.

44.

Vãrmaga (?) (on the map no. 32).

p.

Supra, no. XXX, 27.

Supra, no. XXX, 29. Hoard ? Single find? I Im?

(probably the same as no. 32); 0. Floca, SCN, II, 1958, P. 103.

224

154.

45.

Oltenia.

Single find ?;

im.; Col. Gh. Georgescu-Corabia;

B. Mitrea,

p. 76, no. 12. 46.

Transilvania. CabNum

XXXI. 47.

Hoard? Single find ?; ?; im. tre. MP, im. tre. Th;

Issues of Thasos Adlnca, corn. Gura Ocniei, district Dlrnboviça. Dacian tre. 6 tre. Th; the year 1953; C. Preda, SCN, II, 1958,

48.

Bistreju, district Dolj. SCN, I, 1957,

49.

p.

p.

p.

also Dacian pottery noticed;

The pool.

single find;

i tr.;

0. Iliescu,

461. Single find;

i tr.;

E. Chiril

-

34, no. 5.

Bogata, district Mure. B. Mitrea,

Hoard; ?; 52; 46

380 sqq.

p.

Boca, district Caras-Severin. G. Mihescu,

50.

Rep., ms.

Vienna, Private collections;

Hoard;

c. 800;

tre and im;

the year 1904;

67, no. 21.

51.

Bogaji.

Supra, no. XXX, 3.

52.

Bonjeti, corn. Clrligele, district Vrancea; Constantinescu

-

H. Boos, SCN, I, 1957,

53.

Boneagu.

54.

Braov, district Braov. tation);

Single find;

p.

i tr.;

G.

469.

Supra, no. XV, 51. a) Hoard; ?;

I. Winkler, p. 102, no. 36;

tre, um;

E. ChiriTh.

M. Braov (imiG. Mihâescu, p.

-

35, no. 9. 55.

Braila, district Bràila.

"The lake Dulce" or "Chercea";

single find;

1 tr; Information N. Haruche. 56.

Brincoveanu (on the map no. 5).

57.

Bucium, district Alba. Rep., ms.

58.

Bucov.

59.

Bucharest (on the map no. 7).

To the north of the village;

E. ChiriTh.

quarry;

hoard;

-

p.

c. 152;

d) "Pipera";

42.

e) "Popeti-Leordeni";

hoard ?;

?; tre; MNA; b) Single find;

68, no. 31; p.

59; tre.;

42,

SCIV, 18, 1967,

35, no. 12.

C)

the year 1938;

E. Chiril.

-

hoard;

C.

20;

p.

MNA (59);

I. Winkler,

p.

p.

-

silver

36, no.

102, no.

tre, i im. (struck in

f) "Tei";

tre;

?;

Dacian

I. Winkler, p. 104, no. 58.

Butcule, ti, corn. Sceni, district Teleorman. Th, 21 dir. (infra, no. XXXIV, 50);

Gh.

Hoard;

30; 9 tre.

tefan, Dacia, IX-X, 1941-

44, p. 349 sqq. 61.

192,

"Herãstrâu"

G. Mihescu,

14; tre; MNA;

I. Winkler, p. 102, no. 45.

settlement; 60.

a) Hoard;

G. Mihescu,

vessel with Dacian ornaments;

Thrace);

hoard; ?; tre;

Supra, no. XXX, 6.

tre.; M1VtB (2); B. Mitrea, no. 2;

Supra, no. VI, 9.

Butimanu, district Ilfov.

Hoard; ?; I. Winkler, p. 98, no. 7.

225

62.

Caol, corn. Roia, district Sibiu. c. 100;

63.

tre;

the year 1777;

B. Mitrea,

hoard; ?; I tr Th, im. tr. C.

p.

154, no. 15;

C.1ugàreni, district 1110v.

-

Cãlugria,

P.

the year 1948;

B. Mitrea,

C. Preda, SCN, II, 1958,

Hoard;

?; tre, 2 im, tre;

pp.

466-

B. Mitrea,

192.

see Meriani.

-

65.

C.prioru.

66.

Ctálina, corn. Panticeu, district Cluj.

Supra, no. XXX, 8.

the year 1881;

68.

66, no. 10.

p.

Th (?)‚ 21 dir. (infra, no. XXXIV, 57);

SCIV, 18, 1967,

67.

hoard;

C.lärai, district Ialomia "Gräditea"; SCIV, IX, 1958, 467, no. 5.

64.

The hill "Uselberg";

also pottery noticed;

Hoard;

?; tre. Th and dir;

Rep., ms.

Celei, Supra, no. XV, 52. Cernatu, district Covasna. Dacian settlement;

Single find;

i tr;

M. Sf. Gheorghe;

B. Mitrea, SCIV, XII, 1961,

p.

146, no. 5;

Z. Székely, ms. 69.

Cetheni, district Arge.

70.

Cetea, corn. Galda de Jos, district Alba. a) The hills "Ticuiata" and "Mãrua"; single find;

Single find;

tre;

?; tre; B. Mitrea,

I. Winkler,

p.

98, no. 11.

67, no. 17; b) "Pietri";

p.

single find; 4; 2 im. tre; 1 dr, i di (infra, no. XXXIV, 71); MIC, MNA; Rep., ms. 71.

Cigmãu, corn. Geogiu, district Hunedoara. dhe. Dyrr, Ap;

72.

Ciuperceni, corn. Cosrneti, district Teleorman. C. Preda, SCN, II, 1958,

73.

Hoard ?;

tre Th.

Single find; i tr;

466, no. 3.

p.

Cimpuri-Surduc, corn. Gurasada, district Hunedoara; the railway;

?;

Rep., ms.

hoard ?;

"a few";

on a hill near

tre; Rep., ms.

74.

Cluj, Supra, no. XXX, 10.

75.

Coada Malului, corn. Magurele, district Prahova. and Dacian ornaments of silver; B. Mitrea,

p.

Hoard;

?; tre;

69, no. 41.

76.

Cojasca.

77.

Cricicova, district Tirni.

78.

Cugir (?).

79.

Curcani, district Ilfov.

80.

Dalnic, corn. Moaca, district Covasna. "Dealul Frurnos"; "a few" tre. Th, I dh. Dyrr.; Rep., ms.

81.

Drti

-

Supra, no. XXX, 11. 1 tr;

B. Mitrea,

66, no. 2.

P.

Supra, no. XXX, 13, a. Single find;

Ilfov, district Ilfov.

(infra, no. XXXIV, 104); 82.

Single find;

Deva, district Hunedoara.

1 tr; Information B. lonescu. hoard; ?

Hoard :Single find ?; ?; 1 tr. Th, i dr.

B. Mitrea, SCN, II, 1958, p. 161, no. 13. Hoard; ?;tre. Th, dir; Rep., ms.

226

83.

Dobolii de Jos, corn. Ilieni, district Covasna. i dr. (infra, no. xxxrv, 117); Rep., ms.

84.

Dridu, district Ilfov.

85.

F rcaele, district Olt. 1964, p. 576, no. 48.

86.

Feleac, corn. Nueni, district Bistrita-Nâsàud. Dacian; B. Mitrea, p. 67, no. 24.

87.

Furculeti, Supra, no. XV, 54.

88.

Single find;

i tr.;

Single find;

Ghelinja, district Covasna.

Hoard;

dhe. Dyrr., Ap.; the year 1P75; (the rest); Rep., ms. 89.

Giurgiu, district Ilfov. -

Grãditea

-

Single find;

I. Winkler,

i tr;

p.

itr.,

100, no. 22.

B. Mitrea, SCIV, XV,

c. 200;

Hoard ?: ?; tre Th,

tre. Th (?) "probably"

M. Sighioara (1), M. Sf. Gheorghe

Hoard ?; ?;

tre; B. Mitrea,

p.

68, no. 35.

see Cãlärai.

90.

Grniceri, district Arad. Between Grniceri and 120; tre..; I. Winkler, p. 100, no. 26.

ic1u;

91.

Gura Ocniei, district DImbovia.

tre.; M. Ploeti

(1);

92.

Hoard;

c. 20;

hoard;

Information V. Teodorescu.

Htteg (district ?)‚ district Hunedoara.

Single find; 1tr; I. Winkler,

SCN, ifi, 1960, p. 455, no. V. 93.

Hirova.

Supra, no. XXX, 16.

94.

Hot.rani, corn. Frcaele, district Olt.

Hoard;

?; 3 tre. Th, 21 dir;

MMA; B. Mitrea, Dacia, IX-X, 1941-44, p. 384; 28, p. 111, no. 97. 95.

Hunedoara (on the map no. 17), district Hunedoara. i tr;

96.

Idem,

E. Chiril

-

p.

68, no.

Single find;

G. Mihescu, p. 36, no. 45.

lederile, district DImbovia.

?;

Hoard ?;

tre;

N. Simache,

Cetãti traco-dacice in regiunea Ploeti (dissertation at Museum session 1966). 97.

Jigodin (on the map no. 18).

98.

Lueta, district Harghita. Hoard?; 2 tre. Th, 2 tre Philip II, 2 tre Alexander the Great; I. Winkler, SCN, II, 1958, p. 403, no. IV.

99.

Mcin, district Tulcea. M1VtB;

100.

Mgherani, district Mure.

?; "a few";

Mrtini, district Harghita.

Hoard;

MIC (10 dir.);

Media, district Sibiu.

laborators,

Hoard ?;

tre;

5 tre;

Z. Sz4kely, SCN, III, 1960,

no. XXXIV, 173); 102.

Hoard;

the year 1965;

B. Mitrea, SCIV, 18, 1967, p. 193, no. 12.

Pdure (1); 101.

Supra, no. XV, 55.

a)

17;

p.

555, no. 1.

1 tr. Th, 16 dir. (infra,

Rep., ms.

Single find;

1; tr; E. Chirila and col-

ActaMN, IV, 1967, p. 457, no. 3;

64.

227

M. Slngeorgiu de

b) Supra, no. XVI,

103.

Meriani.

Supra, no. XXX, 21.

104.

Monor, district Bistriça-Näsud. M. Bistria (1), ]VUC (2);

105.

E. Chirilã

Moreni, district Dimbovia. and Geography, C raiova; Num., IV, 1969, p. 10.

106.

c. 30;

tre;

G. Mihescu,

-

Single find;

0. Toropu-O.

Moteni, district Teleorman. single find; i tr;

Hoard;

the year 1940;

p.

37, no., 54.

1; tr; Faculty of History Stoi ca, ComC raiova, Ser.

The old precincts of the village;

I. Spiru, SCN, ifi, 1960, p. 553, no. 2.

107.

Nicoleti, corn. Frumoasa, district Harghita. Rep., ms.

Single find;

i tr;

108.

Nocrich, district Sibiu. Single find; tre. Alexander the Great, tre. Th. im. tre. Th, i dh, Dyrr., i type KOEQN Rep., ms.

109.

Novaci.

110.

Nucet.

111.

Nuci (former Plrlita), corn. Vasilai, district ilfov.

Supra, no. TIE, 5, c. Supra, no. XXX, 22.

tre., im. tre. Th;

the year 1960;

Hoard;

MNA (40), MMB (5);

c. 50;

C. Preda,

SCIV, 17, 1966, pp. 370-372. 112.

Ocna Sibiului, district Sibiu. no. 35.

Single find;

M.

ürbeascade Sus (on the map no. 24), district Teleorman. ?; tre; Dacian pottery; I. Winkler, VI, 1969, p. 161.

114.

Ostrov, district Constana. year 1903;

115.

CabNum;

Hoard;

Hoard;

Petreti, corn. Corbeanca, district Ilfov. Winkler, p. 102, no. 38.

M.

Petrosani, district Hunedoara.

118.

119.

-

Plrlita

? ; tre;

?; 200 tre;

p.

I.

c. the year

0. Floca, SCN,

-

Single find;

1 tr;

-

B.

Hoard;

1 tr. Th, 26

66, no. 5. 76;

"part originals, part imitations"; Rep., ms.

see Teleorman.

Piva Pietrii, corn. Giurgeni, thstrictlalomija. I. Winkler, p. 102, no. 43. -

121.

Hoard;

B. Mitrea, p. 66, no. 6;

Ap., 23 dhe. Dyrr.

Pielea

172, no. 12.

p.

Pianu de Sus, corn. Pianu, district Alba. dhe.

120.

Hoard;

Pianu de Jos, corn. Pianu, district Alba. Mitrea,

the

? tre, "may be imitations"; p.

116.

M. Deva (2); 106.

Hoard?;

102, no. 37; I. Spiru, RevMuz,

178; 89 tre. Th, 89 dir.;

B. Mitrea, SCIV, 19, 1968,

1936-37; II, 1958,

I. Winkler, p. 102,

B. Mitrea, p. 68, no. 36, p. 113,no. 113.

Pcureji (?) district Prahova. MNA (3);

p.

1. tr;

Hoard ?;

tre;

see Nuci.

Ploeti, district Prahova. Quarter Ploi et i-north Information V. Teodorescu. 228

single find; 1 tr;

122.

Podu Vadului the city of Breaza, district Prahova. B. Mitrea, SCIV, 18, 1967, pp. 193 -194, no. 15.

123.

Poiana Teiului, district Neamu. probably i im;

124.

125.

3 tre, from which

B. Mitrea, SCIV, 18, 1967, p. 194, no. 16.

Popeti, corn. Vasilai, district Ilfov. 102, no. 44;

p.

Hoard;

E. Chiril

p.

38, no. 75.

p.

Poroschia, the city of Alexandria, district Teleorman. Winkler,

Hoard: 124;

the year 1938;

I.

102, no. 46.

Prundu, district Ilfov. "Vadul Pescriei"; AnUnivB, XV, 1966,

128.

Dacian settlement;

G. Mihäescu,

-

39 tre. Th, 85 dir. (infra, no. XXXIV, 229);

127.

i tr;

Supra, no. II, 3, e, g.

Pope9ti.

I. Winkler, 126.

Hoard ?;

Single find;

p.

itr; Fl. Preda,

24.

Rernetea Mare, district Timi. XCIV, 242);

single find;

Hoard;

the year 1905;

176; 7 tre. Th, 169 d (infra,

also Dacian ornaments of silver;

Rep.,

MS.

129.

Riu Sadului, district Sibiu. The source of the Sadu; years 1860 -1870; Rep., ms.

130.

Roata (dc Jos or Mica?), corn. Roata de Jos, district Ilfov. find;

i tr;

B. Mitrea, SCIV, XV, 1964,

131.

Rozavlea, district Maramure.

132.

S.cuieni, district Bihor. no. I Oradea;

133.

Sebe, district Alba.

Singeorzu Nou. i tr;

Single find;

136.

Stkcua, district Braila. MNA;

140.

Stoeneti, district Ilfov.

Suatu.

hoard;

c. 50;

b) "Fulgewand";

single find;

Hoard ?:

?;

tre;

Rep., ms.

To the north-west of the village;

hoard; the

Hoard;

42;

14 tre and im. tre. Th;

B. Mitrea, SCIV, 16, 1965,

p.

28

609, no.

Supra, no. XXX, 30.

ieu, district Bistrita -Nsud. Trtàeti, district Ilfov. XXXVI, 1913,

141.

608, no. 12.

C. Preda, SCN, II, 1958, p. 240 sqq.

Dacian tre; the year 1963; 13, p. 610, no. 23.

139.

p.

53 tre. Th, 34 dir (infra, no. XXXIV, 295), 2 silver bars;

year 1953;

138.

Collection of the Lycaeurn

Rep., ms.

Slnmartin, district Harghita.

137.

Rep., ms.

Rep., ms.

a) Supra, no. XV, 60.

the year 1883;

I tr;

The neighbourhood of the city;

135.

87;

i tr;

Single

571, no. 12.

Single find;

B. Mitrea, SCIV, 16, 1965,

tre, dheDyrr. andAp.; 134.

p.

tre; ?; the

p.

Single find; ?; tre;

Hoard (?);

tre;

Rep., ms.

V. P'arvan, ARMSI,

29.

Teleorman (former Pielea), corn. MIrzneti, district Teleorman. Single find; itr; Collection of local school; I. Spiru, SCN, III, 1960,

p.

554, no. 3.

229

142.

Tisa, corn. Burjuc, district Hunedoara. Th, 2 im. tre. Th, 37 dhe. XXXIV, 320);

143.

Hoard;

over 950; 50 tre.

Dyrr., 19 dhe Ap., 848 d.

the year 1873;

MNNEBp;

T'irgovite, district DIrnbovija.

(infra, no.

Rep., ms.

Single find;

i tr;

I. Winkler, p.

106, no. 60. 144.

Turda, district Cluj.

Single find;

i tr;

E. ChiriTh.

-

G. Mihescu,

p. 39, no. 102. 145.

146.

Tuna, district Covasna. no. 61.

Single find;

Vasilaji, district Ilfov. Oltenia (2);

Hoard;

2 tre;

50;

C.

148.

Viioara.

149.

Viioara, corn. Tlrgu Trotu, district Bacu.

Supra, no. XXX, 33, a.

the spot "La budàe";

hoard;

806;

the year 1957;

dhe Dyrr.), M. Piatra Neamj (the rest); Mitrea, SCIV, IX, 1958, \Tldeti, district Vulcea. Mitrea, SCIV, Xli, 1961,

B.

SCN, II, 1958, p.28 sqq.

Single find ?; p.

MNA (100

Dacian settlement;

153, no. 8;

p.

The hamlet Vratic,

2 tre. Th; 3 im. tre. Th, 789 dhe.

Dyrr., 11 im. dhe. Dyrr., 1 dh. Ap.;

I tre., 2 im. tre. Th;

B.

147, no. 15.

Zimnicea, district Teleorman. vation);

106,

MNA (c. 40), M]v]:B, M.

Vârmaga, Supra, no. XXX, 32.

151.

p.

Information B. lonescu.

147.

150.

I. Winkler,

Single find;

Dacian settlement; B. Mitrea,

p.

tre, im. tr. (5 in exca68, no. 34;

SCIV, 16,

1965, p. 253. 152.

Bacu (district).

Single find;

153.

Banat.

154.

Hunedoara (district).

Single find ?;

1 tr;

I. Winkler, p. 98, no. 1.

tre, im. tre; Single find?;

B. Mitrea, 13 tre;

p.

66, no. 3.

I. Winkler,

p.

100, no.

29. 155.

Transilvania.

Hoard and single find;

the year 1853;

C)

Hoard;

Hoard;

a) 10 tre.:

117; tre., im. tre;

?; tre, 1 dh. Dyrr., dir.; MIC, CabNu

private collections;

Rep., ms.;

e) i tr.;

b)

tre. "numerous"

the year 1897; d) -

,CabNumVienna,

Sz1T1.y, SCN, III, 1960,

p. 557, no. 8. a.

Imitations of Thasian tetradrachms

156.

Afumai, district Ilfov. XXXIV, 1);

157.

Hoard; ?‚

jim. tr..

.

6 dir. (infra, no.

B. Mitrea, SCN, II, 1958, pp. 156-57,

Aiud, district Cluj.

In the city;

and Alexander the Great or Th; 158.

7;

single find?; MIC, MMB;

M. tre Philip II R., ms.

Bânia, the city of Petroani, district Hunedoara Bolii; Hoard; ?; 12 im. tre.; 1962, p. 218, no. 11.

230

M. Deva;

-

Quarry of Petera

B. :'trea, SCIV,

,III,

159.

Berceni, district Ilfov. Hoard; ?; 2 im. tre; B. Mitrea, SCIV, IX, 1958, p. 153, no. 11.

160.

Bobaia, corn. Bo,orod, district Hunedoara. Popescu, SCIV, XIV, 1963, p. 456, no. 54;

161.

Bogata, Supra, no. XXXI, 50.

M.

Braov.

163.

Bi mncoveanu 7 (on the map no. 5).

164.

Bucharest (on the map no. 7). im.; B. Mitrea,

69, no. 39;

p.

Cã1ärai.

166.

Ciineti, district Teleorman.

Cálugärija

-

168.

Celei (on the map no. 67).

169.

Cetea.

170.

Chiselet, district Ilfov.

Hoard;

c. 500-600;

3 im. tre. Th, 92 dir.

