Dacian civilization

VI Congreso Internacional de la Asociación Española de Historia Militar (ASEHISMI) - Dominio político y expansionismo militar en la Historia. Granada, 21-24/V/2019: Las guerras dácicas de Trajano (101-106 d.C.) se saldaron con las mayores adquisiciones territoriales realizadas por el Imperio romano en el Continente europeo desde el principado de Augusto. Sin embargo, el expansionismo territorial y político, una de las causas fundamentales del conflicto entre el Imperio romano y el Estado dacio, no ha sido objeto, hasta la fecha, de un estudio concienzudo y renovador en la totalidad de sus perspectivas. Del mismo modo, la historiografía especializada ha puesto con demasiada frecuencia su atención exclusivamente sobre los motivos y procesos que llevaron al estallido del conflicto desde un punto de vista predominantemente romano, ignorando casi por completo la perspectiva del reino dacio y sus aliados en esta cuestión.
Partiendo de innovadores planteamientos en torno a la geopolítica del conflicto y sus antecedentes, esta investigación pretende abordar cómo las pretensiones territoriales y las aspiraciones a la hegemonía regional sobre el curso del Danubio y las costas del Mar Negro por parte del Estado dacio, jugaron un papel esencial en la puesta en marcha de las guerras dácicas de Domiciano y Trajano. Como veremos, desde el año 69 d.C., los soberanos dacios trataron de desplazar al poder romano del espacio danubiano mediante una astuta combinación de presión diplomática, influencia política y guerra abierta. Estos procesos se materializaron en una precisa y constante política expansionista que se extendió hasta la destrucción del reino dacio durante la segunda guerra dácica de Trajano (105-106 d.C.), llegando a desencadenar una serie de reiterados intentos para anexionar militarmente diversos territorios en la provincia romana de Mesia Inferior.
En este sentido, el Imperio romano marchó a la guerra, inicialmente, en defensa de sus propios intereses y de su amenazada hegemonía política en la región. El ascenso a la púrpura del emperador Trajano en 98 d.C. conllevaría la asunción final, por parte de Roma, de la anexión de Dacia y la expansión territorial al norte del Danubio como única solución viable a la amenaza que el Estado dacio y sus aliados suponían, no ya para la posición preponderante del Imperio en la Europa danubiana, sino incluso para su mera presencia en la región.

Several high-rank members from Trajan’s general staff were granted with coronae classicae in the context of 101 to 106 AD Dacian Wars. These decorations were given only to members of the senatorial order with consular rank for naval military victories over enemy navies. In this regard, how and where could naval battles take place in a conflict like Trajan Dacian Wars?
If we carefully analyze the conflict scenario, crossed by the Danube and its huge tributary rivers, and flanked by the Black Sea Western Coast, we soon notice the vital importance that taking control of fluvial and sea spaces would have for any army who intended to launch an offensive to or from Roman territory in the early 2nd Century AD. The Roman Empire properly understood this circumstance and, consequently, raised the classis Flavia Moesica and the classis Flavia Pannonica, among other provincial squadrons of its navy deployed in the area.
Furthermore, we should keep in mind the climatic, logistic and purely practical contingencies that prevented barbarians and Romans from crossing a river like the Danube with a big army in the crudest part of winter to take advantage that its surface could be frozen. The unavoidable struggle between Dacians, Romans and their allies for the strategic control of the Danube, its tributary rivers and the Black Sea Western Shore made naval battles between enemy navies inevitable, and we intend to prove and go in depth into these facts in our chapter.

The paper asks the question what the Romans really meant, when the used the term "barbarian". The evidence shows that the Romans had been often uneasy with this greek word, as in the end they themselves would be Barbarians, too. Further, the paper focuses also on the non-biological (or even "racial") approach of the Romans. Barbarians can become citizens, if they accept Roman paideia and a cultural set of Romanitas. The Dacians and Tracians are used in this context as examples from a rather neglected zone of the Empire.

Global Strategy Report 10/2020 - https://global-strategy.org/las-guerras-dacicas-de-domiciano-y-trajano-85-106-d-c-la-batalla-por-la-hegemonia-en-la-europa-danubiana/
Entre los años 69 y 106 d.C. el Imperio romano se enfrentó a una amenaza de primer orden contra su hegemonía sobre la Europa danubiana y balcánica que puso en serio peligro incluso su mera presencia en la región: bajo el enérgico liderazgo del rey Decébalo, el Estado dacio, había conformado una formidable entente con el objetivo de convertirse en la nueva superpotencia en el curso medio y bajo del Danubio y las costas occidentales del Mar Negro. Alcanzar esta meta, sin embargo, pasaba necesariamente por desplazar a Roma de la región y, por lo tanto, por un conflicto directo a gran escala que, independientemente de su resultado, cambiaría para siempre la historia de la Europa oriental.

