Commentaria archaeologica et historica (IV)

RUSTOIU, AUREL

EPHEMERIS NAPOCENSIS 31 (XXXI/2021)

Commentaria archaeologica et historica (IV)

(pages 69-90)

DOI: https://www.doi.org/10.33993/ephnap.2021.31.69

Download PDF

Authors:
AUREL RUSTOIU
Academia Română, filiala Cluj‑Napoca. Institutul de Arheologie și Istoria Artei. Str. M. Kogălniceanu 12–14, 400084 Cluj‑Napoca, Romania. E‑mail: aurelrustoiu@yahoo.com

Keywords: Danube, Neacșu din Câmpulung; Ptolemaios, Alexander the Great, Iron Gates, panoply of weapons, warrior identities, Late Iron Age, “Celts”, “Dacians”.

Abstract
1. Navigating on the Danube, from Ptolemy the son of Lagus to Neacșu of Câmpulung. The year 2021 marks the 500 anniversaries of the moment when Neacșu of Câmpulung wrote his letter, which many specialists considers to be the earliest attested document written in Romanian language. Since this is an important document for the history of Romanian literature, the following note will also be written in Romanian language. The sender of this letter, Neacșu of Câmpulung, was a merchant who was sending information to Hans Benkner, the mayor of Brașov, about the movements of Ottoman army along the Danube in the summer of 1521. Among the information are some regarding the way in which ships coming from the Bosphorus and the Black Sea navigated upstream on the Danube, through the Iron Gates, to Belgrade. This story echoes a quite similar one that happened eighteen centuries and a half earlier – the expedition of Alexander the Great to the Danube in 335 BC. The events were described by one witness who was part of the expedition: Ptolemy, the son of Lagus, a general of Alexander and future king of Egypt. The fragments describing the Danubian expedition are preserved in later works by Arrian and Strabo. According to them, while preparing the expedition to the east, Alexander the Great sought to first stabilize and pacify the northern territories of the kingdom. Therefore, in the spring of 335 BC, Alexander left Amphipolis to initiate a new expedition against the Triballi, who were chased up to the Danube. Led by king Syrmos, they took refuge on an island of the river, being also helped by the Getae living on the left bank of the Danube. Upon reaching the river, Alexander the Great met the “big ships” that came to help him from Byzantium, through the Black Sea and along the Danube (Arrian I, 3, 3). The alliance of the Getae and Triballi motivated Alexander to organize a one-day punishing raid to the north of the Danube. Several hypotheses have been proposed over time regarding the entire campaign and the location of the island on which the Triballi led by Syrmos took refuge, or the area where Alexander crossed the Danube (Fig. 1). F. Medeleţ had convincingly demonstrated that the army led by Alexander the Great reached the Danube near the Morava confluence. Al. Vulpe has objected to this hypothesis, mostly bringing into discussion the supposed difficulties encountered by the Macedonian fleet when attempting to navigate through the Iron Gates. However, the problem of passing through the Iron Gates cataracts was already solved in ancient time by towing the ships. The difficult conditions for the navigation through the cataracts were similar both before and after the Roman times, and until the modern age. Therefore, the information provided by Neacșu of Câmpulung about the Ottoman campaign along the Danube in 1521 is important. His description confirms that the Ottoman ships were towed, also indicating the way in which passage through the Danube’s Iron Gates was organized. Consequently, the idea suggesting that the “big ships” from Byzantium navigated upstream the Iron Gates while coming to support Alexander the Great in 335 BC is plausible. This hypothesis, proposed by Florin Medeleț, continues to be the most convincing one, ahead of all others proposed so far. 2. “Panoplies” of weapons and warrior identities from the “Celtic” to the “Dacian horizon” in Transylvania. The Late Iron Age in Transylvania was defined by two cultural and chronological horizons: the “Celtic horizon” (between ca. 350 and 190/175 BC) and the “Dacian horizon” (between ca. 190/175 BC and AD 106). One aspect that has seldom been discussed is the way these “panoplies” defined a particular social identity of these elites during each of the aforementioned cultural and chronological horizons which characterized the inner Carpathians region during the Late Iron Age. The comparison of the “standard” panoplies of weapons specific to the “Celtic” and the “Dacian horizon” indicates the existence of both similarities and differences. More precisely, these panoplies are quite similar in what concerns their functionality. In funerary contexts, these weapons are meant to define symbolically the warlike identity. However, the ways in which martial identity was constructed and expressed within the social environment differed from one horizon to another. The “Celtic” warrior was closely connected to the community within which he lived, being buried alongside other members of the community, in an area belonging to his group, clan or family, using all markers of his social status and identity. On the other hand, the “Dacian” warrior belonged to a hierarchic society that was defined by the emergence of hilltop fortresses surrounded by a dependent rural hinterland. Therefore, despite the apparent similarities in the functional structure of the panoplies of weapons, the warriors of these two horizons belonged to two very different models of social organization. Keywords: Danube, Neacșu din Câmpulung; Ptolemaios, Alexander the Great, Iron Gates, panoply of weapons, warrior identities, Late Iron Age, “Celts”, “Dacians”.