B. Mitrea,

M. Chijescu, SCIV, 17, 1966, p.

Supra, no. XV, 52.

Supra, no. XXXI, 70.

569,

p.

Hoard;

?;

9 im.;

172.

Cugir, Supra, no. XXX, 13, b.

173.

Dobreni, corn. Vrti, district Ilfov.

Supra, no. XXX, 11.

Hoard;

I. E. Dimian, SCIV, VI, 1-2, 1955,

Geoagiu, district Hunedoara.

hoard?;

B. Mitrea, SCIV, XV,

no. 6.

Cojasca,

im.;

Gràditea

-

p.

25;

im;

the year

305.

At the foot of hill near the village;

Rep., ms. see Càlärai.

Grditea Muncelului, corn. Ortiora de Sus, district Hunedoara. Hoard; 1951;

4;

2 im. tre. Th, 2dir (infra, no. XXXIV, 142, a) the year

Dacian settlement;

C. Daicoviciu, SCIV, III, 1952,

p.

304.

Gura Padinii, corn. Orlea, district Olt. Hoard; 248; 1 Alexander the Great, 1. im. tr. Th, dir. (infra, no. XXXIV, 144); the year 1962;

M. Corabia;

Luica, district Olt.

B. Mitrea, SCIV, XIV, 1963, Hoard:?;

M. Chiescu, SCN, IV, 1968, 178.

101;

the year 1961;

171.

M.

hoard;

Supra, no. XXX[, 64.

Cã1ugreni.

176.

information H. Daicoviciu.

see Mariani.

167.

175.

D.

Supra, no. XXXI, 63.

SCIV, XIII, 1962, p. 219, no. 15; 235 sqq.

-

MEC;

b) Supra, no. XXXI, 59, e.

(infra, no. XXXIV, 58), 6 im. dir.;

174.

im. tre.

.

Supra, no. VI, 9. a) Colentina;

165.

1940;

c 240;

MNA;

Supra, no. XXXI, 54.

1

1964,

Hoard;

Dyrr. andAp., dir. (infra, no. XXXIV, 31);

Th, dhe.

-

the year 1956;

10 im. tre. Th; pp.

hoard;

no. XXXIV, 168).

231

468, no. 14.

the year 1962;

448-449.

Luncani, corn. Bosorod, district Hunedoara. b) "Curmtura S.cuiului";

p.

500;

a) Supra, no. XU, 40;

9 im. tre. Th, 491 dir (infra,

179.

Mgureni (former Pirlita), corn. Sru1eti, district Ilfov. 40; im. tre.; p. 146, no. 8.

the year 1960;

180.

Meriani.

181.

Mura Mica.

182.

Nocrich.

183.

Nuci.

184.

Olteni, district Teleorman. Th;

MNA;

Supra, no. XXX, 21. Supra, no. XXXI, 38.

Supra, no. XXXI, 108.

Supra, no. XXXI, 111.

the year 1966;

Hoard;

49;

Pcureti.

186.

Pianu de Sus, Supra, no. XXXI, 119. Pirlita

-

45 Daciantre., 4 im. tre.

B. Mitrea, SCIV, 18, 1967, p. 196, no. 33.

185.

-

Supra, no. XXXI, 115-

see Mgureni.

187.

Poiana Teiului (?).

188.

Popeti.

189.

Rhu.

190.

SatuNou, corn. Mica, district Bihor.

Supra, no. XXXI, 123.

Supra, no. II, 3, f. Supra, no. XXX, 26, b. Hoard;

c. 180;

tr. Th, 125 dir, 4 im. dir (infra, no. )XXIV, 265); M. Arad; 191.

Sebe,

I. Winkler, SCN, I, 1957,

B. Mitrea,

p.

Sfineti, district Teleorman. B. Mitrea, Mat., I, 1953,

Hoard ?;

Stncrieni, district Harghita.

195.

SInpetru.

196.

Stoene9ti.

197.

Suhaia, district Teleorman.

Dacian settlement;

SCN, II, 1958,

p.

170 sqq.

Supra, no. XV, 60.

Supra, no. XXX, 29. Supra, no. XXXI, 137. a) to the west of the village;

2 im. tre. Th, 5 dhe. Dyrr., 8 dir. (infra, no.

the year 1964;

b) Single find; no. 15.

M. Chiescu, SCN, IV, 1968,

i dh. Dyrr.;

Timioara, district Tirni. SCIV, XV, 1964,

p.

Hoard ?;

the year 1950;

C. Secàanu, SCN, I, 1957,

pp.

p.

hoard;

xxxrv,

300,

453-454;

B. Mitrea, SCIV, 19, 1968,

TmcThu Mare, district Ilfov. Biatec, 2 tre. Nonnos;

199.

13 im. tre. Th, 92 dir;

Hoard of Dacian silver ornaments;

SIngeorzu Nou (on the map no. 134).

198.

im; the year

D. Popescu, Dacia, NS, II, 1958, pp.

194.

c. 200;

395;

the year 1930;

507 sqq;

p.

um. tr. Th., I dh. Dyrr.; 157, 181.

a);

the year 1932;

43, no. 6.

I im. dr. (infra, no. XXXIV, 276);

193.

130; 1 im.

79 sqq.

p.

(on the map no. 133), district Alba, hoard;

1801; 192.

Hoard;?;

B. Mitrea, SCIV, XII, 1961,

p.

172,

16 im. tre. Th, 1 tr.

I. Winkler,

p.

104, no. 56;

31 sqq.

Hoard?;

571, no. 14. 232

?;

2 im. dhe.;

B. Mitrea,

200.

Tisa.

201.

Supra, no. XXXI, 142.

Turma,s, corn. Märtineti, district Hunedoara. tre.;

the year 1925;

M. Deva;

202.

Viioara.

Supra, no. XXXI, 149.

203.

Vlâdeti.

Supra, no. XXXI, 150-

204.

Zimnicea.

205.

Banat.

206.

Galai (district;

Oltenia.

former Covurlui).

Single find?

Dessewffi;

Col. Gh. Georges cu

im. tre.;

former collection

68, no. 37.

Agthiciu, corn. Axente Sever, district Sibiu. Dacian hoard with 5 dhe, i piece of uncertain bronze;

Alba Julia, district Alba.

Hoard ?;

4.

Apoldu de Sus, district Sibiu.

5.

Arad. district Arad.

7.

Single find;

Quarter "Grãdite";

B. Mitrea, SCIV, XIII, 1962,

Single find;

i dh;

Rep., ms.

single find;

f dh;

B. Mitrea, p. 93, no. 5;

Barboi, the city of Galaçi, district Galaj;i.

70;

dhe.

Dyrr. and Rep.,

a) "Gherghina"

dhe. Dyrr., Rhodes, Dacian tre., 91, no. 51.

p.

Basarabi, the city of Calafat, district Dolj.

Hoard;

355;

BazaAcad. Craiova;

Bazia, corn. Socol, district Cara-Severin. "Lunca" or the village Lunca;

M.

217, no. 2.

Hoard;

Dacian ornaments of silver;

the

B. Mitrea, SCIV,

Baja de Cri, district Hunedoara.

die. Dyrr. and Ap; the year 1968; SCIV, 20, 1969, P. 162, no. 2. 9.

p.

i dh;

Ap.; ms.

(= "Tirighina ?"); hoard; 4000; dir., dii Commodus; B. Mitrea, 8.

M. Alba

Rep., ms.

Albeti, corn. Vedea, district Teleorman.

Arad;

M. Sibiu;

dhe. Dyrr and Ap.;

year 1967; MNA; in archaeological excavation; 19, 1968, p. 171, no. 1.

6.

Co rabia,

-

Issues of Dyrrhachlum

Julia; 3.

p.

I. E.

68, no. 38.

p.

Single find?

B. Mitrea,

silver ornaments; Rep., ms. 2.

Single find? 5 im. tre;

Transilvania. Supra, no. XXXI, c.

XXXIII. 1.

106.

305-306.

pp.

im. tre.;

B. Mitrea,

Romania (until 1914).

209.

P.

Supra, no. XXXI, 153.

M. Corabia; 208.

51 im.

Supra, no. XXXI, 151.

Dimian, SCIV, VI, 1-2, 1955, 207.

Hoard ?;

0. Floca, SCN, II, 1958,

dhe, im. B. Mitrea,

"The hill Lokva" or

Hoard; 52; 3 dhe. Dyrr., 10 dhe. Ap.,

38 dir. (infra, no. XXXIV, 18), 1 Dacian tr.; Rep., ms.

233

10.

Bejan, com. �imu�, district Hunedoara. Hoard ?; 13 dhe. Dyrr. and Ap.; B. Mitrea, p. 88, no. 10. - Bivolija - see Izvoarele.

11.

Bobaia. Supra, no. XXXI, 160.

12.

Bra�ov, district Bra�ov. "The valley of Citadel" ( ?) hoard ?; dhe. Rep., ms.

13.

Bruznic, com. Drago�, district Arad. Single find; 1 dh.; the year 1879; M. Timi>'oara; Rep., ms.

14.

Bucharest. a) Single find; 2 dhe; MMB (1); M. Macrea and M. Rusu, Dacia, N. S., IV, 1960, pp. 223-224; B. Mitrea, SCIV, 18; 1967; p. 192, no. 4; b) "Fundeni"; hoard; 9; 1 dh. Dyrr. (?), 8 dir. and im. dir. (infra, no. XXXIV, 45 e); the year 1952; CabNum (1 dh, 1 im. dr.); B. Mitrea, SCN, II, 1958, p. 162, footnote 2.

15.

Caprioara, com. Savtr�in, district Arad. Hoard; 85; 4 dhe. Dyrr., 4 dhe. Ap.; the year 1875; MNMBp (4). M. Timi�oara (4); Rep., ms.

16.

Cernatu, district Covasna. Hoard?; dhe and dir. (infra, no. XXXIV, 69). The year 1946; B. Mitrea and z. Székely, Mat, 11, 1956, p. 678, no. 7.

17.

Cigm3.u. Supra, no. XXXI , 71.

18.

Cincu, district Bra�ov. Hoard ?; dhe.; M. Agnita; B. Mitrea, SCIV, X, 1959, p. 157, no. 1.

19.

Cimpuri-Surduc, com. Gurasada, district Hunedoara. a) Hoard; ?; 10 dhe; the year 1886; MNA (8unpublished); b) Hoard; ?; dhe; the years 1943-1944; Rep., ms; e) "La M3.nastire"; 1 dh. Dyrr., í dh. Ap; Dacian fortification; M. Valea-L. Ma.rghitan, Sargetia, IV, 1966, p. 70.

20.

Cimpuri de Sus, com. Gurasada, district Hur.edoara. Hoard; 8; dhe; Rep., ms.

21.

Cirlomane�ti, com. Verne�ti, district Buzáu. 1 "coin of gilt bronze with mention of the city of Dyrrhachium"; t1'2 year 1967; archaeo­ logical excavation; B. Mitrea, SCIV, 20, H•19, p. 162, no. 5.

22.

Cluj, district ciuj. Quarter "Gheorgheni"; single find; 3 dhe; CabNumCluj; E. Chiriláand collaborators, .\ctaMN, IV, 1967, no. 6-7, 9.

23.

Con}e�ti. Supra, no. XXX, 12, b.

24.

Cornetu, com. Capreni, district Dolj. Hoard; 129; 1 dh. Dyrr., 127 dir. (infra, no. XXXIV, 84), 1 illegible: O. Iliescu, SC N, III, 1960, p. 477 sqq.

"

- Coronini - see Pescari. 25.

Coste�ti, com. Od\'. )' tioara de Sus, district f-:.·nedoara. a) Single find; 1 im. dh. Dyrr.; MIC; B. Mitrea, p. 88, --:). 15. b) "Sub Martinoi": single find; 1 dh. Dyrr. , 1 im. dh. Dyrr.; �he 2nd century B.C.; the 234

year 1957; MIC; [1961], p. 315. 26.

Dacian settlement;

H. Daicovociu, Mat., VII

Cozmeni, corn. Slnmartin, district Harghita. the 2nd century B.C.;

27.

Dalmc.

28.

Decea, corn. Miräsl.u, district Alba. Ap.; Rep., ms.

29.

Derna, district Bihor. 1960;

Single find;

i dh;

Rep., ms.

Supra, no. XXXI, 80.

M. Oradea;

Hoard ?;

4 dhe.

Dyrr. and

Hoard ?; 2; 1 dh. Dyrr., 1 dh. Ap.

the year

E. ChiriTh. and collaborators, ActaMN, II, 1965,

p. 647, no. 2. 30.

31.

Deva, district Hunedoara.

Hoard;

Ap., dir.;

M. Deva (a few);

the year 1913;

dhe. Dyrr. and

Rep., ms.

Dieci, district Arad. a). Hoard; 171; dhe. Dyrr. and Ap.; the year 1902; MN1VrBp. ("a part"); M. Oradea;

32.

"some thousands";

Rep., ms.;

b) Hoard;

B. Mitrea, SCIV, 19, 1968,

349;

dhe Dyrr. and Ap.;

171, no. 5.

p.

Dubova, corn. Plavievija, district Mehedini.

Single find;

i dh;

I. Winkler, p. 110, no. 19. 33.

Fetindia, corn. Meseenii de Jos, district Maj. M. Mau;

V. Lucicel, Catalog Zälau,

34.

Furculeyti.

35.

Fijioneti, district Vrancea. Mitrea,

36;

p.

Single find;

i dh.;

5, no. 6.

p.

Supra, no. XV, 54.

91, no. 53;

?;

dhe. Dy rr ., di r .; B.

SCN, II, 1958, p. 81,

Geti, district Dirnbovia. Dyrr., 11 dhe. Ap.;

Hoard ?;

Hoard;

22;

10 dhe. Dyrr., i im. dh.

I. E. Dirnian, SCIV, VI, 1-2, 1955,

pp.

304-

305. 37.

Ghelinja (?). -

38.

Gherghina

41.

the year l96o;

I. Winkler,

p.

single find;

i dh. Dyrr. or

B. Mitrea, SCIV, XLII, 1962, p. 218, no. 7. Single find;

i dh.

Dyrr. or

110, no. 22. i dh;

MMB;

B. Mitrea,

Grädi, tea Muncelului, corn. Orätioara de Sus, district Hunedoara. Hoard ?;

b) Hoard ?; IV,

p.

461;

?;

dhe. Dyrr., Ap.;

I dh. Dyrr.; c) Hoard;

4;

Grozeti, district Bacu. INA, M. Tg. Ocna;

43.

In the city;

Giurgiu, district Teleorman. Single find; SCIV, 18, 1967, p. 193, no. 10.

a)

42.

see Barboi.

Ghioca, corn. Crtrnpoia, district Olt. Ap.;

40.

-

Gherla (?)‚ district Cluj. Ap.;

39.

Supra, no. XXXI, 88.

B. Mitrea, p. 88, no. 14;

I. Winkler, SCN, III, 1960, p. 455, no. dhe.; Hoard;

MIC;

Dacian settlement.

over 180;

180;

B. Mitrea, SCIV, IX, 1958,

Hangu, district Neamj. pp. 81-82.

Single find;

235

1 dh;

dhe. Dyrr., Ap.; p.

153, no. 9.

B. Mitrea, SCN, II, 1958,

44.

Hunedoara, district Hunedoara.

a) Supra, no. XVIII, 69;

3 dhe. Dyrr., the restAp., dir. im.; 45.

I. Winkler,

p.

b) Hoard; 56

112, no. 25 a.

Izvoarele (former Bivolqa), corn. Cälineti, district Teleorman. Hoard; ?; dhe. Dyrr., dir. (?);

before the year 1926;

MNA (1);

B. Mitrea, SCIV, IX, 1958, p. 153, no. 10. 46.

Lemnia, district Covasna. M. Sf. Gheorghe (1); -

47.

Lunca

?;

3 dhe.;

the year 1963;

see Bazia.

-

Milcoveni, corn. Berlite, district Cara-Severin. i dh.;

48.

Hoard;

B. Mitrea, SCIV, 17, 1966, p. 417, no. 2.

Rep., ms.

Moiad (?)‚ corn.

ârmäag, district S.laj.

Hoard ?;

ably they come from the great hoard of Moigrad; 49.

Moigrad, corn. Mirsid, district Slaj. b) Hoard ?; find;

7;

dhe;

i d.h.; IVflC;

N. S., IV, 1960, M. Zalau; no. 8, 10 50.

Single find;

MNMBp.;

pp.

216, 221;

Prob-

a) Supra, no. VI, 11 b.

cf. Moiad;

Dacian necropolis;

7 dhe.

Rep., ms.

Rep., ms.;

M. Macrea

d) Single find;

-

2;

Single

C)

M. Rusu, Dacia, 1 dh, jim, dh,;

E. Chirilã and collaborators, ActaMN, IV, 1967,

457.

p.

Moldova Veche, the city of Moldova Noufl., district Cara-Severin. Hoard; ?;dhe;

the year 1879;

Rep., ms.

51.

Nàdelu, corn. Sinpaul, district Cluj. 1846; Rep., ms.

52.

Nocrich.

53.

Novaci.

54.

Ocna Sibiului, district Sibiu. 1 dh.;

Hoard;

if;

dhe; the year

Supra, no. XXXE, 108. Supra, no. III, 5, d. Roman Catholic cemetery;

Single find;

Rep., ms.

55.

Odorheiu Secuiesc, district Harghita, Single find; tification; Rep., ms.

56.

Oradea, district Bihor.

In the neighbourhood;

2;

B. Mitrea, SCIV, 16, 1965, p. 608, no. 8.

dhe; Dyrr. andAp.;

57.

Oravia, district Cara-Severin. rns.

58.

Pänciu, district Vrancea.

59.

Panade, corn. Stncel, district Alba. B. Mitrea, SCIV, 17, 1966,

60.

p.

hoard;

In the city;

Hoard; ?; dhe;

1 dh; Dacian for-

single find;

B. Mitrea,

Hoard;

some hundreds;

273;

p.

i dh;

91, no. 52.

dhe.; the year 1964;

417, no. 3.

Pescari (former Coronini), district Cara-Severin.

a) Hoard;

dhe. Dyrr., Ap.; the year 1895; M. Timioara (1), M. VIr9e MNMBp (59); b) Citadel; single find; I dh; Rep., ms. 61. 62.

Rep.,

178; (2),

PianudeSus, Supra, no. XXXI, 119. Piatra Neamj, district Neam. the year 1967;

Bitca Doarnnei;

Dacian fortification; 236

single find;

i d.h.;

N. Gostar, çeti, p. 21.

63.

Poiana, com. Nicore>'ti, district GalaJi. Single find; ?; dhe. Dyrr. Ap.; the year 1950; MNA; Dacian settlement, the !ayer Poiana Il; R. Vulpe and collaborators, SCIV, II, 1, 1961, p. 187.

64.

Pope�ti, Supra, no. II, 3, h.

65.

Potoe. Supra, no. XIV, 49.

66.

Rah'áu. Supra, no. XXX, 26, a.

67.

Ro�iorii de Vede, district Teleorman. The surroundings of the city; single find; 1 dh.; M. Ro�iorii de Vede; B. Mitrea, SCIV, 16, 1965, p. 608, no. 10.

68.

Sacalasau, com. Derna, districtBihor. Hoard; c. 31; dhe. Dyrr., Ap., dir.; the year 1935; MIC (8); and Dacian ornaments of silver; Rep., ms.

69.

Sebe�. Supra, no. XXXI, 133.

70.

Sebe�ul de Sus, com. Racovi!a, district Sibiu. Hoard; 469; dhe. Dyrr.; the year 1838; M. Vienna (58); Rep., ms.

71.

Sighi�oara, district Mure�. a)Hoard ?; ?; dhe. Dyrr., 1 tr. Philip II, dir.; Rep., ms; b) Wietenberg; single find?; 3; dhe.; Dyrr., Ap.; B. Mitrea, p. 89, no. 29.

72.

Sincraieni. Supra. no. XXXI, 193. A

73.

Singeorzu Nou. Single find; 1 dh; Rep., ms.

74.