During the first half of the 1st century BC the geto-dacians became the greatest superpower of Eastern Europe under the leadership of one of their most famous kings: Burebista. After founding the Dacian Estate through the unification of the diverse geto-dacian tribes, Burebista led his people to build an authentic “empire” that stretched from the middle Danube course to the western Black Sea coast, and from nowadays Slovakia to the limits of Tracia and Dalmatia. Through the main literary, epigraphic and archaeological sources we are going to analyze the expansionist process accomplished by Burebista, its premises, causes, sequence of events and consequences.

The Dacian Kingdom was a formidable opponent to the Roman Empire. However, it’s suprising to find a pronounced tone of wonder and acknowledgment in the greco-roman literary fonts to this enemy: far away of the classical stereotyped perception of the “barbarían”, the Dacians, the Dacian Kingdom and its most prominents sovereigns are described in a very remote line of vision against the greco-roman insight about any other foreign entity. The image of two key sovereigns of the Dacian History, Burebista and Decebalus, built by the same classical fonts, particularly attracts our attention: the first was a founder and civilizing King, creator of a power took into account by Rome along and after his reign; the second was a clever strategist, who was able to (could) put the Roman Empire against the wall, being the tragic hero of the fall and conquest of his Kingdom during the Trajan’s Dacian Wars (AD 101-106). To that is added that Burebista (without forgetting Deceneus, his adviser and heir) and Decebalus became in the personified definition of the culture, the Kingdom and the Dacian “State” in the collective imaginary of the classical fonts that speak about them.

No conflict can be totally understood without previously grasp the circumstances of all contenders. In this sense, to know the Dacian soldier’s panoply is essential not just to approach to the facts of the battlefields of Domitian’s and Trajan’s Dacian Wars (85-106 d.C.) and their consequential impact on the development of historical events, but also to apprehend the development of arms and tactics seen in the Roman Army during this period. Our goal is to present an updated reconstruction and analysis of Dacian infantry soldier’s offensive and defensive panoply during Decebalus’ times, of the military specialties derived from it, as well as its tactical and battlefield  impact. To do so, we will start from the last historiographical breakthroughs till the date and, also, from a critic re-reading of available fonts about Dacian infantry’s weaponry in 1st to 2nd Centuries AD, its origins, applications and possible foreign influences.

""En Filipo II y el Arte de la Guerra tendremos la oportunidad de conocer en profundidad a uno de los más grandes reyes de la antigua Macedonia. Gracias a su habilidad como estratega, diplomático, político y soldado, heredó un reino pobre, débil y acosado por innumerables enemigos y lo transformó en el más poderoso de toda Grecia.

A lo largo de sus páginas podremos conocer la historia del reino Macedonio, desde sus orígenes míticos hasta la formación de un imperio, de la mano del que, a la postre, se convertiría en el padre del mítico Alejandro Magno y en el forjador de un nuevo ejército que cambiaria el devenir de la guerra en la Antigüedad. Filipo II fue el creador de la falange macedonia, formación que se demostraría como inigualable en el campo de batalla y que reportaría incontables victorias sobre poderosos enemigos, como los ilirios, los tesalios, los tracios, los beocios o los atenienses. Pero no sólo eso, logró integrar en el campo de batalla a la infantería y a la caballería para emplearlos en nuevas formaciones tácticas: armó a sus soldados con las míticas sarissas y apreció como pocos las posibilidades militares que la maquinaria de guerra podía proporcionarle, siendo el mecenas de numerosos avances en este campo. Soñó con conquistar el Imperio persa, cuando ya había logrado lo que nadie antes fue capaz: el control de Grecia.

Sólo la muerte le arrebató esa hazaña, pero sentó las bases de lo que más tarde conseguiría su propio hijo. Su figura levantó tanto odios como pasiones; se le conocía como mujeriego y bebedor, pero también por su habilidad para la oratoria, por sus astucia, determinación y valor. Siempre luchó en primera línea junto a sus soldados y nunca permitió que éstos le llamaran rey, sino solo "General".