References:

[1] BABEȘ 1997
M. BABEŞ, Despre fortificaţiile “Cetăţii Jidovilor“ de la Coţofenii din Dos. Studii și Cercetări de Istorie Veche și Arheologie 48, 3 (1997), 199–236.

[2] BERECKI 2021
S. BERECKI, Identity in Landscape. Connectivity and Diversity in Iron Age Transylvania (Cluj-Napoca 2021).

[3] BOTEVA 2002
D. BOTEVA, An attempt at identifying Alexander’s route towards the Danube in 335 BC. In: K. Bošnakov, D. Boteva (eds.), Jubilaeus V. Sbornik v čest na prof. Margarita Tačeva (Sofia 2002), 27–31.

[4] CĂLINESCU 1941
G. CĂLINESCU, Istoria literaturii române de la origini până în prezent (București 1941).

[5] CĂSĂLEAN 2020
A. CĂSĂLEAN, Cetatea dacică de la Cugir. VOL. 2. Habitat și teritoriu (Cluj-Napoca 2020).

[6] CRUMLEY 1995
C. CRUMLEY, Heterarchy and the analyses of complex societies. Archaeological Papers of the American Anthropological Association 6 (1995), 1–5.

[7] DAICOVICIU 1972
H. DAICOVICIU, Dacia de la Burebista la cucerirea romană (Cluj 1972).

[8] DRĂGAN 2020
A. DRĂGAN, Living on the river. A study of the interactions in the lower Danube gorge during the Late Iron Age and Early Roman Times (Cluj-Napoca 2020).

[9] GUMĂ 1992
M. GUMĂ, Vestigii de civilizaţie dacică în zona piemontului bănăţean. Symposia Thracologica 9 (1992), 38–43.

[10] HELLEBRANDT 1999
M. HELLEBRANDT, Celtic Finds from Northern Hungary. Corpus of Celtic Finds in Hungary III (Budapest 1999).

[11] HURMUZACHI/IORGA 1900
E. HURMUZACHI/N. IORGA, Documente privitoare la istoria românilor, vol. XI (București 1900).

[12] ILIESCU 1990
V. ILIESCU, Alexander der Grosse und Dromichaites. In: M. Tačeva, D. Bojadžiev (eds.), Studia in Honorem Borisi Gerov (Sofia 1990), 101–113.

[13] LAZAROVICI 1977
G. LAZAROVICI, Gornea – Preistorie (Reșița 1977).

[14] ŁUCZKIEWICZ/SCHÖNFELDER 2008
P. ŁUCZKIEWICZ/M. SCHÖNFELDER, Untersuchungen zur Ausstattung eines späteisenzeitlichen Reiterkriegers aus dem südlichen Karpaten- oder Balkanraum. Jahrbuch der Römisch- Germanisches Zentramuseum Mainz 55 (2008), 159–210.

[15] MEDELEȚ 1982
F. MEDELEŢ, În legătură cu expediţia întreprinsă de Alexandru Macedon la Dunăre în 335 î.e.n. Acta Musei Napocensis 19 (1982), 13–22.

[16] MEDELEȚ 1999–2000
F. MEDELEȚ, Dacia protoistorică și Familia Simuliidelor. Analele Banatului 7–8 (1999- 2000), 293–298.

[17] MEDELEȚ 2002
F. MEDELEŢ, Über den Feldzug Alexanders des Grossen an die Donau im Jahr 335 v. Chr. In: K. Bošnakov, D. Boteva (eds.), Jubilaeus V. Sbornik v čest na prof. Margarita Tačeva (Sofia 2002), 272–279.

[18] NAWOTKA 2010
K. NAWOTKA, Alexander the Great (Cambridge 2010).

[19] NÉMETI 1988
I. NÉMETI, Necropola Latène de la Pişcolt, jud. Satu Mare. I. Thraco-Dacica 9 (1988), 49–74.

[20] NÉMETI 1989
I. NÉMETI, Necropola Latène de la Pişcolt, jud. Satu Mare. II. Thraco-Dacica 10 (1989), 75–114.

[21] NÉMETI 1992
I. NÉMETI, Necropola Latène de la Pişcolt, jud. Satu Mare. III. Thraco-Dacica 13 (1992), 59–112.

[22] NÉMETI 1993
I. NÉMETI, Necropola Latène de la Pişcolt, jud. Satu Mare. IV. Thraco-Dacica 14 (1993), 117–129.