Snagov, district Ilfov. Single find; 2 dhe; MMB; cremation grave; B. Mitrea, p. 91, no. 50; SCIV, 18, 1967, p. 194, no. 22.

75.

Sofronea, district Arad. Hoard; "more ancient coins"; 1; dh.; the year 1965; B. Mitrea, SCIV, 19, 1968, pp. 172-173, no. 16.

76.

77. 78.

79.

Sorne� Cald, com. Gilau, district Cluj. Hoard; 438; 318 dhe. Dyrr., 120 dir. (infra, no. XXXIV, 293); the year 1844; CabNum Vienna (the greater part); Dacian ornaments of silver; Rep., ms. Suhaia. Supra, no. XXXI, 197. SimleulSilvaniei, districtSalaj. a)Hoard; 72; 30 dhe. dhe. Ap., im.; I. Winkler, p. 114, no. 48; b) The foot Magura �imleului; hoard; .Q· 40-50; 11; dhe; the year M. Oradea, CabNumCluj; E. Chirila and collaborators; 1965, pp. 645, 647, no. 1.

Dyrr., 42 of the hill 1964; ActaMN, Il,

Talpe, com. Dragane�ti, districtBihor. Hoard; 349 (?); dhe.Dyrr., Ap.; c. 1930-31; M. Chijescu, SCN, IV, 1968, pp. 360-361.

80.

Teliu, districtBraJOV. Hoard; over 100; 6 dhe.; the year 1930; B. Mitrea, SCIV, XII, 1961, p. 147, no. 12.

81.

Tileagd, district Bihor. Hoard; 53; 6 Dyrr., 45 Ap.; the year 1907; In. Winkler, SCN, II, 1958, p. 401, no. I.

82.

Timi�oara, district Timi�. Quarter Mahala; single find; 1 dh; the year 1877; B. Mitrea, p. 87., no. 1. 237

8:1.

Tisa.

Supra, no. XXXI, 142.

84.

Toplia, district Harghita.

Single find;

1 dh. Dyrr.;

In Winkler,

p. 114, no. 52. •

igmandru (?)‚ corn. Nade, district Mure. coins", probably dhe. Dyrr. and Ap.;

86.

Valea C.lugäreasct. district Prahova. (the majority), Ap.;

the year 1963;

Hoard ?; ?;

"Greek

Rep., ms. Hoard;

c. 300;

dhe;

Dacian pottery; B. Mitrea, SCIV, 18, 1967, p. 195, no. 24; mation V. Teodorescu. 87.

Vii9oara.

88.

Viea, corn. Ap,;

89.

Dyrr.

M. Ploeti (282), I'.fl'TA (1); Infor-

Supra, no. XXXI, 149. Jucu, district Cluj.

Single find;

E. Chirilá, ActaMN, VI, 1969,

p.

2;

1 dh Dyrr., 1 dh.

476, no. 1, 3.

Vllcele (former VI1celele Rele), corn. Bretea Romn, district In the village; hoard; ?; 370; dhe Dyrr., im. dhe

Hunedoara. Dyrr.; 90.

the year 1886;

M. Deva (370);

Rep.

ms.

Vilcelele Bune, corn. Bretea Romn., district Hunedoara. over 500;

dhe.;

Vilcelele Rele

Dyrr., Ap.; -

the year 1876;

Hoard;

Rep., ms.

see \filcele.

91.

Vinatori, corn. Mi sea, district Arad. MNA; Rep., ms.

Single find?;

1;

dh. Dyrr.;

92.

Ioivodeni, corn. Dragu, district Sãlaj. Hoard; 223; 212 dhe. Dyrr., it im. dhe. Dyrr.: the year 1964 ; MIC : E. Chirilá, Apulurn, WI/i, 19 69, p. 123 sqq; E. ChiriM and collaborators, StComSibiu, 14, 1969,

.

)p. 283-284, no. 5-18. 93.

2 bala, district Covasna.

Single fi n d; 2; 1 dh. Dyrr., i dr.;

B.

Mitrea, SCIV, 20, 1969, p. 164, no. 13. 94.

Ciuc (former district). year 1923;

95.

Hoard;

MNA (S Dyrr).;

Dolj (former distr:ct).

c. 1/2 kg ; dh e .Dyrr., Ap.

Rep., m s .

Hoard;

139;

Ap., 3 dir (infra, no. XXXIV, 363); 1955, p. 305

135 dhe. Dy rr ., um. dh. I. E. Dirni'.n, SCIV, VI. 1-2,

a.

Imitations of drachmas issued by Dyrrhachium

100.

Basarabi. -

Supra, no. XXXII, 8.

Belitori

101.

Costeti.

102.

Geti.

103.

Moigrad.

-

see Troianul. Supra, no. XXXII, 25.

Supra, no. XXXII, 36. Supra, no. XXXII, 49, d.

im1eul Silvaniei (?).

104. 105.

Supra, no. XXXII, 78, a.

Troianul (former Belitori), district Teleorman. dhe. Dyrr. and Ap.;

the year 1943;

Hoard;

416; im.

M. Chijescu, SCN, IV, 1968,

p. 133. 106.

Viioara.

107.

Vllcele.

Supra, no. XXXI, 149, XXXII, 87. Supra, no. XXXII, 89.

Vllcelele Rele 108.

Voivodeni.

XXXIII. 109.

see Vllcele.

-

Supra, n. XXXII, 92.

Issues of Apollonia

Agriul Mare, corn. Tlrnava, district Arad.

Single find ?;

dhe.;

Rep., ms. 110.

Alba lulia.

Supra, no. XXXII, 2.

111.

Baia deCri.

112.

Basarabi.

113.

Bazia.

114.

Beiu

Supra, no. XXXII, 6.

Supra, no. XXXII, 8. Supra. no. XXXII, 9.

(?)‚ district Bihor.

Hoard;

64;

59 dhe Ap., 5 im. dhe. Ap.;

possibly the hoard also contained dir. (infra, no. XXXIV, 22); Chiescu, SCN, IV, 1968, 115.

Bejan. -

116.

p.

M.

355 sqq.

Supra, no. XXXII, 10.

Belitori

-

see Troianul.

Bucureti (on the map no. 14). B. Mitrea, SCIV, 18, 1967,

117.

Cprioara.

118.

Cigmu.

119.

dImpuri-Surduc.

120.

Coi4esji.

121.

Decea.

p.

Colentina;

single find;

192, no. 3.

Supra, no. XXXII, 15.

Supra, no. XXXI, 71, XXXII, 17. Supra, no. XXXII, 19, b-c.

Supra, no. XXX, 12, b, XXXII, 23. Supra, no. XXXII, 28.

239

i dh;

MNB;

122.

Derna, district Bihor. a). Supra, no. XXXII, 29; b) "Dealul Comorii' or "Peniza"; hoard ?; 1 dh. Ap., dir.; Dacian ornaments of silver; Rep., ms.

123.

Deva. Supra, no. XXXII, 30.

124.

Dieci. Supra, no. XXXII, 31.

125.

Drauj, district Arad. Single find; 1 dh.; -2_. the year 1891; MNMBp.; Rep., ms.

126.

Gáe�ti. Supra, no. XXXII, 36.

127.

Ghelinja ( ?) •

128.

Gherla (?). Supra, no. XXXII, 38.

129.

Grádi�tea Muncelului. Supra, no. XXXII, 41, a.

130.

Groze�ti. Supra, no. XXXII, 42.

131.

Gura Vaii, com. Ple§CUgt, district Arad. In the village; hoard; 70; dhe; the year 1850; Dacian ornaments of silver; Rep., ms.

132.

Hunedoara. Supra, no. XVIII, 69, XXXII, 44.

Supra, no. XXXI, 88, XXXII, 37.

- Lunca - see Bazia§. 133.

Mis3ca, com. Chi§laz, district Bihor. Hoard: ?; 1 dh. Ap.; the year 1931; B. Mitrea, SCIV, 19, 1968, p. 172, no. 11.

134.

Moigrad, Supra, no. VI, 11, XXXII, 49.

135.

Oradea. Supra, no. XXXII, 56.

136.

Or§ova, district MehedinJ;i. a) Single find; 1 dh. Ap., 1 dr. (infra, no. XXXIV, 208, a); Rep., ms.; b) Single find; 1; dh; B. Mitrea, p. 88, no. 10.

137.

Pescari. Supra, no. XXXII, 60, a.

138.

Pianu de Sus. Supra, no. XXXI, 119, XXXII, 61.

139.

Poiana. Supra, no. XXXII, 63.

140.

Pope�ti. Supra, no. II, 3, i, XXXII, 64.

141.

Potoc (on the map no. 65). a) Supra, no. XIV, 49; b) Hoard; 178; 1 dh. Ap., 176 dir., 1 di (infra, no. XXXIV, 231, a); the year 1842; Rep., ms.

142.

Sacalas�u. a) Supra, no. XXXII, 68; b) Hoard; 20; dhe. Ap.; the years 1907-8; Rep., ms.

143.

Sebe�. Supra, no. XXXI, 133, XXXII, 69.

144.

Sighi§oara. Supra, no. XXXII, 71, b.

145.

�imleul Silvaniei. Supra, no. XXXII, 78. a.

146.

Talpe. Supra. no. XXXII, 79.

147.

Tileagd. Supra, no. XXXII, 81. 240

148.

Tisa.

Supra, no. XXXI, 142, XXXII, 83.

149.

Tigmandru. (?).

150.

Valea Càlugreasc.

151.

Viioara.

152.

Viea.

153.

Vllcelele Bune.

154.

Vldeni, corn. Dãrmanti, district Dimbovia.

Supra, no. XXXII, 85. Supra, no. XXXII, 86.

Supra, no. XXXI, 149, XXXII, 87.

Supra, no. XXXII, 88.

Ap., 15 dir.;

Supra, no. XXXII, 90.

Dacian pottery;

Hoard;

Information V. Teodorescu.

155.

Ciuc (former district), a) Supra, no. XXXII, 94; Ap.; the year 1931; Rep., ms.

156.

Hunedoara (former district).

157.

Romania. no. 26

a.

Single find;

Basarabi.

159.

Beiu -

160.

Supra, no. XXXII, 96.

?; dhe. Ap.;

CabNum;

I. Winkler,

p.

120,

Supra, no. XXXII, 8.

(?).

Belitori

Supra, no. XXXIII, 114. -

see Troianul.

PianudeSus.

161.

Supra, no. XXXI, 119, XXXII, 61.

im1eul Silvaniei.

Supra, no. XXXII, 78, a.

16Z.

Troianul.

163.

Dolj (former district).

Supra, no. XXXII, 105. Supra, no. XXXII, 95.

B.

XXXIV.

ROMAN COINS

Roman Republican and Imperial coins from theist century A.D.

1.

Afumaji.

2.

Alba Julia, district Alba. ms.

3.

Albeti

-

Supra, no. XXXI, 156.

Dir.;

Single find;

Sighioara, district Mure.

the 2nd century -49 B.C.; p. 680, no. 25.

2;

6 dir.;

M. Alba Julia;

Hoard; ?; 10;

Rep.,

the middle of

In the bed of the brook Albi;

1 dr., 1 Imperial Bronze coin;

Aldea, corn. Märtini, district Harghita. single find;

172/151-49 B.C. (G).

B. Mitrea and Z. Sz6kely, Mat, II, 1956,

Albi, corn. Cernat, district Covasna. single find;

5.

b) Hoard; ?; 16 dhe.

Ihuitations of the drachmas issued by Apollonia

158.

4.

16; 1 dli.

1; dr; 82 B.C. (G);

Rep., ms.

'tBozbokoralja difib";

M. Cristurul Secuiesc;

settlement?; Z. Szkely, SCN, III, 1960, p. 556, no. 4. 241

Dacian

6.

Alexandria, district Teleorman. Hoard?; ?; 10 dir., 7 Imperial bronze coins; before 1869; B. Mitrea, p. 112, no. 104; SCN, II, 1958 p. 154, See also Poroschia.

7.

Alungeni, com. Turia, district Covasna. "Fintina Sa.ratá"; hoard; c. 120; 33; dir; the 2nd century-63B.C.; the year 1946; Dacian ;ettlement; Rep., ms.; B. Mitrea and Z. Sz�kely, Mat, II, 1956, p. 679, no. 14.

8.

Amara�ti, com. Fa.rea§! district Dolj. Hoard;? 4 dir.; 86-72 B.C.; before 1906; MNA; l. Winkler, p. 126, no. 4.

9.

Amará�tii deJos, district Dolj. Hoard;?; 4 dir.; 133/126-83B.C. (S); the year 1966; CabNum; B. Mitrea, SCIV, 19, 1968, p. 175� no. 33.

10.

Amna�, com. Sali�te, district Sibiu. "Gropile Hoj:ilor"; hoard; E· 300-350; 157; 156 dir., 1 im dr.; the year 1880; M. Sibiu; Rep., ms.

11.

Apoldu de Sus, com. Miercurea Sibiului, district Sibiu. "Ripa Vrábiilor"; hoard; c. 500; 499 dir: before 154-38B.C., 1 im. dr.; the year 1860; Rep., ms.

12.

Arad, district Arad. The forest "Ceala"; single find; 1 dr; 49 B.C.; kilns for baking Dacian pottery; Rep., ms.

13.

A§tileu - Ale�d, districtBihor. Single find; 1 dr.; 69-79 A.D.; l. Winkler, p. 126, no. 9.

14.

Augustin, com. Ormeni§l, districtBra§OV. "LaBordeie"; hoard; 294; dir. dii: 217/197-37 A.D.; the year 1939; M. Macrea - I. Berciu, Apulum, I, 1939-42, p. 110 sqq.

15.

Axente Sever, district Sibiu. a) Hoard; E· 200; dir; the year 1824; B. Mitrea, p. 109, no. 66; b) Hoard; 563; dir.: 271-49B.C.; the year 1875; Rep., ms.

16.

Bancu, com. Ciucsingeorgiu, district Harghita. "Martonos"; hoard ?; 3 dir.: 150/125-73B.C.; the year 1922; M. Miercurea Ciuc; z. Székely, SCN, I, 1957, p. 471.

17.

Barbo§i, the city of Galaji, district Gala1i. a) "Gherghina" (="Tirighina"?); hoard; 517; 505 dir. and Augustus: 264 (?) 2B.C., 11 im. dir., 1Juba I; B. Mitrea, p. 112, no. 108; b) "Tirighina"; single find;?; dir: the 1 st centuryB.C., dii: Augustus­ Nero, Bronze of Vespasian; Dacian settlement; N. Gostar, Apulum, V, 1965, p. 145; Ceta,ti, p. 34.

18.

Bazia§, Supra, no. XXXII, 9. Dir.: 268/217 - 54B.C.

19.

Balane§ti, com. Marunjei, district Olt. "Vilceana Ma.rasca"; hoard; E· 20; 10 dir: 240/217-78B.C. (G); Dacian settlement; B. Mitrea, SCN, II, 1958, p. 154 sqq.

20.

Baujar, district Cara§-Severin. Hoard; �- 300; 1; dir; M. Orástie (1); I. Winkler, p. 128, no. 14. 242

21.

Beclean, district Braov. Hoard; 31; 30 dir.: dr.; before 1903; MN1VrBp.; Rep., ms.

22.

Beiu

(?)‚ district Bihor.

21 dir:

Hoard ?;

209-28 B.C., 1. im.

135/126-71 B.C. (S);

Liceul Beiu; M. Chijescu, SCN, IV, 1968, pp. 355-356. tion: the same hoard as X=I, 114? 23.

Bencecu de Sus, corn. Pischia, Domitian, Trajan;

district Timi.

the year 1894;

Berghin, district Alba. Single find; I. Winkler, p. 128, no. 18.

25.

Berzovia, district Cara-Severin. find; -

26.

2;

1 dr, i di:

Beeneu

-

2; dii:

Rep., ms.

i dr.:

82-81 B.C.;

MIC;

a) Hoard;

110 dir.;

b) Single

B. Mitrea, P. 105, no. 29.

see Pdureni.

Bicsad, corn. Malna, district Covasna. dir., 1 aureus Nero;

27.

Nero;

Single find;

M. Timioara;

24.

Observa-

Rep., ms.;

Biled, district Timi.

Hoard;

"The orchard";

single find;

I. Winkler, p. 128, no. 21.

?; 4; dir:

32-31 B.C. (G);

MNA (2);

B. Mitrea, SCIV, 17, 1966, p. 419, no. 13. 28.

Bistretu, district Dolj. 1960, p. 166. -

BivoliJa

-

Hoard ?;

"some" dir.;

C. Preda, SCN,

see Izvoarele.

29.

Blrsa, district Arad. Hoard; note particularly, p. 442.

30.

BIrzeti, corn. Archi, district Arad. 150/125-50 B.C.; no. 15.

?; dir.;

the year 1862;

E. Dtirner, RevMuz, II, 1965,

Hoard;

c. 100;

Bobaia.

32.

Boiu Albeti, district Mure. p. 128, no. 24.

33.

Boiu Mare.

34.

Bonjeti. corn. d?rligele, district Vrancea. Hoard?; d. from "the beginning of the empire"; the year 1954;

dir.:

Supra, no. XXXI, 160.

-

Single find: ?;

dir.;

I. Winkler,

Supra, no. XXX, 4.

Dacian settlement; p. 469.

G. Constantinescu

BonJida, district Cluj.

a) Single find;

-

Bord, corn. Cucerdea, district Mure. the end of the 3rd-44 B.C.;

36; dir. and M. Focani;

H. Boos, SCN, I, 1957,

2 dir.:

1 from 150/125 B.C.

(B); b) Hoard; ?; I dr: 90 B.C.; the year 1794; III, 1960, p. 441, no. IV, p. 446. 36.

19;

I. Winkler, Schatzfunde, p. 143,

31.

35.

Hoard;

the year 1932;

I. Winkler, SCN,

C.

200;

182;

dir.:

B. Mitrea and Z. Szke1y,

Mat., HI, 1956, p. 680, no. 20. 37.

m,

Brad, district Hunedoara. Szegedin; Rep., ms.

Single find;

243

i dr.:

M. Antonius;

M.

38.

Bradu, corn. Negri, district Bacu. Dacian settlement;

Single find;

i dr: ante 100;

Al. Vulpe, Morminte tumulare la daci in sec. I.

i.e.n.-I e.n., ms. 39.

Bran, districtBraov.

"Bran-Poart";

151-38 B.C. (G), 4 illegible; 1958, 40.

63;

59 dir.;

172/

I. Winkler, SCN, II,

402-403, no. III.

pp.

Braov, district Braov. Otho, Titus;

41.

hoard;

the year 1911;

The surroundings;

single find;

2 aurei:

Rep., ms.

Brate, district Covasna.

Single find;

1;

dr:

family Antonia;

Rep., ms. 42.

Breaza, corn. Lisa, district Braov. 132; dir.:

196/173-6 B.C. (S);

"Capul Turnului";

hoard; ?;

near the Dacian citadel;

N. Lupu,

StComSibiu, 14, 1969, p. 261 sqq.; SCN 43.

V,

Biqncoveanu, corn. Odobeti, district Dimbovija. hoard;

?; 14;

12 dir.;

SCIV, 20, 1968, 44.

p.

tirbu,

"Voineasca";

133/126-54/51 (S), 2 im.dir.;

B. Mitrea,

166, no. 25.

Buciumeni, district Galaji. 4 dir.;

45.

Gh. Poenaru-Bordea-C.

265-282.

pp.

To the west of the village;

single find;

R. Vulpe and collaborators, SCIV, 11, 1, 1951, pp. 214-215.

Bucharest.

a) Dmroaia, Lacul Tei, Popeti-Leordeni, Snagov;

single find;

5;

4 dir and i im. dr.:

the Ist century B.C.:

Macrea and M. Rusu, Dacia, IV, 1960, ings;

single find;

156-157;

I dr. : 85 B C.;

M.

b) The surround-

B. Mitrea, SCN, 11, 1958, pp.

.

"Fundeni".

C)

pp. 223-224;

Supra, no. XXXII, 14, b.

Dr.: the year

86 B.C. (G). 46.

Budiu Mic, corn. Crciuneti, district Mure. "Telek"; dir., dii: ? -Augustus; the year 1865;

47.