Sarmatian tamga-signs studied in three big contact zones: with Goths in Poland and Western Ukraine, with the tribes of upper Oka Basin near Moscow, with local population of Dacia before and after Roman invasion.
1. The Sarmatian tamgas on the Germanic ritual spears of the 2nd-3rd cc. CE is known in 17 points, mainly on the territory of Poland and the border areas of Ukraine (Fig. 1). Most of these finds were made in the basin of the Oder and its left tributaries (Fig. 2, Ns. 3-8) and in the upper reaches of the Vistula (Fig. 2, Ns. 9, 12, 16-17). Usually they were found in graves, they have different preservation. In 12 cases the tamgas of Sarmatian types are accompanied by runic texts, often with symbols of the sun and moon and ornaments. In Bozdanowo, a spear with tamga No 32 was stuck in the cut of the grave, point up. Voronyatov S.V. and Machinsky D.A. (2010, p. 66) offer three variants for the purpose of these spears: 1) magic weapons made by sorcerers; 2) these are the tops of battle banners; 3) these are items for counting the number of killed enemies. All these versions seem equally unlikely. 25 signs are known on the spears, there are usually identical to those of the nomads of the Middle Sarmatian Culture of the 1st – early 2nd cc. CE, for later time – only four (Ns. 24, 25, 28, 38) (Fig. 3). 89 % of the signs used by the Sarmatians BEFORE the appearance of the Germans in the area of residence of the Sarmatian nomads. Most of the types of tamg nomads were used by the Sarmatians of the Lower Don (7) and the Crimea (4) – the most remote territories from the Germans and there they were used by the local elite only. A special importance had the Sarmatian signs of the Lower Don: they are found in 10 points, and some signs are met three times (Gotland Island); tamgas Ns. 22, 24 are especially popular. Most of tamgas came to the Goths when they were still weak, and Sarmatian groups were very powerful. The Goths gained the right to use Sarmatian signs as allies and as a result of elite marriages. The version of S. V. Voronyatov about "trophy tamgas" has no historical analogues and is not supported by facts.
2. The Sarmatian tamgas in the late Dyakovo Culture (to the north, near Moscow) and partly in the early Moshchiny Culture (to the south, near Kaluga) in the Upper Oka Basin in Forest Zone (Fig. 4). Here the signs are represented on the bronze ornaments of women's costume (most often belts) and they appeared in the 2nd century AD. The most active tamgas' usage we see in Lukovnya I settlement. Probably, at first, the tamgas of the Sarmatians of the Bosporan Kingdom came to the north, and a little later, after the middle of the 2nd century AD, the tamgas of the Western Ukrainian nomads came to the south. These tamgas got to the deep regions of the Forest Zone together with the Sarmatian wives. The allied relations with the far northern tribes were needed by the Sarmatians to more reliably control the tributary tribes of the Forest-Steppe Zone.
3. The Sarmatian tamgas of the local population of Dacia. Usually the colleagues believe that such signs were used only before the occupation of this territory by Rome in 106 CE, but this cannot be accepted. The most important to clarify the situation of the settlement, where large series of signs are identified. The concentration of signs is marked between the Seret and Prut Rivers on the border with Sarmatian Steppes (Fig. 5). Almost all signs that are reliably associated with a specific region and period for Sarmatians are found in Poiana settlement. Here we see a wide variety of Sarmatian tamgas from the Lower Don up to the Western Ukraine, from the early 1st to the mid. 3rd cc. CE. Most often these tribes lived far from the borders of Dacia. The emergence of Sarmatian tamgas in Romania was the result of various types of contacts – the military alliances, the sedentarization of Sarmatian small groups, with Sarmatian wives, after trade and other reasons.
KEY WORDS: tamga-signs of Sarmatians, the 1st - 4th cc. CE, use by a neighbouring peoples, Goths, tribes of the upper Oka River, Dacians.
         
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS:
Fig. 1. German gala spears of the 2nd-3rd cc. CE with Sarmatian tamga-signs (based on: Yatsenko, Dobrzhanska, 2012, fig. 2-3; Voronyatov, 2014, fig. 8; 2015, fig. 2-3): 1 – Valle; 2 – Mos; 3 – Medow; 4 – Müunchenberg-Dahmsdorf; 5 – Jankowo; 6 – Bozdanowo; 7 – Wresńia; 8  – Zadowice; 9  – Strycowice; 10  – Rozwadów; 11  –  Suzyczno; 12  – Kamienica; 13  – Nedobjewicy; 14  – private collection (the find point is known approximately); 15  –  Mušov; 16  –  Podloduw; 17 – Gach.   
Fig. 2. The distribution area of German gala spears of the 2nd-3rd cc. CE with Sarmatian tamga-signs and distribution of their types in complexes (the map base: Voronyatov, 2015, fig.11).
Fig. 3. Forms of the identical marks on the German spears of the 2nd-3rd cc. CE: 1-45  – the “printed” forms of signs; A-E  – the groups of forms probably genetically related to each other.
Fig. 4. Sarmatian tamgas on the metal costume accessories of the Dyakovo and the early Moshchiny Cultures of the Upper Oka Basin of the 1st-4th cc. CE (the circles of dots are circled products with one row of punctures made by kapernick).
Fig. 5. The mains find points of Sarmatian tamgas from the Lower Danube Basin (the future Dacia Inferior) in Pre-Roman period  (based on: Voronyatov, 2014, figs. 4-6): 1-4  – the points are not specified; 5-6  – Dumbrava; 7  – Brad; 8  –  Synsimion; 9-22  – Poiana.