[23] PAPAZOGLU 1978
F. PAPAZOGLU, The Central Balkan Tribes in Pre-Roman Times (Amsterdam 1978).

[24] PÂRVAN 1926
V. PÂRVAN, Getica. O protoistorie a Daciei (Bucureşti 1926).

[25] POPA 2018
C. N. POPA, Modeling identities. A case study from the Iron Age of south-east Europe (Cham 2018).

[26] RAMSL 2020
P. C. RAMSL, Diversity of male identities in Early and Middle La Téne period cemeteries in Central Europe (Nitra 2020).

[27] RAPIN 1995
A. RAPIN, Propositions pour un classement des équipements militaires celtiques en amont et en aval d’un repère historique: Delphes 278 avant J.-C. In: J.-J. Charpy (ed.), L’Europe celtique du Ve au IIIe siècle avant J.-C. Contacts, échanges et mouvements de populations. Actes du deuxième symposium international d’Hautvillers 8–10 octobre 1992 (Sceaux 1995), 275–290.

[28] RAPIN 1999
A. RAPIN, L’armement celtique en Europe: choronologie de son evolution technologique du Ve au Ier s. Av. J.-C. Gladius 19 (1999), 33–67.

[29] RAPIN 2007
A. RAPIN, Les armes des Celtes. Des messages enfouis sous rouille. MEFRA 108.2 (2007), 505–522.

[30] RUSTOIU 1994
A. RUSTOIU, Observaţii privind înmormântările tumulare din Dacia preromană. In: S. Mitu et al. (eds.), Studii de istorie a Transilvaniei (Cluj-Napoca 1994), 33–37.

[31] RUSTOIU 2005

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

[32] RUSTOIU 2006
A. RUSTOIU, A Journey to Mediterranean. Peregrinations of a Celtic Warrior from Transylvania. Studia Universitatis “Babeş-Bolyai”. Historia. Special Issue: Focusing on Iron Age Elites 51, 1 (2006), 42–85.

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

[34] RUSTOIU 2012
A. RUSTOIU, Commentaria Archaeologica et Historica (I). 1. The grave with a helmet from Ciumeşti – 50 years from its discovery. Comments on the greaves. 2. The Padea- Panagjurski kolonii group in Transylvania. Old and new discoveries. Ephemeris Napocensis 22 (2012), 159–183.

[35] RUSTOIU 2015
A. RUSTOIU, Civilian and funerary space in the Dacian fortified settlement at Cugir. In: D. Micle et al. (eds.), Interdisciplinarity in Archaeology and History. In Memoriam Florin Medeleţ (1943–2005). Arheovest III (Szeged 2015), 349–367.

[36] RUSTOIU 2016a
A. RUSTOIU, Some questions regarding the chronology of La Tene cemeteries from Transylvania. Social and demographic dynamics in the rural communities. In: S. Berecki (ed.), Iron Age Chronology in the Carpathian Basin. Proceedings of the international colloquium from Târgu Mureş 8–10 October 2015 (Cluj-Napoca 2016), 235–264.

[37] RUSTOIU 2016b
A. RUSTOIU, Slashing knives (hiebmesser) – Curved dagger (sica, -ae). Their function and symbolic role in the La Tene panoply of weapons. Acta Musei Porolissensis 38 (2016), 199–221.

[38] RUSTOIU 2016c
A. RUSTOIU, Commentaria archaeologica et historica (II). Banatica 26 (2016), 73–100.

[39] RUSTOIU 2018
A. RUSTOIU, The functional and symbolic life of the “Dacian” sica from its beginning until today. In: E. Nemeth (ed.), Violence in Prehistory and Antiquity (Kaiserlautern und Mehlingen 2018), 69–91.

[40] RUSTOIU 2019
A. RUSTOIU, Archaeological explorations of magic and witchcraft in Iron Age Transylvania (Cluj-Napoca 2019).

[41] RUSTOIU 2020
A. RUSTOIU, Commentaria archaeologica et historica (III). Ephemeris Napocensis 30 (2020), 11–38. https://doi.org/10.33993/ephnap.2020.30.15

[42] RUSTOIU/BERECKI 2015
A. RUSTOIU/S. BERECKI, Weapons as symbols and the multiple identities of warriors. Some examples from Transylvania. In: S. Wefers et al. (eds), Waffen–Gewalt–Krieg, Beiträge zur Internationalen Tagung der AG Eisenzeit und des IAUR–Rzeszów 19.–22. September 2012, BUFM 79 (Langenweissbach 2015), 127–148.