Bugiuleti,

district Vllcea.

2 dir.: 120, 105 B.C. (5); no. 26. 48.

To the west of the village;

I. Winkler,

p.

Bungard, corn. elimbr, district Sibiu. Winkler, p. 130, no. 33.

50.

Butcule9ti.

51.

Buzu, district Buzãu.

52.

Supra, no. XXXI, 60.

53.

Hoard;

the year 1906;

Dir.:

77;

i dr.;

I.

172/151-77 B.C.

1 Dacian tr., 76 dir.:

Hoard;

150/ pp.

157-

?; dir., 21 im. dir.;

M. Chiescu, SCIV, 16, 1965, p. M.

Caracal, district Olt. Antonius;

Single find;

B. Mitrea, SCN, 11, 1958,

Cadea, corn. Sãcueni, district Bihor. the year 1941;

Hoard: ?; dir.: 56-12

130, no. 32.

49.

125-55 B.C. (G); 158.

single find;

B. Mitrea, SCIV, XV, 4, 1964, p. 573,

Bujor, corn. Vlrvoru de Jos, district Dolj. B.C.;

hoard; ?;

Rep., ms.

The surroundings;

single find;

B. Mitrea, SCIV, XV, 1964, p. 573, no. 27.

244

1;

dr. M.

54.

Cain, district Bacu. Domitian;

Hoard;

c. 200;

36;

some dii:

Titus,

B. Mitrea, SCIV, VIII, 1-4, 1957, p. 175, footnote 25.

55.

Clacea, corn. clffrbou, district Slaj. 1879; Rep., ms.

Single find ?;

56.

Clanu Mic, the city of Clan, district Hunedoara. dir. -Otho; B. Mitrea, p. 105, no. 38.

57.

Cthrai.

Supra, no. XXXI, 63.

58.

Clineti.

Supra, no. XXXI, 166.

59.

Cline9ti, corn. Dãrmneti, district Suceava. dir.; Information M. Ignat.

60.

Câlmuiu, district Teleorman. Single find; B. Mitrea, SCN, II, 1958, p. 156.

61.

Cpilna, corn. Ssciori, district Alba.

Dir.:

dir.; the year

Hoard;

99/94-64 B.C. (G).

Dir.:

155/150-54 B.C. (5). Single find (?); ?;

1;

dr.:

90 B.C.;

a) Single find;

28;

the second half of the 2nd century-14 B.C., i im. dr.; find; ?;

and dii until Nerva;

c. 100;

Dacian citadel;

27 d:

b) Single

M. Macrea and I.

Berciu, Dacia. N.S., IX, 1965, pp. 226-227; dr; Dacian citadel.

Single find; 1;

C)

62.

Cpruj;a, corn. Birzava, district Arad. 48 B.C.; Rep, ms.

Hoard ?; ?;

63.

Cäptálan (?)‚ corn. Nolac, district Alba. rns.

64.

Cätälina.

65.

Ctina, district Buz au.

a).

Augustus;

b) Single find ?; I dr.;

dir.:

Single find;

100-

?; dii; Rep.,

Supra, no. XXXI, 66.

before 1932;

Single find ?;

?;

3 dir.;

150/125

90 B.C. (G);

B.

Mitrea, SCN, II, 1958, p. 159, no. 9. 66.

Celei (?)‚ district Olt. Hoard ?; ?; dir.; B. Mitrea, Dacia, lxx, 1941-44, p. 383 and footnote 3; 0. Tudor, OltRorn 3 , 1968, p. 29.

67.

Cepari, corn. Dumitra, district Bistria-Nsud. single find; ?;

68.

dir.;

1;

dr.:

M. Antonius;

M. Bistria;

Cernatu,

a)

504;

491 dir.:

B. Mitrea,

Supra, no. XXXII, 16.

Dir.:

p.

Ceteni, district Arge. Dacian settlement;

a)

Hoards;

?;

106, no. 41;

Rep,ms.

the 2nd-the Ist century

B.C.; b) Hoard; "C. 1 kg". 7; 6 dir, 1 di; Mitrea, SCIV, 20, 1969, p. 166, no. 27. 70.

268-43 B.C.,

with Dacian ornaments and in a bronze vessel (see

catalogue of bronze-vessels); 69.

the year 1886 ; b) single find;

Rep., ms.

Cerbtl, district Hunedoara. Hoard; 13 im. dir.;

a) "Hlrtoape";

the year 1941;

dir.;

B.

in amphorae;

D. V. Rosetti, SCIV, XI, 1960, p. 395;

b)

Hoard; ?; dir: until Caesar; Dacian settlement; Fl. Mirju, StArtlst, V, 1963, p.17; C) "Cetãuia"; hoard; 121 -dir.; the year 1960; settlement;

M. Piteti;

with Dacian ornaments of silver;

D. Popescu, SCIV, XII, 1961, p. 142, no. 92; 245

Dacian

B. Mitrea, SCIV, MI, 1961, p. 149, no. 21; d)

Single find ?;

4;

dir.;

Information E. Popescu;

Dacian settlement;

B. Mitrea, SCIV, MV,

1963, p. 468, no. 12. 71.

Cetea. b)

a)

Supra, no. XXXI, 70, b, Dr.;

Single find;

25;

dir.:

Dacian settlement; 72.

?

?

and Dacian pottery;

Single find;

Chilioara.

74.

Chinari, corn. Slntana de Mure, district Mure.

75.

Trajan:

Single find;

Hoard;

70;

with a bracelet of gold and a bar of silver;

1;

dir.;

the

Rep., ms.

Chiorani, corn. Bucov, district Prahova "Valea Orlei";

hoard; ?;

B. Mitrea, SCIV, XIV, 1963, p. 468, no. 13.

Ciumeghiu, district Bihor.

Single find;

i dr.:

90/89 B.C. (S);

E. Chiril. and collaborators, StComSibiu, 14, 1969, 78.

di: Domitian;

IOOA.D. ; Rep., ms.

Chitid, corn. Boorod, district Hunedoara.

10 dir,; 77.

1;

Supra, no. XXIX, 88.

year 1877; 76.

MNA;

Rep., ms.

73.

d.

Augustus;

Trajan;

-

Rep., ms.

Checea, corn. Cenei, district Timi. M. Timioara;

Caesar, di:

Augustus, dii;

-

284, no. 20.

p.

Ciuperceni, the city of Calafat, district Dolj. "Arcer"; dir, dii:

135/134-6 B.C. (S);

the year 1920;

hoard;

CabNurn;

161;

B. Mitrea,

SCIV, X, 1959, p. 157, no. 5. 79.

Clndeti

Buhui, district Neam.

-

85A.D.; 80.

Cut, corn. H9rna, district Arad. Dacian settlement;

Cluj, district Cluj. dr.;

di: Domitian

Single find;

a) Single find;

133/126 B C. (5),

2;

dir.:

89 and 88

Information S. Durnitracu. 2;

dir.:

I. Winkler, SCN, ifi, 1960, p. 441, no. V; 1;

1;

C. Matas. and B. Mitrea, SCN, I, 1957, p. 476.

B.C. (B); 81.

Single find;

92, 47 B.C. (B);

b) Someeni;

single find;

Dacian settlement ; B. Mitrea, SCIV,

.

XIV, 1963, p. 468, no. 16. 82.

Cornâlàu, corn. Reci, district Covasna. year 1920-1930;

83.

Z. Szkely, SCN, II, 1958,

Conjeti, corn, Sascut, district Bacu. ?;

136;

dir, dii:

In the village;

217-5/2 B.C.

p.

1;

dr.;

the

473, no. f.

The hill "Cojocaru";

the year 1955;

hoard;

Dacian settlement;

E. I. Bold, SCN, LI, 1958, p. 474. 84.

Cornetu. -

85.

86.

Coronini

Supra, no. XXXII, 24.

Dir.:

187/150-76/71 B.C.

see Pescari.

-

Corund, district Harghita.

Single find;

B. Mitrea, SCIV, 18, 1967,

p.

2;

quinarii:

Costeti, corn. 0rã9ti0ara de Sus, district Hunedoara. ?; im. dr.; year 1810; III, 1960,

B. Mitrea, p. 41; torques of silver;

p.

442, no. VI,

pp.

47-46 B.C. (G);

197, no. 37.

b) Hoard ?;

?;

Dacian settlement; 445-446.

246

1 di:

a) Single find; Gaiba;

the

I. Winkler, SCN,

87.

Costeti, the city of Tg. Frumos, district Iai.

Hoard;

Vespasian 7, Titus 3, Domitian 1, Nerva 1, Trajan 6;

?;

18 dii:

the year 1948;

B. Mitrea, SCIV, VIII, 1957, p. 175, footnote 25. 88.

Covasna, district Covasna. 6 dir.:

The citadel of Zinelor;

the Ist century B.C. I di:

settlement;

single find;

Vespasian, 72 A.D.;

7;

Dacian

Z. Szkely, Contribuie la problema culturii materiale

a dacilorin sud-estul Transilvaniei, ms. 89.

Craiva, corn. Cricãu, district Alba. "Piatra Craivei"; 9;

6 dir.:

87-46 B.C. (G);

Dacian settlement;

90.

92.

7 B.C.

cl. B. Mitrea, SCIV,

18, 1967,

Celticum, 197, no.

p.

D. Popescu, Dacia, N.S., XII, 1968, p. 428, no. 53.

C rásani, corn. Balaciu, district Ialomija. find;

91.

2 dir., i bronze Augustus:

I. Berciu, Al. Popa and H. Daicoviciu,

Xli, 1965, p. 138 sqq; 39;

single find;

"small coins";

Cremenari.

I. Andrieescu, Piscul Cr.sani,

Supra, no. XII, 36.

Dir.:

Cristuru Secuiesc, district Harghita. Ist century B.C.;

"Piscul C r1sani"; single p.

2.

91, 86 B.C. (G).

Single find;

dir.:

the 2nd -

B. Mitrea and Z. Sz6kely, Mat, II, 1956, p. 679,

no. 11. 93.

Cri9, corn. Dane, district Mure.

Hoard;

?;

"a few";

dir.;

Rep.,

ms. 94.

Cringeni, district Teleorman. B.C. (S);

Single find;

the years 1960, 1062;

2;

dir.:

110/108, 109

M. Roiorii de Vede;

B. Mitrea,

SCIV, 16, 1965, p. 611, no. 27. 95.

Cuciulata, corn. Hoghiz, district Braov. single find;

1;

di:

18 B.C.;

"Stogul din Cojofan";

Dacian settlement;

Gh. Bichir, Mat,

VII, [1961], pp. 352, 354. 96.

Cugir.

97.

Curtea de Arge, district Arge. dir.:

Supra, no. XXX, 13, a.

172/151-70 B.C. (G);

Mitrea, SCN, II, 1958, 98.

pp.

Curtici, district Arad. I. Winkler, Schatzfunde,

99.

50 B.C. (G);

Hoard ?; p.

p.

?;

B.

dir:?

-

Caesar;

the year 1862;

single find; 1;

M. Cristurul Secuiesc;

Z.

555, no. 2.

Daia, corn. Apold, district Mure. Appuleia;

CabNurn;

10;

145, no. 43.

the year 1957;

Szkely, SCN, III, 1960,

101.

the year l9l5orbefore;

hoard; ?;

159-160.

Curned, corn. Atid, district Harghita. "Bar6tdttfl"; dr.:

100.

The surroundings?;

Single find;

dr.:

family

Rep., ins.

Deti, district Vllcea.

Hoard;

c. 100;

B. Mitrea, Dacia, IX-X, 1941-44,

pp.

4;

dir, dii:

385-386;

82-19 B.C.;

SCN, II, 1958,

p. 160, no. 11. 102.

Dãesji, corn. Popeti, district Vllcea.

Hoard;?

jority from the first half of the Ist century B.C.;

247

18;

dir.:

the ma-

the year 1907;

B. Mitrea, SCIV, MI, 1961, p. 149, no. 22. 103.

DiJa;Daia, district Ilfov.

Single find;

1;

dr.:

99/94 B.C. (G);

B. Mitrea, SCN, II, 1958, p. 161. 104.

Dàrti-Ilfov.

Supra, no. XXXI, 81.

105.

Dealu Perjului, corn. Onceti, district Bacu. Nerva; I. Winkler, p. 132, no. 57.

106.

Deleni.

107.

Densu, district Hunedoara.

108.

Derna.

109.

Desa, district Dolj.

Supra, no. XXX, 14.

dr.:

dr.:

90 B.C. (G). Single find;

di:

88 B.C.

Single find;

Rep., ms.

i aureus Nero;

Supra, no. )=I, 122, b.

p. 132, no. 61 a.;

a) Hoard; ?; b) Hoard?;

I. Winkler, p. 132, no. 61; inside bronze-vessel;

C)

I dr.:

?;

M. Atilius;

dir.;

Hoard;

111.

Deva, district Hunedoara.

p.

197, no. 36.

single find;

1;

a) The saddle between ttMajI and "Colt";

dir., 3 im. dir.;

Rep., ms.;

b) Single find;

87, 75 B.C. (G); I. Winkler, SCN, m, 1960, no. XXXI, 82; d) Supra, no. XXXII, 30. Dezna, district Arad.

Baza Acad. Craiova;

B. Mitrea, SCIV, 18, 1967,

Deta, district Tirni. To the east of the village; aureus: Caesar; Rep., ms.

hoard; ?;

I. Winkler,

uncertain information;

over 100;

110.

112.

1;

Single find; ?;

dir.;

2; dir.:

453-454;

pp.

Supra

C)

inhumation cemetery;

Dacian hoard of silver ornaments has been found in the same spot or in the vicinity; Rep., ms. 113.

Diaconi, corn. Buciurneni, district Galaji. 150 B.C.

-

Titus;

p. 134, no. 64;

the year 1949;

95;

dir., dii:

I. Winkler,

C. Deculescu, SCIV, 17, 1966, p. 586.

114.

Diosig, district Bihor.

115.

Dobasu, district Vrancea.

Hoard;

?;

22;

Single find;

G. Constantinescu and H. Boos, 116.

Hoard;

Dacian settlement;

dir.; 1;

MNMBp.;

dr.;

SCN, I, 1957,

Dobirca, corn. Miercurea Sibiului,

M. Focani;

p.

district Sibiu.

29 dir., 8 dii: 137/134 B.C. (S) -96 A.D.; E. Chiril- I. A. Aldea, ActaMN, V, 1968,

Rep, ms.

470. Hoard.;

the year 1967; 428-432.

37; M. Sebe;

pp.

117.

Dobolii de Jos. Supra, no. XXXI, 83. Dr.: M. Antonius; Rep., ms.; M. ChiJescu, SCIV, 19, 1969, p. 661, no. 12.

118.

Dràgneti, corn. Brusturi-Dràgneti. district Neamt. 1;

119.

120.

di:

Vespasian;

I. Winkler,

Drágneti-Olt, district Olt. I, 1957, p. 467.

MNA;

Vilcea;

I. Winkler,

Single find;

134, no. 67.

Single find;

Drgani (?)‚ district Vllcea. before;

p.

Hoard;

1;

dr.;

9; dir;

I. Spiru, SCN,

the year 1908 or

possibly they belonged to the hoard of Stoeneti p.

134, no. 68;

248

-

D. Tudor, OltRom 3 , 1968,

p.

27.

121.

Drgeti, corn.

Dmieneti, district Bacu.

124/103-36/29 (G), "early" dii; 1968, P. 175, no. 34. 122.

Hoard;

the year 1944;

Duleu, corn. FIrliug, district Cara-Severin. Nero;

123.

the year 1877;

MNMBp;

Frcaele, district Olt.

B. Mitrea,

Hoard; ?;

84;

?;

dir.:

B. Mitrea, SCIV, 19,

Single find; p.

5;

1;

aureus,

104, no. 28.

82 dir.:

172/151-38 B.C.

(B), 2 im. dr.; B. Mitrea, Dacia, IX-X, 1941-44, p. 359 sqq.; Information M. Macrea. 124.

Fijioneti.

Supra, no. XXXII, 35.

125.

Virliug, district Cara-Severin. Vespasian;

I. Winkler,

p.

Single find;

Fläminzi, no. 73.

district Botoani.

127.

Foto, corn. Ghidfalu, district Covasna. 271;

dir., dii.:

aurei:

Nero,

134, no. 72.

126.

280;

2;

Hoard;

32;

dir.; I. Winkler,

In the village;

172/151 B.C.-14/37 A.D.;

p.

134,

hoard;

the year 1952;

B. Mitrea and Z. Szekiy, Mat, II, 1956, p. 645 sqq. Freidorf

-

128.

see

-

Filnceti, district Vllcea. OltRom 3 , 1968,

129.

P.

Hoard ;

?;

d: before Nero;

D.

Tudor,

27.

Galbeni, corn. Filipeti, district Bacu. Mitrea,

130.

Tirnioara

Single find;

1; dr.;

Single find;

2;

B.

SCIV, 19, 1968, p. 175, no. 35.

Ga1ia, corn. Ostrov, district ConstanJa.

dir.;

B. Mitrea, SCIV, MI, 1961, P. 149, no. 23. 131.

Garvn, corn. Jijila, district Tulcea. dir., dii:

a) "La Nisip";

Caesar, M. Antonius, Augustus;

"numerous";

Dacian settlement in the

vicinity; Gh. tefan, StRefistRom, I, 1954, p. 36; b) (?) "Pietricica"; hoard; c. 60; 1; dr.; the year 1966; B. Mitrea, SCIV, 19, 1968, P. 175, no. 36. 132.

G1eti, district Dimbovija. B.C. (S);

133.

134.

-

Gherghina

-

M. Carei;

Nerva;

135/126

Single find.

1;

bronze

Single find;

1;

I. Winkler, p. 140, no. 121.

Dacian settlement;

Single find;

1;

dr.: 90/88 B.C. (G);

Information V. Teodorescu.

136.

Ghidfal.u,

district Covasna.

M.

Giurtelecu

imleului, corn. Merite, district S1aj.

dr:

dr.;

see Barboi.

Gherghija, district Prahova.

1;

1;

Information Gh. Lazin.

Gh. Gheorghiu-Dej (former Oneti), district Bacu. di:

135.

single find;

Ghenci, corn. Cua, district Satu-Mare. Vespasian, 74 A.D.;

134.

In the city;

B. Mitrea, SCIV, 16, 1965, p. 611, no. 26.

Trajan 98 A. D.;

Single find;

3;

dir.;

Information Sanda Sabu.

249

Rep., ms. Single find;

138.

Glodeni, districtMure�. Hoard; 84; dir.; Rep., ms.

139.

Golej, com.Buco�nija, district Cara�-Severi.n. Hoard; dir.; CabNuro Vieilila; B.Mitrea, p. 104, no. 20.

140.

Govajdia, coro. Ghelari, the city of Hunedoara, district Hunedoara. On the road to Cerbal; hoard; ?; dir.: the 2nd century-the 1st century B.C.; in amphora; Rep., ms.

141.

Govodarva, coro. Caz�e�ti, districtMehedinJi.. Single find; 1; dr.: Caesar; I. Winkler, p. 136, no. 78.

?; 60;

- Gradi�tea - see Calara§i.. 142.

Gradi�teaMuncelului, coro. Ora�tioara de Sus, district Hunedoara. a) Supra, no. XXXI, 175. Di.r.: the end of the 1st centuryB.C.; b) Single find; 8; 1 di Trajan, 7 bronzes (1 from 41 A.D. -Claudius -, 1 from 101/102, 5 undeterminable) Dacian settlement; C. Daicoviciu and collaborators, in SCIV, III, 1952, p. 304; IV, 1-2, 1953, p. 174; VI, 1-2, 1955, p. 202; Mat, VI, 1959, p. 341; VII, [1961], p. 307. c) "Sub Cununi"; hoard; c. 500; dir., dii.: the 3rd centuryB.C.­ Trajan w ( ithout the title of "Dacicus"); the year 1847; B.Mitrea, p. 106, no. 42; I. Winkler, p. 136, no. 69.

143.

Gruiu, districtllfov. Single find., 1; dr.; I. Winkler, p. 136, no. 80,

144.