Este libro trata de pueblos antiguos y de otros no tan antiguos, de identidades, de la confección de mitos sobre los orígenes, de confusiones y de identificaciones conscientes, de procesos de búsqueda de legitimidad para pueblos-nación y para sus monarquías, su nobleza o incluso sus dictaduras…; hablaremos de apropiaciones del pasado, con todo lo que ello conlleva en cuanto a su uso, su manipulación, su distorsión, en suma, lo que hoy se conoce vulgarmente como «el uso y el abuso de la historia», pero también de la Historia, con mayúsculas, como disciplina del conocimiento del pasado. Desde esa perspectiva, este estudio constata el gran poder de legitimación y justificación del pretérito más remoto en diferentes momentos, zonas geográficas y circunstancias nacionales. Y es que todo el pasado resulta válido para dicha finalidad, pero la Antigüedad mantiene una mayor idealización, su palabra escrita detentará mayor peso como testimonio y como fuente de legitimidad que las líneas redactadas, copiadas, compiladas o tergiversadas en época posterior. Todo ello hará que las nuevas creaciones en ella basadas, los mitos sobre los orígenes en los que debemos incluir la generación de genealogías míticas, no hayan podido ser refutadas históricamente hasta época muy reciente. Así pues, hablaremos de apropiaciones de la Antigüedad.

Studiu despre religia geto-dacilor, cu scopul de a clarifica aspecte ale mitului lui Zalmoxis. Concluzia:  Zalmoxis este același cu Gebeleizis, o divinitate a luminii de natură ignee, zeu primordial și civilizator, iar formal mitul său urmează tiparul comun al basmelor românești, tipar care se păstrează până astăzi. Sunt abordate și problemele credințelor populare geto-dacice, formele alternative de cult. Text revăzut.

The purpose of this article is to present most of the small finds unearthed at Sarmizegetusa Regia (Grădiștea de Munte, Hunedoara County) in the area located below the southern gate of the fortress. Extensive research at this location began in the year 2013 after the discovery, following a series of fortunate events, of a bronze matrix.
During these excavations a number of different artefacts were discovered, our attention focusing on the iron, bronze and glass objects and their subsequent categorization.
We will include the general archaeological context, the specific characteristics of the artefacts, their chronology, distribution and typology, as well as their significance.

The northern Balkan Peninsula was the place where, beginning with
the 4th century BCE, important ethnocultural, economic, political and military changes took place. The peninsula was successively disturbed by the Celtic invasion, by the German Bastarns penetration, by the decline of Thrace, Macedonia and Greece, by the Getic retreat, by the instauration of the Roman power in the region and by the foundation of the Dacian Kingdom.The resulted ethnocultural mixture determined inter alia the appearance of specific cultural patterns which mainly consist of associations of artifacts and funerary practices, fact explained as representing the emergence of a new cultural identity, conventionally called the Padea-Panagjurski Kolonii group/facies/ horizon. The concrete expression of this convention in the academic communities contains
constants, explanations, nuances, acceptances or ambiguous positions which were maintained for a long time. This article brings together information, data, opinions and assumptions about the PPK phenomenon and tries to discern if its scope on such a big geographical and chronological area is due to the migrations of some groups of
warriors or the dispersion of the elements which define the phenomenon is the result of
the mobility of the ideas and of the specific cultural and identitary models.The analysis of the ancient literary sources and of the historical and archaeological file of the phenomenon leads to the hypothesis that there are not enough arguments for important demographic displacements, but, anyway, they cannot be completely rejected. In the
area in question there were natural people exchanges, as a result of military, political and matrimonial alliances or even of kidnapping or commercial exchanges. All these
natural and fluctuating changes cannot explain by themselves the considerable force of the dispersion. More plausible, the dispersion is the result of a mimetic export of ideas and successful identity models which is sufficiently articulated. The result was the almost sudden development in which a constellation of different families, clans and tribes
coagulated socially, spiritually and politically in a powerful barbaric kingdom, an archetypal symbiosis between the Hellenistic-type organization and the tribal Thraco-Celtic one.