[43] RUSTOIU/BERECKI 2018
A. RUSTOIU/S. BERECKI, Symbols of status and power in the everyday life of Late Iron Age Transylvania. Shaping the landscape. In: I. V. Ferencz, O. Tutilă, N. C. Rișcuța (eds.), Representations, signs and symbols. Proceedings of the symposium on life and daily life. Cluj-Napoca 2018, 65–78.

[44] RUSTOIU/FERENCZ 2019
A. RUSTOIU/I. V. FERENCZ, Dacian fortified settlements in the Iron Gates region during the 1st c. BC and their warrior elites. In: V. Sîrbu, C. Schuster, D. Hortopan (eds.), Border guards of the passes, from the fortresses and the graves: the Bronze and Iron Ages, Proceedings of the 17th International Colloquium of Funerary Archaeology, Târgu Jiu, Gorj County (Romania), 4th–7th October 2018 (Târgu Jiu – Brăila, 2019), 189–209.

[45] RUSTOIU/FERENCZ 2021
A. RUSTOIU/I. V. FERENCZ, Chronologie der vorrömischen Eisenzeit in Siebenbürgen. Die Archäologie fliessender ethnischer und sozialer Identitäten. In: E. Sava, V. Iarmulschi, A. Zanoci, M. Băț, O. Munteanu, Die Chronologie der vorrömischen Eisen- und Frühen Kaiserzeit im Mittel- und Südosteuropa: Probleme und Perspektiven (Chișinău-Berlin 2021), 75–90.

[46] SZABÓ ET AL. 2012
M. SZABÓ/K. TANKÓ/Z. CZAJLIK, La nécropole celtique à Ludas – Varjú-Dűlő (Budapest 2012).

[47] SZABÓ ET AL. 2018
M. SZABÓ/Z. CZAJLIK/ K. TANKÓ, La nécropole celtique à Sajópetri – Homoki- szőlőskert (Paris 2018).

[48] TĂTULEA 1984
C. M. TĂTULEA, Așezarea geto-dacică fortificată de la Bâzdâna, jud. Dolj. Considerații preliminare. Thraco-Dacica 5 (1984), 92–110.

[49] TURCU 1979
M. TURCU, Geto-dacii din Cîmpia Munteniei (Bucureşti 1979).

[50] VULPE 1970
A. VULPE, Archäologische Forschungen und historische Betrachtungen über das 7. bis 5. Jh. im Donau-Karpatenrau. Memoria Antiquitatis 2 (1970), 115–213.

[51] VULPE 1988
A. VULPE, Istoria şi civilizaţia Daciei în sec. IX-IV î.e.n. In: V. Dumitrescu, A. Vulpe, Dacia înainte de Dromihete (Bucureşti 1988), 85–113.

[52] VULPE 2001
A. VULPE, Istoria şi civilizaţia spaţiului carpato-dunărean între mijlocul sec. al VII-lea şi începutul sec. al III-lea a.Chr. In: M. Petrescu-Dîmboviţa, A. Vulpe, (eds.), Istoria Românilor, vol. 1 (Bucureşti 2001), 451–500.

[53] VULPE/ZAHARIADE 1987
A. VULPE/M. ZAHARIADE, Geto-Dacii în istoria militară a lumii antice (Bucureşti 1987).

[54] VULPE 1966
R. VULPE, Aşezări getice din Muntenia (Bucureşti 1966).

[55] WELLS 2007
P. S. WELLS, Weapons, ritual and communication in Late Iron Age Northern Europe, in C. Haselgrove, T. Moore (eds.), The Later Iron Age in Britain and Beyond (Oxford 2007), 468–477.

[56] WELLS 2008
P. S. WELLS, Image and Response in Early Europe (London 2008).

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

[58] WILLIAMS 2003
H. WILLIAMS, Introduction. The Archaeology of Death, Memory and Material Culture. In: H. Williams (ed.), Archaeologies of Remembrance. Death and Memory in Past Societies (New York-Boston-Dordrecht-London-Moscow 2003), 1–24.

[59] WOŹNIAK 1974
Z. WOŹNIAK, Wschodnie pogranicze kultury latènskiej (Wroclaw-Warszawa-Kraków- Gdansk 1974).

[60] YORDANOV 1992
K. YORDANOV, The march of Alexander the Great into Thrace. Bulgarian Historical Review 4 (1992), 11–32.

[61] ZIRRA ET AL. 1993
V. ZIRRA, N. CONOVICI, G. TROHANI, P. GHERGHE, P. ALEXANDRESCU, GH. GÂTA, V. V. ZIRRA, La station fortifiée de “Cetatea Jidovilor” (Cotofenii din Dos, dép. de Dolj). Dacia N. S. 37, 1993, 79–157.

EPHEMERIS NAPOCENSIS

Issues

Commentaria archaeologica et historica (IV)