Gura Padinii.. Supra, no. XXXI, 176, Dir.: the end of the 3rd or the beginning of the 2nd century B.C.-32/31 M ( . Antonius). - Gu�terija - see Sibiu.

145.

Hateg, district Hunedoara. Single find; 1; dr.; M. Alba-Iulia; �ep., ms.

146.

If'alchiu, districtBra�ov. Single find; dr. family Reroia; Rep., ms.

147.

Horezu, district Vilcea. Hoard; ?; 3; dir.: 1M. Antonius; B. Mitrea, SCIV, 15, 1964, p. 576, no. 50.

148.

Rotarani • Supra, no . XXXI, 94.

149.

Hunedoara, district Hunedoara a) Supra, no. XVIII, 69. 1006 dir.: 268/217 - 54/48B.C.; b) Supra, no. XXXII, 44, b; e) Supra, no. XXX, 17. Dir.: 189-38B.e., 1 Vespasian.

150.

Ighii¡u Vechi, coro. Birghi�, district Sibiu. Hoard; .2_. 40; dir.; the year 1853; B.Mitrea, p. 109, no. 69.

151.

!lidia, com. Ciclova Romana, district Cara§-Severin. Single find, 1; di: Vespasian; the year 1879; Rep., ros.

152.

Ilieni, district Covasna. The valley of the brook Agri§; hoard; .2.· 200-300; 107; 106 dir.: the first half of the 2nd centuryB.C. 1 im. dr.; the year 1877; Rep., ms.; B.Mitrea 44 B.C.; Z. székely, Mat., II, 1956, p. 678, no�

153.

Ineu, districtBihor. Hoard; ?; 21; 20 dir., 1 iro. dr.; the year 1864; Rep., ros.

"'

250

154.

Inuri, corn. VinJu1 de Jos, district Alba. hoard;

37;

dir.:

172/151;77 B.C.;

"Piatra cu SIinjenu";

0. Floca, Sargetia, IV, 1956,

p. 16 sqq. 155.

Islaz, the city of Turnu Mgurele, district Teleorman. 160;

139;

dir, dii:?

-

4 B.C., im. dir., 21 Imperial until the 4th

century A.D. (uncertain coins) 383, no. 1. 156.

Ialnija, district Dolj. i im. dr.; Mitrea

B. Mitrea, Dacia, IX-X, 1941-44;

Hoard;

the year 1942;

C. S. Nicolaescu

-

Hoard; c.

157.

Izvoarele.

158.

Jegália, district Ialomija.

134;

133 dir.:

M. Craiova; -

p.

172/151-38 B.C. (G),

Dacian settlement;

Plopor, Mat., I, 1953,

B.

544 sqq.

p.

Supra, no. XXXII, 45.

M. CäIärai;

Hoard;

Dacian settlement;

c. 460;

dir.;

the year 1967;

B. Mitrea, SCIV, 19, 1968, p.

175, no. 37. 159.

Jeledini, corn. Mártineti, district Hunedoara. hoard;

160.

161.

dir.;

The hill "Comoara";

Rep., ms.

Läpunic (?)‚ corn. Bara, district Timi.

Hoard;

Augustus, 2 dii:

B. Mitrea,

Hadrian;

the year 1868;

Läscud, corn. Ogra, district Mure. single find;

2;

dir.:

13;

dir.; ? p.

-

104, no. 18.

The valley of the Agri;

84-79 B.C. (B);

the year 1962;

M. Tlrnäveni;

E. Chiri1, ActalvtN, IV, 1967, p. 458, no. 16-17. 162.

Lei1e, corn. Teiu, district Arge. SCIV,XV, 1964,

163.

dir.:

172/151;55 B.C. (G);

SCN, II, 1958,

165.

pp.

Livezi (?)‚ corn. Podari, district Dolj. p.

Single find;

Hoard;

?;

3;

705.

p.

dir.; Rep.,

dir.;

B. Mitrea,

390, footnote 3.

Locusteni, corn. Danei, district Dolj.

"La Predeti"; the year 1957;

Dacian settlement;

Ludu, district Mure.

hoard; ?;

B. Mitrea,

87 dir.: 167/155-50 B.C. (S) I im.dr.;

82/81 B.C. (G);

B. Mitrea,

I. Spiru, Mat, V, 1959,

Lisnu, corn. Ozun, district Covasna.

Craiova (10); 167.

1; dr.;

the year 1951 (?);

162-163, no. 18;

Dacia, IX-X, 1941-44, 166.

Single find;

573, nr. 28.

Licuriciu, corn. Clineti, district Teleorman "Plai"; 63;

164.

p.

hoard;

?;

2;

88;

MNA (78), M.

C. Preda, SCN, III, 1960,

Sugar factory;

the year 1953;

hoard ?;

dir.:

B. Mitrea, SCIV, 16, 1965,

p.

135 sqq.

99/94p.

611,

no. 28. -

168.

Lunca

-

see Bazia.

Luncani, corn. Boorod, distrist Hunedoara. single find;

4;

Dacian citadel; p. 146;

3dir.:

a)

"Piatra Roie";

150/125-87 B.C. (B), limdr.;

MIC,

C. Daicoviciu and collaborators, SCIV, I, 1, 1950,

C. Daicoviciu, Cetatea dacicà de la Piatra Roie, 1954,

pp. 76-77;

b) Supra, no. XXXI, 178, b.

251

169.

Malaica, corn. Certu, district Dolj. 1;

dr.:

85/84 B.C. (S);

Geography Craiova; IV, 1969, p. 5. 170.

b) Single find;

2;

dii.:

a)

Hoard;

over 100;

Nero, Domitian;

-

The Monastery Bistria

-

-

Domitian;

Hoard; ?;

see Viioara.

Mrcua, corn. Cernat, district Covasna. dii.:?

dir.;

Rep., ms.

Migura Topliça, corn. Certeju de Sus, district Hunedoara. dir.; the year l85ø; Rep., ms. -

172.

single find;

The faculty of History-

0. Toropu, 0. Stoica, ComCraiova, Ser. Num.,

Mgheni, corn. Ozun, district Covasna. Rep., ms.;

171.

In the village;

the year 1967;

the year 1892;

Hoard;

175;

53;

dir.,

ArchErt, XIII, 1893, p. 181;

I. Winkler, Schatzfunde, p. 148, no. 87. 173.

Mrtini.

a) Supra, no. XXXI, 101:

b) bracelet of dir.; Observation: 174.

-

82/81 B.C.;

Z. Szkely, SCN, III, 1960,p .556, no. 5.

the year 1955;

Media, district Sibiu. 2 dii:

-

probably both belong to the same hoard.

Màtcina, corn. Vinjul de Jos, district Alba. 77 B.C.; Rep., ms.

175.

bracelet of dir.; ?

dir.: ?

M. Deva (30), MIC (3), M. Alba (3);

Single find;

11 B.C.-103 A.D.;

Hoard; ?; 36;

6;

4 dr.: 120-38/36 B.C. (S),

E. Chirila and collaborators, ActaMN, IV,

1967, pp. 457458, no. 11, 13-15, 18-19. 176.

Medve, corn. Fru, district Alba. 69 B.C.;

I. Winkler, Schatzfunde,

Hoard; ?;

p.

Merei, district Buzu. Single find; B. Mitrea, SCN, II, 1958, p. 164.

178.

Mierea, corn. Verneti, district Buzau.

1;

Single find;

181.

Moaca, district Covasna "Cseresz"; Rubria; Rep., ms. Mofleni,

109-58 B.C. (5);

3;

Buzu;

dir.: 89-

B. Mitrea,

hoard; ?; 57;

the year 1958;

single find;

the city of Craiova, district Dolj.

hoard; ?; 6; dir.:

-

North of the village;

56 dir.: 167/155-73 B.C. (5), 1im. dr.; B. Mitrea, SCN-, IV, 1968, p. 373 sqq. 180.

150/125 (?) B.C. (G);

dr.:

77 B.C.; the year 1932; not at Gura Ni y cov SCN, II, 1958, pp. 163-164, no. 19. Mihai Bravu, district Ilfov.

dir.: 175/151-

149, no. 89.

177.

179.

13;

I dr.:

MNA;

family

"The mill of Boboc";

the year 1936;

Collection of

the school Leamna de Sus; 0. Toropu, 0. Stoica, CornCraiova, Ser. Nurn, IV, 1969, pp. 7-9. 182.

Moigrad.

a) (?) Supra, no. VI, 11, b;

b) "Mgura";

2;

78 B.C., i di.: 2-11 A.D.;

the year 1959;

1 dr.:

Dacian necropolis; VIII, 1962, p. 488; 31 B.C.;

single find; 1VUC;

M. Macrea, M. Rusu and I. Mitrofan, Mat., C)

Single find;

6; dr.: i from 48 B.C.Tc.

V. Luccel, Catalog Zilau,

252

p.

6, no. 9-14.

183.

Moisei, district Maramure. (S);

184.

the year 1918;

i aureus:

Titus;

B. Mitrea,

5;

dir.:

90/89-78/77 B.C.

hoard;

10;

silver;

Rep., ms.;

dir.: ?

-

Caesar; b) Hoard;

a) The bank of the brook Cigher;

the year 1866; c. 20;

0. Iliescu, SCN, II, 1958,

1;

Dacian ornaments of

dr.: 99/95 B.C. (G);

the

460.

p.

Movila (?)‚ corn. Niculesti, district Ilfov. B.C. (G);

Single

105, no. 31.

p.

Moroda, corn. Seleu, district Arad.

year 1955; 186.

?;

Moldova Veche, corn. Moldova Nou, district Cara-Severin. find;

185.

Hoard;

B. Mitrea, SCIV, 20, 1969, pp. 167-168, no. 29.

Single find;

1;

B. Mitrea, SCIV, XI, 1960, P. 191, no. 7.

dr.: 54

Observation:

two dii have been found also here (the same spot ?) 187.

Movileni (former 'llrnpeni), district Olt. 131 (S);

188.

M. Slatina;

Mozacu, corn. Negrai, district Arge. M. Piteti;

189.

Single find;

1; dr.; 145-

B. Mitrea, SCIV, XflI, 1962, p. 219, no. 17. Hoard;

B. Mitrea, SCIV, XV, 1964,

Nadia, corn. Strugari, district Bacãu.

?;

13;

dir.;

573, no. 29.

p.

Single find;

2; dii: Vespasian,

79A.D., Trajan, 98A.D.; M. PiatraNearnj; Mitrea, SCN, I, 1957, p. 476.

C. Matãsa and B.

190.

Nsud, districtBistri1.a-Nsud.

8;

191.

Nedeia, corn. Gighera, district Dolj. "Mcieul de Jos"; 19;

dir.:

209-58 B.C. (B);

Hoard;

?;

the year 1951;

dir.;

Rep., ms. hoard;

V. Cristu, SCN, I,

1957, pp. 467-468. 192.

Negreni (?)‚ corn. Ciucea, district Cluj. Nero;

I. Winkler,

p.

Single find;

1;

aureus

140, no. 117.

193.

Neudorf, corn. Zibrani, district Arad. Single find; Augustus; I. Winkler, p. 140, no. 118.

194.

Nicolae Blcescu.

195.

Niculijel, district Tulcea.

Supra, no. XXX, 39. Hoard;

century B.C. or earlier-50 B C.; .

161;

Dir.; 38;

1;

aureus

172/151-69 B.C.

dir., dii: the ist

the year 1937;

C. Deculescu,

SCIV, 17, 1966, pp. 577-578. 196.

Novaci. Supra, no. III, 5, e. Dir.: Domitian.

197.

Nufalu, district Slaj.

198.

Ocnia, corn. Ocnele Man, district Vllcea. 88 B.C. (G), i di:

Hoard?;

101 and 91 B.C. (G), di.:

?;

dir.;

Rep., ms. Single find;

Vespasian, 71 A.D., I im. dr.;

ment; B. Mitrea, SCIV, 18, 1967, p. 197, no. 38; no. 30. 199.

Odorhei, district Harghita. p. 130, no. 36.

200.

Ohaba Ponor, corn. Pui, district Hunedoara. single find; 1; VI, 1-2, 1955,

Cdieni;

di; Dacian pottery; p. 139. 253

hoard;

?;

?;

3; 1 dr.:

Dacian settle20, 1969, p. 167,

dir.;

I. Winkler,

The cave "Bordul Mare";

C. S. Nicolâescu-Plopor, SCIV,

201.

Olteni, district Teleorman. (G), i im. dr.;

202.

01tenija, district 1110v. the year 1925; -

203.

Oneti

196/173 B.C.

166.

single find;

1;

as of Claudius;

The surroundings;

the year 1908 (?);

M. Oradea;

single find;

1;

di.:

B. Mitrea, SCIV, 18,

199, no. 59.

p.

Orsie, district Hunedoara. a) Hoard; 111; 54 dir., 57 dii. (including 16 im. dir. and dii): 20B.C.-93/94A.D.; the year 1855; B. Mitrea,

p.

106, no. 44;

B. Mitrea,

pp.

b) Hoard;

105-106, no. 39;

B.C.-98 A.D.; 205.

In the city;

1 dr.: P.

see Gh. Gheorghiu- Dej.

-

Domitian;

204.

2;

C. Deculescu, SCIV, 17, 1966, p. 587.

Oradea, district Bihor. 1967,

Single find;

B. Mitrea, SCN, II, 1958,

B. Mitrea,

C)

70;

dir.;

the year 1877;

311;

dir., dii.: 268

Hoard;

106, no. 45.

p.

Orbeasca de Jos, corn. Orbeasca, district Teleorman. 1;

dr.:

103 B.C. (S);

the year 1961;

MNA;

Single find;

B. Mitrea, SCIV,

XV, 1964, p. 573, no. 30. 206.

Orlea, district Olt. hoard;

207.

?;

12;

"Grindul lui lancu Musat" or "La Cremene";

dir.;

D. Tudor, OltRorn 3 , 1968,

Ormenis (?)‚ corn. Viioara, district Mure. single find;

1;

di.:

Domitian;

28.

p.

"Schackental";

Rep., ms.;

Observation: Roman

finds from the 2nd-3rd century A.D. in the territory of the village. 208.

Orova, district Cara-Severin. family Caecilia; 1;

dr.:

79 B.C.;

single find; ?;

a) Supra, no. XXXIII, 136, a. Dr.:

b) Between Orova and Tr. Severin; B. Mitrea,

p.

104, no. 27;

Ostrov.

210.

Ozun, district Covasna.

p.

104, no. 19;

1;

bronze Trajan, before the

Rep., ms. Single find;

1;

di:

Rep, ms. Single find;

4;

dir.;

M. Sf. Gheorghe;

Pädureni (former Beeneu), corn. Moaca, district Covasna. 1;

di.:

Trajan, before 106 A.D.;

Pruani, corn. Livezi, district Vilcea. the year 1900; 1968,

215.

Single find;

Dacian pottery;

Pava, district Covasna. Rep., ms.

find; 214.

B. Mitrea,

Palota, corn. Sintandrei, district Bihor. Domitian;

M.

In the city;

Supra, no. XXXI, 114.

conquest of Dacia;

M.

single find;

Roman urban centre, the 2nd-the 3rd century A.D.

209.

211.

(?)

I dr. Augustus, dii. Tiberius, bronze Titus, 3 bronzes

Germanicus, 1 im. di. Vespasianus; Observation:

C)

p.

I. Winkler, Hoard;

I. Winkler, p. 142, no. 127;

?;

p.

Single

128, no. 20.

104;

dir.;

D. Tudor, OltRom3 ,

28.

Pu1i, district Arad. Rep., ms.; 1950-1951;

b)

a)

Single find:

Single find;

"a few";

dir.;

the year 1854;

1 Roman Republican bronze;

B. Mitrea, SCIV, XV, 1964,

254

P.

573, no. 31.

the years

M.

Pecica, district Arad.

a) Single find; 1; dr .: the ist century B.C.; 111, no. 86; b) "anj;ul Mare"; single find; 3; 2 dir.: 46/45, 43 B.C., 1 di: Trajan; c) I coin-die; Dacian settlement; B. Mitrea,

p.

I. H. Crian, Apulum, V, 1965, p. 130; 217.

Peretu, district Teleorman. B.C.;

M.

Hoard;

?;

6;

VI, 1969, dir.:

219.

dir.:

family Aelia, Quinctia;

Mesteceni"; hoard; the year 1960;

39;

36 dir.: p.

Piatra Neam, district Neamj. dir.: Mat

1 from 98 B.C.; VI, 1959,

.,

Cetài,

p.

21;

single find;

"Hotarul de Jos

Gostar, Cetã1i,

di: p.

58 sqq.;

B. Mitrea, SCIV, 17, 1966,

a) "Bitca Doamnei";

single find;

Galba, 68-69 A.D.;

683, no. 49;

p.

14/12 B.C.;

224.

p.

"La Gruiu";

Hoard;

?;

single find;

6;

(G);

1950;

-

11 A.D.; e)

2 B.C.;

-

-

Single find;

Vespasian;

Vespasian;

the year 1968; pieces; 100; ?; ment;

hoard?;

CabNum;

?;

9;

66:

6 dir., 2 di:

dir.:

152;

the year 1949; 31;

B

Hoard;

194;

Vespasian;

f) Single find;

g) Single find;

h) Single find;

i) Single find;

-

Hoard;

145 dir., dir., the year

Augustus, Vespasian, 1

the year 1927;

the year 1950;

C)

dir., dii: ?

1;

46;

dr.:

24; dir.,

dir., dii: ? 194 B.C. (B);

dir. and "Greek" in a lot of 28

j)

Hoard; (?) 27; k) Hoard ?; 82;?; 1) Hoard; (?) over part of them MNA, M. Tecuci, MuzlstMold; Dacian settle-

V. P.rvan, ARMS[, t. XXXVI, 1913, p. 99;

Dacia, III-IV, 1927-32, pp. 339-340; SCIV, VIII, 1-4, 1957,

p.

166 sqq.;

B. Mitrea,

p.

R. and Ec. Vulpe, 113, no. 112;

Information S. Teodoru;

Coin-die and i unimpressed blank of silver;

Poiana, com. Turburea, district Gorj. 14 dii: Augustus-Domitian;

Hoard;

the year 1938; 255

m)

the year 1949 (the blank);

R. Vulpe and collaborators, SCIV, I, 1, 1950, pp. 48, 50; N. S., I, 1957, p. 154. 225.

6;

B. Mitrea, SCN,

a) Hoard;

the year 1949;

d) Hoard;

Roman Republican bronze; dii: ?

82/81-45 B.C.,

after 268-14/12 B.C. ; the year 1927;

dir., dii.: ? -

1 dr.:

174, no. 44.

7d. Augustus: dii: ?

3;

B. Mitrea, SCN,

5 dir.:

The surroundings;

the year 1957;

Poiana, corn. Nicoreti, district Galai. 25;

N.

B. Mitrea, SCIV, XV, 1964, pp. 573-574, no. 32.

Ploeti, district Prahova. II, 1958,

b) "Cozia";

26.

Pingraji, district Nearn.

217/197-85 B.C.

143;

p.

Dacian fortification;

64 B.C. (G), 2 im. dr.; MNA; Dacian settlement; II, 1958, pp. 166-167, no. 23, p. 184.

223.

?;

A. Niu, I. Zamoteanu,

N. Gostar, Apulum, V, 1965,

Pietroasele, district Buzu.

i di.:

Panta de

-

175/151-68 B.C. (G), 3 im. dir.;

D. Popescu, SCIV, 19, 1968,

1;

?;

and Dacian ornaments of silver;

Dacian fortification;

365;

p.

Single find;

Rep., ms.

M. Sf. Gheorghe;

Z. Szkely, SCIV, 16, 1965, p. 420, no. 14.

222.

100.

B. Mitrea, SCIV, 16, 1965, p. 612, no. 33.

Peteni, corn. Z5ba1a, district Covasna.

220.

p.

145/138-32/31

Pescari (former Coronini), district Cara-Severin. 2;

221.

Acta

Dacia,

14 dir.: 124-81 B.C.,

and Dacian ornaments of

silver; C. S. Nicoliescu-Plopor, Dacia, \711-VIII, 1937-40, p. 203 sqq.; C. Deculescu, SCIV, 17, 1966, p. 586. 226.

Poiana Srta, corn. Oituz, district Bacu. dir.;

the year 1880;

227.

Polovragi, district Gorj. Information Al. Vulpe.

228.

Popeti, corn. Mihileti, district Ilfov.

?;

Single find;

2;

dir:

a)

92, 90 B.C.;

10-15;

dir.: 150/125-90/85 B.C.;

dir.;

c)

Single find;

3;

Dacian settlement;

the yea r R. Vulpe and collaborators, SCIV

VI, 1-2, 1955, pp. 258, 263;

R. Vulpe, Mat., III, 1957,

[1961], p. 333;

nearly all the coins of a-c) in MNA,

observation:

no. XXXI, 126.

Dir.:

single find;

1;

dr.;

150/125-75 B.C. (G);

bank of the river Vedea; 16 im. dr;

hoard;

the year 1964;

552;

b)

536 dir.:

Potoc.

1;

di:

1;

a)

Supra,

Terrace on the left 187/175-39 B.C. (5)

M. Chiescu, SCIV, 16, 1965, pp. 170-171

Vespasian;

"Galathtetti";

Z. Szkely, Mat., V, 1959, p. 233.

a) Supra, no. XXXIII, 141, b. 176 dir, i di:

Single find;

234; VII,

p.

R. Vulpe, Mat.,

Porumbenij Mici, corn. Mugeni, district Harghita. single find;

aureus Titus;

the year 1875;

Vespasian;

18;

10 dir.:

M. Antonius, 8 dii:

b)

Rep., ms.

Prjesti (?)‚ corn. Traian or Mgireti (?)‚ district Bacu.

232.

Dir.

b) Hoard;

Poroschia, the city of Alexandria, district Teleorman.

231.

j.

Supra, no. II, 3,

the year 1932-1947;

MMB; d) Near the village; VI, 1959, p. 321.

230.

dir., 5 im.

150/125- Caesar, i d. Augustus; 1954-55, 1958;

229.

Hoard;

I. Winkler, Schatzfunde, p. 150, no. 114.

a) Hoard;

Nero 1, Vespasian 5, Titus 1,

Hadrian 1; the year 1963 (?); b) Hoard; 77; 73 dii: M. Antonius, dii: Nero 1, Vespasian 1, Dornitian 1, Faustina II 1; the year 1965; the same hoard ?; 233.

234.

B. Mitrea, SCIV, 18, 1)67, p. 200, no. 63-64.

Prejmer, district Braov.

"Cimpul Morii"; hoard; the 2nd century-43 B.C., 8 im. dir.; the year 1887; B. Mitrea, p. 107, no. 53; Rep., ms. Priseaca, district Olt.

Hoard;

?;

2;

dir.:

c. 200;

dir.:

M. Braov;

87 B.C.;

M. Slatina;

B. Mitrea, SCIV, XIV, 1963, p. 468, no. 15. -

235.

Protea Mare

Dacian settlement ?;

Hoard;

?;

dir. dii;

B. Mitrea, SCN, II, 1958,

Racovija, corn. Voineasa. district Olt. 1914;

237.

see 'I'i'rnava.

Pruneni (?)‚ corn. Zrneti, district Buzu. before 1900; p. 173.

236.

-

Hoard; ?;

86; dir.;

the year

B. Mitrea, Dacia, IX-X, 1941-44, p. 384.

Räctu, corn. Horgeti, district Bacu.

a)

Hoard;

?; ?

-

M.

Antonius; Information M. Chijescu; b) The hill of "oirnuluj Cetuie"; single find; 3; dir.: 85-46 B.C.; Dacian settlement; MNA (1). M. Bacu (2); V. Cpitanu 1969.

-

B. Mitrea, SCIV, XI, 1960, pp. 191-192,

no. 9;

V. Ursache, dissertation at the Vth Museum session

256

238.

Rähu, the city of Sebe, district Alba. dir.;

Hoard;

some hundreds;

I. Winkler, p. 144, no. 138.

B. Mitrea, P. 110, no. 81;

239.

Rzvad, district D?mbovija. Single find; 1; dr.; year 1930; B. Mitrea, SCN, II, 1958, p. 168.

240.

Reci, district Covasna. Dacian pottery;

Single find;

1;

dr.;

84 B.C.;

the

M. Sf. Gheorghe;

Rep., ms.

241.

Reghin, district Mure.

242.

Remetea Mare.

Single find;

?;

dir., im. dir.;

Supra, no. XXXI, 128.

Dir., dii.:

Rep., ms.

144-16/15 B.C.;

M. Timioara (2). 243.

Renghet, corn. Geoagiu, district Hunedoara. 72 B.C. (G);

244.

I. Winkler, SCN, III, 1960,

Single find;

p.

Reca (?)‚ corn. Dobrosloveni, district Olt.

1;

dr.;

457, no. X. Hoard ?;

?;

3;

dir.;

B. Mitrea, Dacia, IX-X, 1941-44, p. 384. 245.

Rlfov, district Prahova. 15;

The highway Rifov-Ploeti;

87 B.C.

3 dir., 12 dii.:

Trajan;

-

Hoard;

the year 1940;

?;

B. Mitrea,

SCN, II, 1958, p. 168. 246.

Ripa, corn. Tinca, district Bihor. 1;

dr.:

100/97 B.C. (5);

"The hill of Morilor";

the year 1967;

M. Oradea;

single find;

E. Chiril

and collaborators, StComSibiu, 14, 1969, p. 284, no. 19. 247.

Ripile, district Bacu. 6 dii:

249.

250.

p.

M. Antonius, i im. dr., the year 1962;

R'iureni, district VIlcea.

Single find;

Iliescu, SCN, II, 1958,

450, no. 6.

p.

12;

dir.; 1;

Rep., ms.

bronze;

12 A.D.:

Roata (de Jos or Mica), corn. Roata de Jos, district Ilfov. dir.;

124/103-49 B.C. (G); pp.

169-170;

SCIV, XV, 1964,

p.

B. Mitrea,

578, no. 66. Hoard;

35;

252.

8 dir.:

Rinov, district Braov.

II, 1958,

251.

16;

Vitellius 1, Vespasian 5, 1 im. di.;

SCIV, XV, 1964, 248.

Hoard;

b)

c. the year 1900;

Single find;

1;

dr.:

0.

a) Hoard ?;

B. Mitrea, SCN,

90/89;

B. Mitrea,

574, no. 33.

Rociu, district Arge. Hoard;

?; dir; and Dacian ornaments of silver;

B. Mitrea, SCIV, 18, 1, 1967,

p.

Roeti, district Vllcea. the year 1912;

Hoard;

197, no. 40. C.

70;

21;

dir.:

B. Mitrea, Dacia, IX-X, 1941-

253.

Roia Montan, district Alba. Claudius; Rep., ms.

Single find;

254.

Roiorii de Vede, district Teleorman.

124/103-38 B.C.;

‚p. 386.

tre. Philip II, 1 di:

"On the hill, among the vine-

yard", "On the hill at Turlan", "at Tir", "In the orchards"; single find;

5 dir.:

106-81 B.C.;

dii in some place; 255.

the year 1900-1959;

Rovinija Mare, corn. Denta, district Timi. 92 B.C. (G);

B.

observation:

and

B. Mitrea, SCIV, 16, 1965, p. 612, no. 34. Single find;

Mitrea, SCIV, IE,1965, p. 611, no. 30.

257

1;

dr.:

-

Rucr

-

see Valea.

256.

Sacalasu.

Supra, no. XXXII, 68.

257.

Sadina, corn. Roata de Jos, district Ilfov. 99/95-80 B.C. (G);

258.

Sadova, district Dolj. Augustus;

Hoard;

the year 1924;

?;

2;

1. dr:

-

0. Stoica,

?;

18;

dir.:

170.

P.

137/134 B.C., I

the collection of the school Damian;

Mitrea, Dacia, IX-X, 1941-44, p. 386; 0. Toropu

Hoard;

B. Mitrea, SCN, II, 1958,

Idem,

B.

112, no. 98;

p.

Corn Craiova

ser. Nurn., IV, 1969,

Hoard;

dir. and d. Augustus;

P. 9. 259.

Salonta, district Bihor. (5); Rep., ms.

260.

Sanisl.u, district Satu-Mare. ms.

261.

Sascut, district Bacu. Hoard; Mitrea, pp. 112-113, no. 109.

262.

141;

Single find;

c. 70;

1;

di.:

dir.:

Sascut-Sat, corn. Sascut, district Bacu.

MNrvmp

Vespasian;

Rep.,

127-27/20 B.C.;

Hoard; ?;

7;

B.

dir.;

B. Mitrea, SCIV, 19, 1968, p. 175, no. 39. 263.

Satulung, district Braov. b)

264.

Hoard;

c. 40;

a) Single find;

dir., dii.:

Satu Mare, district Satu Mare.

In judeul

dr.:

150/125 B.C.

106B.C.-75A.D.,; Hoard;

44/40 B.C. (G), 7 im. dir., i di: Tezaure monetare

1;

159;

Rep., ms.

151 dir.:

Septimius Severus;

Saft Mare, 1969,

P.

216/197I. Winkler,

19 sqq;

Observation:

Denarius of Septiriius Severus is doubtful. 265.

Saft Nou. Supra, no. XXXI, 190. dir.: 124/103-4 B.C.

266.

Scele, district Braov. Rep., ms.

267.

Sâlau de Sus, district Hunedm.ra.

"Turrhe";

229/217-58 B.C. (G), 3 im. di ,-.; Settlement; 268.

Dir.:

single find;

"asa";

"Te'glsdiilö";

Dacian settlement;

269.

SMite, corn. Bia, district Hunedoara. 1 di.; Rep., ms.

270.

S.lite, district Sibiu.

"Coasta .Pltii";

the year 1968;

108 dir.: Dacian

M. Buzau;

single find;

B. Mitrea, SCIV,

Single find;

2;

single find;

1;

1 dr.,

dr.: 58

N. Lupu, StComSibiu, 14, 1969, pp. 286-

Srata, corn. Ulmeni, district J3uziu. B.C. (G);

111;

M. Deva;

0. Floca, SCN, 111, 1960, P. 89 sqq.

4; dir.: 172/151-81 B.C.; XII, 1961, p. 149, no. 26.

271.

1; dr.: Domitian;

hoard;

the year 1935;

Slauri, corn. Vej;ca, district Mure.

B.C. (B); 287.

229/217-50 B.aC. (G), 4 im.

Single find;

B. Mitra, SCN, II, 1958,

258

1; p.

dr:

170.

99/94

272.

Scundu, district Vllcea.

Hoard?;

?;

1;

dr.:

102/100 B.C. (G);

B. Mitrea, SCIV, XII, 1961, p. 150, no. 27. 273.

Scurta, corn. Orbeni, district Bacáu. 150/125 B.C.-12 A.D., 2 im.; Schatzfunde,

274.

Seleu, district Arad.

the year 1927;

Single find:?;

M. Sibiu;

276.

Sfinesji.

277.

Sf. Gheorghe, district Covasna. b) "Behehza";

year 1950;

Dacian settlement;

?;

Near the city;

-

hoard;

280.

31;

p.

1;

281.

Sinaia, district Prahova. 1958, p. 171, no. 33.

17;

282.

Slnandrei, district Timi. CabNum Vienna (6);

Hoard;

90 B.C.; Dacian settlement; 561-562, 564.

285.

286.

p.

hoard; -

the year 1963

75; dir.;

dir., dii.;

single find; 1; dr.;

the year 1855;

1; im. dr.;

1; dr.;

dir., 2 dii.:

Caesar-Nerva;

single find;

B.

B. Mitrea, p.

B. Mitrea, SCN, II,

the year 1840;

single find;

p.

1;

dr.:

R. Vulpe, SCIV, VI, 1-2, 1955, pp.

Single find;

110, no. 78.

M. Timioara;

Single find;

I. Winkler, p. 148, no. 165.

259

1;

di: Domitian; c.

Rep., ms.

SInpaul(?), corn. Mrtini, district Harghita. aureus Otho;

the

15;

363 sqq.

dir., dii.:

Brick factory;

Slnmihaiu Roman, district Timi. the year 1905;

p.

B. Mitrea

Slngeorzu Nou, corn. Lechina, district Bistria-Nsãud. B. Mitrea,

647,

Rep., ms.

?ncrieni, district Harghita.

dir.;

p.

Single find; ?;

dr.: 129 B.C.;

Single find;

dir.;

e) The southern limit of

a) "The hill Galben";

b) Single find;

-

the ist century B.C.

the year 1851;

b) Guterija;

Sighipoara, district Mure.

?;

?;

d) Protestant church;

172/151-8 B.C. (G);

a) Single find;

107, no. 47;

?

dr.: 104 B.C. (B);

Z. Szkely, SCN, IV, 1968,

Mitrea, p. 109, no. 68; C) Single find; 42, no. 3; d) Supra, no. XXXII, 71, a.

284.

dir.:

hoard;

dir., dii:

678, no. 3;

61 ; dir le., dii.:

Sibiu, district Sibiu. p.

? 10;

K. Horedt, Mat., II, 1956,

Sibiel, corn. Beriu, district Hunedoara. Domitian; M. Lugoj; Rep., ms.

Rep., ms.;

283.

1;

108, no. 59;

p.

B.

Dir.: 217/197-72 B.C.

the Ist century A.D.;

Dacian settlement;

B. Mitrea, Rep., ms.

M. Antonius;

Hoard;

single find;

Z. Szekely, Mat., II, 1956,

279.

dir.:

a) "Bedehza";

hoard, e. 50;

B. Mitrea,

dir., dii: ?

the city;

In Winkler,

B. Mitrea and Z. Szke1y, Mat., II, 1956,

footnote 1; C)

dir., dii.:

and Dacian ornaments of silver;

Supra, no. XXXI, 192.

Vespasian;

14;

180, no. 75.

p.

Caesar; the year 1878; Rep., ms.

278.

3;

Senereu, corn. Dane, district Mure.

the year 1942;

?;

152, no. M.

p.

Mitrea, SCIV, 19, 1968, 275.

Hoard;

Single find.

I;

A

A

287.

Sinpetru de Cimpie, district Mure§· Single find; 1; dr.: 119/110 B.C. {S); CabNumCluj; E. Chirila and collaborators, ActaMN, IV, 1967, p. 458, no. 12.

288.

Sinvasii, com. Galejti, districtMurej. Hoard; 42; dir.: 172/15147 /46 B.C.; M. Tg. Mure�; A. Zrinyi, Descoperiri arheologice pe peritoriul regiunii Mure�-Autonoma Maghiara privind mileniul 1 e.n., Dissertation Museum Session 1966.

289.

Slatina-Timi�, district Timi�. Single find: 1; dr.: family Julia; Rep., ms.

290.

Slimnic, district Sibiu. Single find; 1; dr.; Dacian pottery; Rep., ms.

291.

Snagov, district Ilfov. Single find; 4; dir.; 86-43 /42 B. C. {G); Dacian settlement and necropolis; B. Mitrea, SCN, II, 1958, p. 171, no. 3 4.

292.

Socol, district Cara�-Severin. Single find; 1; aureus Tiberius; I. Winkler, p. 148, no. 169. - Some�eni - see Cluj.

293 .

Sorne� Cald. Supra, no. XXXII, 76. Dir.: ? - 50 B.C.

294.

Sprtncenata, district Olt. Hoard; c. 200; dir.; the year 1959; M. Sibiu, M. Pite�ti (116) ; Information E. Popescu.

295.

Stancuja. Supra, no. XXXI, 136. Dir.: 150/125-52 B.C. {G).

296.

Stane�ti, district Ilfov. Single find; 1; dr.; Information Gh. R�dulescu.

297.

Stoene�ti, com. Berisl'áve,ilti, district Vilcea. Hoard; 170; 10; dir.; the year 1908; MNA (10); D. Tudor. OltRom3 , 1968, p.29. - Strimba - see Valea.

298.

Stupini, com. Sinmihaiu de Cimpie, district Bistrit3--Nasaud. Hoard; E.· 400; 251; dir.: 217-42 B.C. (B); the year 1899; and Dacian ornaments of silver; Rep., ms.

299.

Suceagu, com. Baciu, district Cluj. "C sóvatet'ó"; single find; 1; dr.; 71 B.C. {G); M. Cluj; I. Winkler, SCN, II, 1958, pp. 408409, no. XVI.

3 00.

Suhaia, district Teleorman. a) Supra, no. XXXI, 197, a. Dir.: 145/13 8-78/77 B.C. {S); b) "At Hillock" ; board; ? ; 1O; dir.: 11O/ 108-43 /42 B.C. {S); M. Chi}escu, SCN, IV, 1968, p. 453 .

3 01.

Surdule�ti, com. Miro�i, district Arge�. The forest "Bal!ata", "Pietri�"; single find; 1; dr.: 89 B. C. (G); the year 1951; B. Mitrea, SCN, II, 1958, p. 172.

3 02.

Suseni, com. Runcu, district Gorj. Single find; 1; dr.: M. Antonius; C. Preda, SCN, III, 1960, p. 167.

303.

�ae�, com. Apold, district Mure)'. Hoard; 563 ; 2; dir.: 217-49 B. C.; the XIX century; M. Sighi�oara (2); Rep., ms. 260

304.

aptesate, the city of Scele, district Braov. 16 dii:

the Ist century B.C.

-

Hoard;

Vespasian (75 A. D.);

40;

24 dir,

B. Mitrea,

p. 108, no. 58. 305.

yard, corn. Ighiu, district Alba.

Hoard?;

1.2 dir., i di (the Ist century A D.);

M. Alba Julia;

.

306.

I "Macedonian silver coin", Rep., m s.

§cheau, corn. Valea C5iugäreasc, district Prahova. dir.:

89-74 B.C. (G);

Observation:

Single find;

3;

perforated for necklace;

information V. Teodorescu. 307.

§eica Mic a, district Sibiu. 356;

of silver. dacice. 308.

the year 1954;

iSeica Mic, 1956,

erbeti, corn. Gnceti, district Bacàu. Single find;

-

eua

hoard;

and Dacian ornaments

0. Floca, Contributii la cunoaterea tezaurelor de argint Tezaurul de la Srãcsu

Vespasian;

309.

The north-east of the village;

dir.: 217/197-28 B.C.;

-

C.

p.

18 sqq.

i;

dr.:

Matasã and B. Mitrea, SCN ‚1, 1957, p. 476.

see Glodeni.

§imleul Silvaniei, district Slaj. hoard;

Gheorghe;

and Dacian ornaments of silver;

necropolis;

35;

Rep., ms;

dir.:

a) "Mgura", the top "Dealul

Criului";

-

Augustus;

b) "Mâgura";

the year 1945;

M. Sf.

Dacian settlement and

single find;

2;

1 dr: 89/88

B.C. (5), 1 im. dr. (?) ; E. Chiril, ActaMN, VI, 1969, p. 476, no. 6-7. 310.

imnicude Sus, district Dolj. Schatzfunde,

311.

p.

Hoard?;

?;

dir.;

I. Winkler,

154, no. 154.

opotu, district Dolj.

"Fata";

B.C. (S), 3 im. dir.;

hoard; ?;

the year 1957;

32; 29 dir.:

155/120-55

M. Craiova (6);

C. Preda and

Gh. Popilian, SCN, IV, 1968, pp. 450-452. 312.

Talpa, corn. BIrguani, district Neam. Information V.

313.

Tträti, district Bacu. (S). the year 1967; 176, no. 40.

314.

Single find;

i;

di: Titus;

Mihilescu-Birliba. Hoard;

MNA (7);

Tuteu, district Bihor.

?;

7 dir.:

100/95-42/38 B.C.

B. Mitrea, SCIV, 19, 1968,

Single find;

1;

aureus:

Nero;

pp.

175-

B. Mitrea,

p. 111, no. 90. 315.

Teiu (former Teiu din Deal), district Arge. M. Piteti (4); -

316.

4;

dir.;

B. Mitrea, SCIV, XV, 1964, p. 574, no. 36.

Tieu din Deal- see Teiu.

Tibod, corn. Dealu, district Harghita. 43/31 B.C., the rest dii.: B. Mitrea, 155.

317.

Single find ?;

p.

109, no. 65;

Vespasian

c. 300;

145;

624;

L. Verus;

-

p.

154, no.

The hill "Mgura", quarry "Baia";

97 dir., 48 dii.:

261

202 dir.:?

the year 1853;

I. Winkler, Schatzfunde,

Tibru, corn. Cricãu, district Alba. hoard;

Hoard; -

150/125-11/10 B.C. (B);

the

year 1938; MIC, M.Alba-Iulia; M. Macrea and I. Berciu, Apulum, I, 1939-42, p. 160 sqq. 318.

Timi�oara, district Timi�. a) In the city; hoard; 32; aurei Augustus; the year 1891; B. Mitrea, p. 104, no. 17; b) "Freidorf"; single find; 1; dr.: 83B.C. (S); B. Mitrea, SCIV, 17, 1966, p. 420, no. 16

319.

Tinosu, district Prahova. Single find; 1; sestertius; 41B.C.; the year 1922; Dacian settlement; R. and Ec. Vulpe, Dacia, I, 1924, p. 213; M. Macrea and I.Berciu, Apulum, I, 1939-42, p. 199, foot­ note 30.

320.

Tisa. Supra, no. XXXI, 142. 837 dir., 11 díi (earlier period).

321.

Timpa, com. �ardu Nirajului, district Mure�. Single find; 1; dr.: Caesar; I. Winkler, p. 150, no. 185.

322.

Tirgovi�te, district Dimbovij;a. The surroundings; single find; 5 ; 4 dr., 1 im. dr.; M. Tirgovi�te; Information G. Mihaescu.

323.

Tirgu Mure�, district Mure�. Hoard ?; Rep., ms.

324.

Tirgu Ocna, districtBaca.u. Hoard; ?; 13; 12 dir. and dii: ? Augustus, 1 im. dr.; I. Winkler, p. 150, no. 186.

A

�

-

?;

dir.: 189-85B.C.;

325.

Tirnava (former Pro�tea Mare) district Sibiu. Single find; 1; di.: Titus; I. Winkler, p. 144, no. 136.

326.

Tirnava, com.Botoroaga, district Teleorman. Hoard; ? ; 20; 19 dir.: 133/126-49/48B.C. (S), 1 dh. Histria; the years 1912-1913; the coins belong to two bracelets, the drachma (the 4th centuryB.C.) is doubtful and may come from another place; B. Mitrea, SCN, IV, 196E p. 381 sqq.

327.

Tirnaveni, district Mure�. Single find; 1; di: 103 A.D.; M. Tirnaveni; E. Chirilá and collaborators, ActaM:N', IV, 1967, p. 458, no. 20 - Timpeni - see Movileni.

328.

Todireni, com. Padureni, district Vaslui. Single find; 1; d: Augustus; I. Winkler, p. 150, no. 188.

329.

Tome§ti, district Hunedoara. Under the citadel situated on the bank of the Cri�ulAlb; single find; 2; dir.; 84B.C. (1 earlier); Rep., ms.

330.

Tulcea, district Tulcea. 3 km from the city; hoard; 150-200; 17; 14 dir.: 217/197-38/37B.C. (G), 3 im. dr.; C. Preda and G. Simion, SCN, III, 1960, p. 546. - Turche� see Sacele.

331. 332.

Turda, district Cluj. Saline; hoard; 111; dir.; hefore 1843; B. Mitrea, p. 110, no. 7°1. Tu.ria, district Covasna. Single find; 1; dr.: 114 R. C .; M. Sf. Gheorghe; B. Mitrea, p. 108, no. 57. 262

333.

corn. Mrtineti, district Hunedoara.

Thrma>s,

Daciantre., 100 dir., before 1925; one Dacian tre., another dir.; 334.

probably two hoards;

Rep., ms.

lage Flminda;

1;

single find;

MNA;

1;

dr.;

dr.:

B. Mitrea, SCN, II, 1958,

91 B.C. (G); p.

338.

the

M.

Ulmeni, corn. Bogdana, district Teleorman. 1 dr.;

the year 1957;

I. Spiru, SCN, III, 1960,

Ungurei, corn. Roia de Seca, district Sibiu.

Hoard;

Ungureni.

p.

554,

some hundreds;

3; 1 tr. Alexander the Great, 2 dir. (1 family Porcia); 19th century; Rep., ms. 337.

51

Between the city and the vil-

single find; no. 2. 336.

M. Deva;

151;

Thrnu Mgurele, district Teleorman. year 1954;

335.

Hoard;

the end of the

Supra, no. MI, 45, b.

Valea (former Strl'mba), corn. BarbuleJu, district Dl'mbovita. "Plaiul lui Ghioil" or "Plaiul Strimbei"; hoard; c. 250; 215; 200 dir.: 217/ 196-29/27 B.C. (G), 11 dii.: 27-9 B.C., 3 im. dir.; the year 1929; hoard considered erroneously at the time as having been found at Rucr; B. Mitrea, SCN, II, 1958,

339.

126 sqq.

p.

Valea Criului, district Covasna. find?; MIC

"more";

(2 dr.:

3;

dir., dii:

Near the Protestant church;

91 B.C.

91, 84 B.C.; 1 di:

Titus;

-

72-73 A.D.);

1958, 340.

p.

Dacian settlement;

Rep,ms.

and Z. Szkely, Mat., II, 1956, p. 678, no. 8;

single

B. Mitrea

I. Winkler, SCN, II,

409, no. XXII.

Vcarea (?)‚ corn. Mihesti, district Arge. 172/154 B.C. (G);

M.

Cimpulung Muscel;

Single find;

1;

dr.:

transformed into pendant;

information Fl. Mlrpi. 341.

342.

Vda9, corn. Neaua, district Mure. I. Winkler, p. 152, no. 196. Värädia(?), district Arad.

Single find;

?;

?;

dir.:

49;

dir, dii;

family Antonia

and Calpurnia, dii:

Nero 2, Titus 1, Vespasian 1, 1 aureus Nero, 1

bronze Octavianus; Rep., ms.

M. Tirni9oara;

343.

Vrmaga.

344.

Vinjul de Jos, district Alba. ms.

345.

Hoard;

B. Mitrea,

104, no. 23-24;

Supra, no. XXX, 32. Single find;

1;

dr.;

Viioara, corn. Tlrgu Trotu, district Bacu. dr.:

p.

77 B.C. (G);

Dacian settlement;

M. Sibiu;

Single find;

?;

Rep.,

1;

B. Mitrea, SCN, II, 1958,

p. 31. 346.

Vi ) sea, corn. Jucu, district Cluj. M. Antonius (5), 1 im. dr. (?); 476, no. 5, no. 8-10.

347.

Vitea, district Cluj. p. 152, no. 200.

Single find;

Single find;

263

4;

3 dir.:

135/134-

E. Chiril, ActaMN, VI, 1969, p.

1;

dr.:

49 B.C. (B);

I. Winkler,

348.

Vizejdia, corn. Lovrin, district Timi9.

KON 349.

351.

?;

dir., igold

Rep., ms.

Vllcan (The pass). B.C.-86 A.D.;

350.

Single find;

Hoard;

?;

98;

the year 1855;

46 dir, 52 dii:

B. Mitrea,

105, no. 32;

p.

Vinãtori, corn. Mica, district Arad. Rep., ms.

Single find;

VIru, district Gorj.

dir.;

Single find;

?;

the 3rd century

?;

Rep,ms.

dir.;

MNMBp.,

C. Preda, SCN, III, 1960,

p. 167. 352.

Vldeni.

Supra, no. XXXIII, 154.

353.

Voineti, district DImbovia.

Augustus; 354.

the year 1952;

355. 356.

M. Tirgovite;

Viioara, district NeamJ. 71-69 B.C. (G); Zbala.

single find;

1;

di:

Information G. Mihescu.

"The monastery BistriJa";

hoard;

?; 2;

C. Matasä and B. Mitrea, SCN, I, 1967, p. 476.

Supra, no. XXXII, 93.

Zlau, district Slaj.

Single find;

(98-99 A.D.); M. Zlau; 27, p. 8, no. 51. 357.

In the village;

3;

dii:

2 Vespasian, I Trajan

V. Luccel, Catalog Zlau,

p.

6, no. 26-

Zätreni, district Vllcea. The narrows of the Dobretilor; hoard; ?; 37; dir.: 150-75 B.C.; the year 1907-1909; MNA (37); B. Mitrea, Dacia, IX-X, 1941-44, P. 385;

D. Tudor, OltRorn 3 , 1968,

p. 29. 358.

Zerindu Mic, corn. Mica, district Arad. year 1878;

359.

MNMBp.;

Zimnicea, district Teleorman. 102-100 B.C.; C)

2;

1 dr.:

MNA;

b)

Single find:

"At Barracks";

"In vinyards";

3;

2 dir.:

p.

3;

dir.;

the

Arad (former district).

Single find;

?;

dr.: MNA;

MNA (dupondius);

247, no. 23-24, p.

1;

dr.: 90 B.C.; p.

109, 87 B.C. (S),

Alexandri; B. Mitrea, SCIV, 20, 1969, 360.

?;

a) In the city; 1;

91 A.D., dupondius 103 A.D.;

B. Mitrea, SCIV, 16, 2, 1965, d)

Hoard:

Rep., ms.

255, no. 25-26;

jim. dr.;

M.

167, no. 33.

dir.:

?

-

Caesar;

MN1VLBp.,

Rep., ms. 361.

Banat, Single find; di: C)

362.

Domitian; 1, bronze:

a) dir.; the year 1865;

the year 1905; Vespasian;

Buz au (former district). Mitrea, SCN, II, 1958,

363.

Dolj (former district). 32/31 B.C. (G).

364.

HaJeg (former comitat). (B, G), 1809;

7 dii:

M. Timioara;

B. Mitrea, p.102, no. 1, 103, no. 2;

M. Timioara;

Single find., 5;

Rep., ms. dir.;

before 1881;

B.

159, no. 8.

p.

Supra, no. XXXII, 95.

Augustus

b) 1;

Hoard?; -

?;

10;

Dir.:

3 dir.:

150/125-

196-49 B.C.

Dornitian (76-80 A.D.); before the year

I. Winkler, SCN, III, 1960, pp. 442-443, no. VII, p. 446.

264

365.

Hunedoara (former district),

a)

Supra, no. XXXII, 96.

2nd century-64 B.C. ; b) Hoard?; B.C.

Nerva (15 undetermined);

-

of silver;

?;

Muntenia.

Single find;

367.

Muntenia.

Oltenia, Southern Moldavia.

the year 1881;

the year 1893; 368.

Oltenia.

dir.;

MNA;

MNA;

Single find;

I. Winkler,

dir.:

194

-

152, no. 205.

p.

?;

298;

c. 200;

dir, im.

dir and Augustus;

B. Mitrea, SCN, II, 1958, 17;

172/150

and three "pieces"

a) Hoard;

b) Hoard?;

the

443-446, no. VIII.

pp.

366.

dir;

94 dir, 64 dii:

the year 1909;

I. Winkler, SCN, III, 1960, 17;

158;

Dir.:

P.

Augustus;

174, no. 42, 43.

B. Mitrea, Dacia,

IX-X, 1941-44, p. 390. 369.

370.

Rimnicu Sãrat (former district), 1878;

MNA;

b) Single find;

MNA;

B. Mitrea, SCN, II, 1958,

Romanaji (former district). Papia and Marcia;

371.

372.

1;

MIB;

1;

dr.;

85 B.C. (G);

p.

168, no. 26, 27.

Single find;

Hoard;

?;

dir.:

490;

dir.;

a) Supra, no. XXXI, 155, d;

209-42 B.C. (B), 5 im. dir.; a.

Single find;

the year

the year 1940;

family Servilia,

B. Mitrea, Dacia, IX-X, 1941-44, p. 385.

Satu Mare (former district). ms. Transilvania.

a) dr.:

M:NMBp.;

b) Hoard;

c. the year 1903;

43;

Rep.,

38 dir.:

Rep., ms.

Imitations of Roman denarii and coin-dies

373.

Amnap.

Supra, no. XXXIV, 10.

374.

Apoldu de Sus.

375.

Baraolt, district Covasna.

Supra, no. XXXIV, if.

dr. of 124/103 B.C.);

Single find;

1;

im. dr. (the obverse of

B. Mitrea, Dacia, IX-X, 1941-1944, p. 382.

376.

Barboi, Supra, no. XXXIV, 17, a.

377.

Beclean.

378.

Bozienii dc Sus, corn. Dulceti, district Neam. c. 25; 1963;

Supra, no. XXXIV, 21.

14;

13 im. dir., 1 im. di.:

M. Roman;

M. ChiJescu

-

78 B.C.

-

B. Mitrea, SCIV, 17, 1966,

V. Ursache, SCIV, 17, 1966,

p.

"La VelniJ"; 69/70 A.D.; p.

hoard;

the year

420, no. 19;

703 sqq.:

M. ChiJeseu,

SCN, IV, 1968, pp. 129-130, 135. 379.

Bra9ov (on the map no. 40), district Braov. "The Hill of single find; i coin-die; M. Braov; Rep., ms.

380.

Brincoveanu.

381.

Bucureti.

382.

Cadea.

383.

Clineti.

)84.

Cäplina.

Supra, no. XXXIV, 43.

Supra, no. XXXII, 14 b;

b) XXXIV, 45, a.

Supra, no. XXXIV, 52. Supra, no. XXXI, 166, XXX[V, 58. Supra, no. XXXIV, 61, a.

265

prenghiu1ui";

385.

Ctunul, corn. Corneti, district DImboviJa. (107 B.C. S); no. 26.

Dacian settlement;

386.

Cerbäl.

387.

Coste > sti.

388.

Deva.

389.

Fãrcaele.

390.

FInttnele, district Prahova. Single find; SCN, II, 1958, p. 162, no. 16. -

-

391.

Single find;

1; im. dr.

B. Mitrea, SCIV, 20, 1969, p. 166,

Supra, no. XXXIV, 68. Supra, no. XXXIV, 86, a.

Supra, no. XXXIV, 111, a. Supra, no. XXXIV, 123.

Gherghina

-

2;

1;

im. dr.;

B. Mitrea,

see Barboi.

Grdiste (Haj;eg)

-

see Sarmizegetusa.

Griditea Muncelului (on the map no. 142), corn. Ortiora de Sus, district Hunedoara.

Single find;

Medallion of baked clay imitating

probably an imitation of dr.; the year 1956; AEC; Dacian settlement; C. Daicoviciu and l. H. Crian, Mat., V. 1959, p.397. 392.

Hunedoara. a) XXXIV, 149.

393.

Ilieni.

394.

lneu.

Supra, no. XVIII, 67;

b) Supra, no. XXXII, 44, b;

Supra, no. XXXIV, 152. Supra, no. XXXIV, 153.

395.

Islaz.

Supra, no. XXXIV, 155.

396.

Ialnia.

397.

Locusteni.

398.

Ludeti, com.Ortioarade Sus, district Hunedoara. Single find; i coin-die (reverse) dr. 81-69 B.C.); MIC; Rep., ms.

399.

Luncani.

400.

Mihai Bravu.

401.

Ocnij;a.

Supra, no. XXXIV, 198.

402.

Olteni.

Supra, no. XXXIV, 201.

403.

Orätie.

Supra, no. XXXIV, 204, a.

404.

Orova.

Supra, no. XXXIV, 208, c.

405.

Pecica.

Supra, no. XXXIV, 216, c.

406.

Peteni.

Supra, no. XXXIV, 219.

407.

Pietroasele.

408.

Poiana.

409.

Poiana Srta.

410.

Poroschia.

Supra, no. XXXIV, 156. Supra, no. XXXIV, 166.

Supra, no. 168, a. Supra, no. XXXIV, 179.

Supra, no. XXXIV, 221.

Supra, no. XXXIV, 224, m. Supra, no. XXXIV, 226.

Supra, no. XXXIV, 229, b.

266

411.

Prejmer.

412.

Reghin.

413.

Rpile.

414.

Satu Mare.

415.

SatuNou.

416.

Slau de Sus.

417.

Scurta.

418.

Sfineti.

419.

Sighioara. -

Supra, no. XXXIV, 233. Supra, no. XXXIV, 241.

Supra, no. XXXIV, 247. Supra, no. XXXIV, 264. Supra, no. XXXI, 190;

Supra, no. XXXIV, 267.

Supra, no. XXXIV, 273. Supra, no. XXXI.

Strimba

-

421.

Sopotu.

422.

192;

XXXIV, 276.

Supra, no. 280, c. see Valea.

im1eul Silvaniei (?).

420.

XXXIV, 265.

Supra, no. XXXIV, 309, b.

Supra, no. XXXIV, 311.

Tilica, district Sibiu. porting muffs;

14 coin-dies (4 of them failures) dir.;

the year 1961;

M. Sibiu;

Dacian citadel;

3 sup-

N. Lupu,

Aspekte des Mtlnzumlaufs im vorrtimischen Dakien, in JNG, 17, 1967, p. 101 sqq. 423.

TIrgovite.

424.

Tlrgu Ocna.

425.

Tulcea.

426.

Valea.

Supra, no. XXXIV, 338.

427.

Viea.

Supra, no. XXXIV, 346.

428.

Zininicea, Supra, no. XXXIV, 359, d.

429.

Cara9 (former district). 1;

Supra, no. XXXIV, 322.

Supra, no. XXXIV, 324.

Supra, no. XXXIV, 330.

im. dr.;

B. Mitrea,

The mountain Piatra Alba; p.

430.

Muntenia, Oltenia, southern Moldavia.

431.

Romania (the boundaries until 1914). 1914;

432.

dr.; b.

Coins of

433.

Supra, no. XXXIV, 367, a. Single find;

B. Mitrea, Dacia, IX-X, 1941-44,

Transilvania. MNIvIBp.; KOEQN

a)

p.

p.

1;

im .dr.;

before

383.

Supra, no. XXXIV, 372, b;

b) Single find;

1;

im.

Rep., ms. type (the second half of the ist century B.C.)

Axente Sever (on the map no. 15), district Sibiu. Winkler,

single find;

104, no. 22.

Hoard;

20;

I.

124, no. 1.

434.

Brezoi, district Vilcea.

Single find;

435.

Cozma, district Mure;

Hoard;

436.

Fi rtuu, corn. Lupeni, district Harghita. p. 1.24, no. 5. 267

?;

1; 2;

I. Winkler,

p.

124, no. 2.

I. Winkler, p. 124, no. 3. Single find;

1;

I. Winkler,

437.

Grdistea Muncelului (on the map no. 142), corn. Ortiora de Sus, district Hunedoara. a) "Virtoape"; c. 1000; Rep., ms.

438.

single find;

Haeg (on the map no. 145), district Hunedoara. single find;

1;

Nocrich, district Sibiu.

440.

Sarmizegetusa. district Hunedoara.

441.

Timioara (on the map no. 318), district Timi. single find; 1; Rep., ms.

442.

Vizejdia.

443.

Craiova (former district). p. 124; no. 4.

444.

Hunedoara (former district).

The surroundings;

Single find;

1;

Rep., ms.

Single find;

1;

Rep., ms.

The surroundings;

Supra, no. XXXIV, 348.

KOEQN

d) Hoard;

Single find;

124;

1;

M. Craiova;

On the river Strei;

and Lysimachus;

Unknown provenance; 9;

b) Hoard;

I. Winkler, p. 124, no. 7.

439.

445.

?;

hoard;

?;

Rep., ms.

a) Single find;

2;

b)

Single find;

I. Winkler, p. 124, no. 14-17.

268

I. Winkler,

?;

C)

Hoard;

ABBREVIATIONS ActaMN

Acta Musei Napocensis, Cluj.

Ahmerov

R. B. Ahmerov, 0 kleimah keramiceskih masterov ellenisticescogo Hersonesa, in VDI, 3, 1951, pp. 77-84.

R. B. Ahmerov

R. B. Ahmerov, Ob astinomih kleimah ellenisticescogo Hersonesa, in VDI, 4, 1959,

pp.

99-123.

AISC

Anuarul Institutului de Studii Clasice Cluj.

I. Andrieescu,

I. Andrieescu, Piscul Crasni, inARMSI, ser.

Piscul Crsani AnUnivB

III, t. III, mem. 1, Bucuresti, 1924. Analele Universitii Bucureti, Seria §tiinle Sociale, Bucureti.

Apulum

Apulum. (Studii

Buletinul Muzeului Regional Alba Julia icommunicri;

Apulensis;

Acta Musei Regionalis

Acta Musei Apulensis).

ArckAnz

Archaologischer Anzeiger, Berlin.

ArchE rt

A rchaeologiai Ertesito, Budapest.

ArhMold

Arheologia Moldovei, Bucuresti.

ARMSI

Academia RomanL

-

Memoriile Secjiei Jstorice,

Seria II, Bucureti. BCME

Buletinul Comisiunii Monumentelor Istorice, Bucuresti.

Boesterd

M. H. P. Boesterd, The bronze vessels in the Rijksmuseum G. M. Kam at Nijmegen, 1956.

F. Bleckmann

F. Bleckmann, Zu den rhodischen eponymen Heliospriestern, in Klio, XII, 1912,

1. B6nis

pp.

249-258.

1. Bónis, Die kaiserzeitliche Keramik von Pannonien, in DissPann, Ser. II, No. 20, Budapest, 1940.

BonnJahrb

Bonner Jahrbücher. Altertumsfreuden

BSNR CAB

Jahrbücher des Vereins von

im Rheinlande, Bonn.

Buletinul Societâii Numismatice Romane, Bucure > sti. Cercetàri arheologice in Bucureti, Bucure9ti; Bucureti. Bucureti.

269

Materiale de istorie

qi

muzeografie,

CABNum

Cabinetul Numismatic al Bibliotecii Academiei R. S. Romanía.

CabNum Vienna

Mttnzkabinett-Wien.

H. Callender

H. Callender, Roman amphorae, Loridon-Oxford, 1965.

V. Canarache

V. Canarache, Importul amforelor stampilate la Istria, Bucure�ti, 1957.

Canarache (Grakov)

V. Canarache, Importul amforelor stampilate la Istria, 1957, pp. 404-421 (listele cu astinomi �i producatori de la Sinope, dupa B. M. Grakov).

Canarache (Pridik)

V. Cana rache, Importul amforelor stampilate la Istria, 1957, pp. 397-398 (listele cu astinomi din Thasos dupa E. Pridik, Inventarnii katalog kleim na amfornih rucikah i gorlimkeh i na cerelitah Ermitajnogo sobranija, 1917).

M. P. Charlesworth

M. P. Charlesworth, Les routes et le trafic com­ mercial dans l'Empire Romain, París, 1938.

E. Chirila-G. Mihaescu

E. Chirila-G. Mihaescu, Der Mtlnzhort von Caprio­ ru, Beitr�ge zu Chronologie und Umlauf der Tetra­ drachmen von Macedonia Prima und der Insel Thasos, 1969.

ComCraiova

Comunicari Craiova, Seria Arheologie, Seria Numismatic�, Craiova.

I. H. Cri�an, Ceramica

I. H. Cri9an, Ceramica daco-getica cu speciala privire la Transilvania, Bucure§ti, 1969.

Dacia

Dacia. Re cherches et découvertes archéologiques en Roumanie, Bucuresti; N. S. Revue d'archéo­ logie ancienne, Bucure�ti.

C. Daicoviciu, Piatra RoS3ie

C. Daicoviciu, Cetatea dacica de la Piatra Ro�ie, Bucure�ti, 1954.

DissPann

Dissertationes Pannonicae, Budapest.

EDR

Ephemeris Dacoromana, Roma.

Eggers

H. J. Eggers, Der rtlmische Import im freien Germanien, 1951.

H. J. Eggers

H. J. Eggers, Rtlmische Bronzegefüsse in Britan­ nien, in JahrbMainz, 13, 1966, pp. 67-164.

H. J. Eggers, JahrbMainz

H. J. Eggers, Zur absoluten Chronologie der rtlmi­ schen Kaiserzeit im freien Germanien, in Jahrb Mainz, 2, 1955, pp. 196-244.

T. Frank

T. Frank, Storia economica di Roma. Dalle origini alla fine della republica, Firenze, 1924. 270

H. v. Gaertringen

H. v. Gaertringen, RE, Suppi. V, s. v. Rhodos.

N. Gostar, Cethi

N. Gostar, Cetãji dacice din Moldova, Ed. Meridiane, Bucureti, 1969.

Grace

V. Grace, Stamped amphora handles found in 19311932, in Hesperia, Journal of the American School of Classical Studies at Athens, 111, 3, 1934, pp. 195-310.

V. R. Grace

V. R. Grace, The eponyms named on Rhodian amphora stamps, in Hesperia, Journal of the American School of Classical Studies at Athens, XXII, 2, 1953,

M. Gramatopol-

pp.

M. Gramatopol

Gh. Poenaru

116-128.

iGh. Poenaru-Bordea, Amphora

stamps from Cailatis and South Dobrudja, in Dacia, N. S., XIII, 1969,

N. A. Harjuche

-

N. A. Harjuche

$F.

pp.

127-282.

Anastasiu, Brilita.

Aezri

F. Anastasiu,

2i cimitire omene > sti datind din epoca neoliticil pin

Brilija

in pragul ortnduirii feudale, Braila, 1968.

J. Hatzfeld

J. Hatzfeld, Les trafiquants Italiens dans l'Orient hellnique, Paris, 1919.

B. Heukemes

B. Heukemes, Rtimische Keramik aus Heidelberg, Bonn, 1964.

HTRTE

A Hunyadmegyei Ttirtnelmi es Re'gszeti Trsulat Evktinyve, Budapest-Deva.

C. .Isings

C. Isings, Roman glass from dated finds, GroningenDjakarta, 1957.

IstRom

Istoria Rom'niei, Bucureti.

D. Ivnyi

D. Ivnyi, Die pannonischen Lampen, in DissPann, Ser. II, 2, 1935.

Izvestia

Izvestia, Bulletin de 1'Institut archologique Bulgare, Sofia.

JahrbMainz

Jahrbuch des Rtimisch-germanischen Zentralmuseums Mainz, Mainz.

JNG

Jahrbuch für Numismatik und Geldgeschichte, herausgegeben von der Bayerischen Numismatischen Gesellschaft.

Kisa

A. Kisa, Das Glas im Altertume, I-HI, Leipzig, 1908.

V. V. Kropotkin

V. V. Kropotkin, Rimskie importnie izdeliya v vostocinoi Evrope (II v. do n.e.

-

V v.n.e.), in

Arheologiya SSSR, Moskva, 1970. KS

Kratkie soobscenija Instituta istorii material'noj kul'tury, Moskva. 271

H. KUthmann

H. KUthmann, Beitrttge zur spttthellenistischen und f rUhrtlmischen Toreutik, KalamUnz, 1959.

M. B. Lloris

M. B. Lloris, Las anforas romanas en Espana, Zaragoza, H}70.

V. Lucácel, Catalog Zalau

V. Lucácel, Catalogul colectiei de monete antice, Muzeul Zalau, 1968.

M

Museum .

Mat

Materiale �i cercetári arheologice, Bucure§ti.

Menzel

H. Menzel, Die rtlmische Bronzen aus Deutschland, Mainz, I, 1960; II, 1966.

:MIA

Materiali i issledovanija po arheologii SSSR, Moskva-Leningrad.

l\1IC

Muzeul de Istorie al Transilvaniei - Cluj.

MIR

Muzeul de Istorie al R.

B. Mitrea

B. Mitrea, Penetrazione commerciale e circolazione monetaria nella Dacia prima della conquista, in Ephemeris Dacoromana, X, Roma, 1945, pp. 1-154.

M:MB

Muzeul de istorie a municipiului Bucure�ti, Bucu­ re�ti.

MNA

Muzeul National de Antichit�Ji - Bucure�ti (obs.: o parte din colecJiile luí acum la l\1IR).

MNMBp

Magyar Nemzeti MÚzeum - Budapest.

Morin

J. Morin, La verrerie en Gaulle sous l'Empire Romain, París, 1913.

MuzistMold

Muzeul de Istorie a Moldovei - Ia§i.

I. Nestor, Stand

I. Nestor, Der Stand der Vorgeschichtsforschung in Rumttnien, in 22. Bericht der Rtlmische­ Germanischen Kommission, 1933, pp. 11-181.

N. A. Onaiko

N. A. Onaiko, Anticinii import v Pridneprov'e i Pobuj 'e v. IV-II vv. do n.e., Arheologiya SSSR, Moskva, 1970.

s.

Romania - Bucure�ti.

v.

Parvan, Dacia

v.

V. Parvan, Dacia. Civiliza!iile stravechi carpato­ danubiene, Bucure�ti, 1957.

Parvan, Getica

v.

Parvan, La Eénétration

V. Parvan, Getica. O protoistorie a Daciei, Bu­ cure�ti, 1926. V. Parvan, La pénétration hellénique et héllenistique tique dans la vallée du Danube, in Academie Roumaine. Bulletin de la Section Historique, t, X, Bucarest, 1923, pp. 23-47.

272

PrvrMB

Publicaj;iile Muzeului Municipiului Bucureti, Bucureti.

E. Pridik

E. Pridik, Zu den rhodischen Amphorenstempeln, inKlio, XX, 1926, pp. 317-321.

A. Rac1nti

A. Radn6ti, Die rtimischen Bronzegeflisse von Pannonien, in DissPann, Ser. II, nr. 6, Budapest, 1938.

RE

Real Encyclopldie der ciassischen Altertumswissenschaft (Pauly-Wissowa), Stuttgart.

Rep.

Repertoriul arheologic a! Transilvaniei (ms. la Institutul de Istorie 9i Arheologie Cluj).

RepMold

N. Zaharia, M. Petrescu-Dlmbovija pi Em. Zaharia, Aezãri din Moldova.

De la paleolitic pina

in secolul al XVIII-lea, Bucureti, 1970. RevMuz

Revista Muzeelor, Bucureti.

H. S. Robinson

H. S. Robinson, Pottery of the Roman Period. Chronology, in The Athenian Agora, V, Princeton 1959.

M. Rostovtzeff,

M. Rostovtzeff, Die hellenistische Welt.

Gesell-

Die hellenistische

schaft und Wirtschaft, I-II, Stuttgart, 1955;

Welt

Stuttgart, 1956.

M. Rostovtzeff, The Social and

III,

M. Rostovtzeff, The Social and Economic History of the Roman Empire, Oxford, 1926.

Economic History J. Rouge

J. Rouge, Recherches sur l'organisation du commerce maritime en Mditerrane sous l'Empire Romain, Paris, 1966.

Sargetia

Sargetia, Buletinul Muzeului Regional Hunedoara, Deva (ContribuJii la cunoa9terea Regiunii Hunedoara;

Acta Musei Devensis).

SCIV

Studii 9i cercethri de istorie veche, Bucureti.

SCN

Studii

icercetri de numismatic, Bucureti.

SCSCluj

Studii

icercetri qtiinjifice, Cluj.

SCIai

Studii

icercetri sjiinJifice, Iai.

StArti st

Studii 9i articole de istorie, Bucureti.

StC1s

Studii Clasice, Bucureti.

StComPiteti

Studii qi comunicri, Pite9ti.

StC omSibiu

Studii

icomunicri, Sibiu.

StMatSuceava

Studii

imateriale, Suceava, 1969.

StRefistRom

Studii

ireferate privind istoria Romniei, I-II,

Bucure9ti, 1954.

273

D. E. Strong

D. E. Strong, Greek and Roman gold and silver plate, London, [1966].

E. M. Staerman

E. M. Staerman, Keramiceskie kleima iz Tin, in KS, XXXVI, Moskva-Leningrad, 1951, pp. 31-49.

H. A. Thompson

H. A. Thompson, Two centuries of Hellenistic pottery, in Hesperia, ifi, 4, 1934, pp. 311-480.

Gr. G. Tocilescu, Monumentele

Gr. G. Tocilescu, Monumentele epigrafice si scuipturali ale Muzeului National de Anti chitati Bucuresti, Bucuresti, 1902.

D. Tudor, OltRom 3

D. Tudor, Oltenia Romana 3 , Bucuresti, 1968.

UnitContlstRom

Unitate Si continuitate in istoria poporului roman Bucuresti, 1969.

Vanderhoeven

M. Vanderhoeven, Verres romains (Jer_i i f eme siècle) des Musees Curtius et du Verre Liege, 1961.

aLiege,

VDI

Vestnik drevney istorii, Moskva.

R. Vulpe, HistDob

R. Vuipe, Histoire ancienne de la Dobroudja, in La Dobroudja, Bucuresti, 1938.

I. Winkler

I. Winkler, Contributii numismatice la istoria Daciei, in SCSCluj, Ser. III, VI, 1-2, 1955, pp. 13-180.

I. Winkler, Schatzfunde

I. Winkler, Schatzfunde rtimlscher Silbermtinzen in Dakien bis zum Beginn der Dakerkriege, in JNG, 17, 1967.

Zeest

I. B. Zeest

I. B. Zeest, 0 tipah gerakleiskih amlor, in KS, XXII, 1949, pp. 48-52. I. B. Zeest, Keramiceskaia tara Bospora, Moskva, 1960.

274

PLATES

Note:

To facilitate the location in the catalogue of objects illustrated in the

plates, every illustration has a letter (see below) and the numbering of the illustrations within the same plate, though not consecutive since not all pieces are illustrated, are in ascending order.

For example:

the piece in plate 15,

no. A 4/c is described in the Catalogue of imported amphorae at locality no. 4, and under that locality it is under the letter c. Only in the case of localities where the large number of the finds has necessitated the use of Arabic numbers in the place of letters, will the plate number be in the form A 22/43. Abbreviations corresponding to the sections of the Catalogue: A

Imported amphorae

IA

Local amphorae

C

Imported pottery

IC

Imitations in pottery of imported products

B

Vessels and objects of bronze

lB

Imitations of bronze vessels

S

Vessels of silver

G

Imported vessels and objects of glass

V

Miscellaneous

275

ci ()

(-)

()

Co

03

cri

C..)

II

Co I1

Ci

C..)

2:1

ci

Li

—I —

I-.-..'

I

U I.-'

-2h0 -230 -220 -210 -200 -190 -160 -170 -160 -150 -140 •130

-

120

-110

-

100

-90

80 -70

-

60

-50 -hO -30 20

7-1 10 5

-I--

Fig. I

Period

BC

DE

FGH

I 50

-77 (Th

50

A.

Painted pottery

20

B.

Pottery with relief

10

decoration

-

40 30

I-,

and

terra sigillata

early/cA. D.

1.0

C.

Dishes, saucers

and plates

30 20

D.

Pitchers and jugs

E.

Kanthari and cups

F.

Lamps

G.

Unguentarii

H.

Other categories

70 5

Ic. B C-Tc.A.D.

Late Ic. B. C.-

50

40 30 20 10 5

.A,

0

and uncertain

B C.

IC.

Late 11-early

0

A-

0 5

en

I. L)

Co

0 0

I - .1

-

-

0 -

A Number of pieces not specified Fig. 2

Bowls

0 0

It)

0 (N

0

I')

a-

ff

0 0 L

Q) 0

6

If)

—a' .— ‚—a

(

cd Li I .5-I

o

0

‚—

'—

0 C..,

c

c

(N

-a-'

suWn/oD eL/i

0v .01 . a.v i

‚1/Dt/ puooes

•0

C)

V

07

‚I/DL/ 4SJ!J

a•v

?8

0

•i-

JD7 •0J

CO

0

0

a v •T . C. v•oj —

•3 8

•0

J1LT I 3] D/

C) N..

0 •Y•I 4/JDe -98 •0jaiD/

.9

' 8 .0J F8

A/JDe -//

•:i 8

•0

&]D/

ff-7

C) CO

U

C) -

C) (N

ROMAN COINS 33 1A 159A

A hoards V single finds it

168

fL15' V

U

V2o

0 imitations of Roman coins

V133

LV coin dies 52 A if q

COINS OF KOEQN

Aio

56

• hoards single finds 21

A

V38 Y 30$

22.

'

253

305A 317

176-

AN 15

Z4 3COA

7'

223

0

390

AA

196

ft3

V

zos £326

27?

152 DA tiV

V306

210

£18

6A

DA 229

Plate '4

A85

A 112/a

Plate

A112/b

i

J

A7/p

A 18,/a

A it

.Y

00

b

1

A 18 /c A 18/e

A 21/a

A 21/b A 22/ a

2 5/ 10

A 25/2

E TOY

IiNAM ©'Y

A 25/26

A 25/18 A 25 / 19 •'-•,• Iil

11 t.

A 25/38

•

•

114

!c— •

.:.':

A 25/43

A 25/100

A 25 /63

A 25 /6 6

Plate 16

A 55

'.r

H

A 64/a

A 77/3 A 7711

A 79/k

OT•.

A 79/9

A 79 /1.

A 85

A 77/4

UO©A VFVA nA W17

J

8 OA CC

A 94

9JZ*

ArPIA N-'

A 87 A 10 7/a

A 113

Plate '7

IA 3/1

IA 2/b IA

IA 3/2

IA 1

IA

2 /a

3

IA

/6

IA

IA

3

IA 3/9

3/7

IA 3/12

A 3/11

3 /10

IA

IA 3/s

3/4

/13

IA

3

/17

‚

IA

IA 3/19

IA 3124

3/21

tl JA

3 /28

IA

3

/29

IA 3/31

IA 3/30

IA 4

IA

/h

IA 12/1

IA 12/2

Plate 18

IA 12/4

IA 12/5

IA 12/6

IA 12/8 IA 12/10

IA 12/9

A 12111

IA 12/12

IA 12/14

IA 12/13

A 12/18 IA 12/15

IA 12/16

IA 12/19

IA 12

IA

12/23

22

IA 12/24 IA 12/26

IA

IA 12/25

IA 12/31

A 12/40

IA 12 /38 IA

12/39

IA 12/44

IA 12/4G

Plate

19

12 /3 2

1)

LILII\L\ D

IA 15/a IA is/t.

A 15

Ic cçj

0

IA 15/d IA15/g

IA

IA 15/h

IA 10

Plate

20

15

C35/2 C34/5

C 7 35 51

C51

Plate

21

C7/e

C27 C52

C27,34

C7 , 35

C34/34

C34/30

Plate 22

C 46/a

E2,9/a C353Z46 C49

C35/30

C3 4/ 35

Plate 23

C39

N

035/31

C34/37

Plate

25

C35/32

C3 7/ 1O C 25,37, 46

C71[

Plate 26

C 34,37 IC27/8

IC C38/10

Plate

27

27/

p.-

r'1

II

H

if I If

ii

I

Irl/ifi HI/f//f/fIJI I

11)1

0

Plate

31

I t,

Plate

32

IC

IC

IC

27/23

27/ 22

IC

IC

27 38

27/30

27/24

( IC 27/31 34 /e

IC 34/g

IC 34/h

Plate 35

Plate 36

66Q'

Plate

‚'C6!6 106J67

B15/c

Plate 38

B 32/c B27/d

B8

Plate 39

B 32/c

1

'-I

U

Plate 4°

4-J

q

wk

Plate

42

Iy/,y

fl

I Jiyfl 3 1 , 1 1

S 4/i

Lit Ili (It(

Witt LU

UUI

L

I1J,

II

'

-

Try

S4/k

Plate 43

4/rn

Plate 44

Plate 45

A 22/a

A 25/2

A 77/3

A 79/i

A 111

Plate 46

Plate 47

Plate 48

C7/i

C37/106 C19/j

IC 27/ 8

-

r

IC 48/c

IC 52

ICL+3/e

IC 55/a

Plate 49

IC 43/s

PlateSo

IC 27/67

Plate p

Plate 52

Plate,r3

B27/1

B 27/s

18 1

54/j

S4/i

G91

G111

GS 011/29

I 011/26

G11/32 G12/c

G11/34 -

Plate54

015

£

5

Plate 5 . c