This article explores the demographic history of Dacia/Romania during and after Roman colonization as a study in the effects of colonialism and de-colonization in the core area vs. the periphery, the identification of local vs. transitory populations, the development of cultural identity, and the more ominous issue of political manipulation of archaeological data. Archaeological surveying and excavations in Romania and peripheral regions, as well as a re-evaluation of ancient literary evidence, suggest a more complex settlement history, rather than a 700-year 'terra deserta'. The post-Roman era has demonstrated an abundant archaeological record of burial and settlement, along with a continuation in distribution of Roman objects throughout former core and peripheral areas. A more thorough analysis of Roman colonization and de-colonization, together with the role of the Roman military, coinage, and commerce, are recommended as avenues towards resolution of the population continuity issue for Dacia.

It is generally known that the way in which the researchers chose to present their own activity and especially the
results of their work to the public is insufficient. This fact is not a characteristic only of Romanian research.
As concerns the research of the past, the situation is not different even if the public interest (coming from various
socio-professional categories) regarding history is a high one.
The Dacian civilization fascinates due to the mystery that surrounds the information coming from written sources. The veil that
covers the culture, the events and the way of life specific to the Dacians is gradually removed by the meticulous research of the
archaeologists. The fulfilment that the researcher feels when he very carefully completes the huge puzzle of the past is very rarely
transmitted to the un-academic public. Often, in discussions with friends, I felt this shortcoming appearing like a veiled criticism. Also, I
have felt a reproach in their voices and as a constant; I have never found sufficient arguments to contradict them. The only answer that I,
as a museum researcher, can give them is to offer them an available perspective from which the Dacian culture and civilisation can be
known and understood.
Starting from this, the idea of a series of temporary exhibitions appeared. This is “Art and craftsmanship during the
Dacian Kingdom epoch”. Together with my colleagues we chose this general title being convinced that it could comprise
numerous aspects related to the Dacian culture and civilisation. We started with the presentation of ceramics because
from many points of view, it represents one of the most important category of vestiges discovered in archaeological
excavations. We have the conviction that the museum product that was “staged” in 2011 at the Museum of Dacian and
Roman Civilisation of Deva and ulterior at Brad, was a success (Ferencz 2011).
For this year, we have chosen to approach a theme that is totally new even for the researchers. In this respect, we
should mention the Dacian objects made of bone, antler, shells (or osseous materials artefacts, as the international
methodological canons refer to them) discovered during the researches done in the last few years, researches carried out
in the Hunedoara area, but also in other parts from Transylvania and Banat. The exhibition starts from the moment of
raw material acquisition and it continues with the finite object, every aspect being integrated in the (reconstructed or
suggested) natural, socio-economic and technologic environment in which these artefacts were manufactured or used.
We have the intention to present sequences of life from the Dacian Kingdom as in a history class, in each class
another domain being approached and for each sequence to approach another domain. In this respect, we will present
exhibitions related to the iron and bronze metallurgy, stone working, architecture, clothes etc.

A vacation in Romania led to the question: who were the Dacians of Romania? what language did they speak? Where did they come from? When did they arrive? The literature suggests they may have come from the Caspian Sea and spoke an unknown version of Indo European, but I doubted it. Dacian was the same as Thracian was the same as Phrygian, which I knew to be Finnish. A long list of Dacian place names translated easily into Finnish, and these place names indicated their origin as the East Sea, which today is called the Baltic Sea.
This led to a wider inquiry: Who were the Thracians? where, when and why did they migrate? The literature suggests they came from Thrace, just north of Greece, around 1100 BC and spoke an unknown version of Indo European, but again I doubted it. Like the entire Middle East, Thrace was incinerated in 1185 BC; few survived to populate anywhere. Based on the premise that Troy was in SW Finland, then Thrace was north of Stockholm.

Volumul este publicat în cadrul seriei Patrimonium care a debutat, în anul 2014, cu tema Civilizația geto-dacică (I). Arme și echipamente din patrimoniul Muzeului National de Istorie a României. Seria continuă cu volumul de față, care prezintă catalogul colecției de unelte și ustensile din colecția MNIR. Lucrarea se datorează acelorași autori – dr. Cătălin Borangic și dr. Alexandru Bădescu, la efortul cărora s-a asociat ing. Marius Amarie și graficianul Radu Oltean.
În paginile volumului sunt descrise și ilustrate unelte folosite în agricultură (seceri, coase, brăzdare și cuțite de plug, vase metalice utilizate pentru păstrarea proviziilor), metalurgie (ciocane, nicovale, clești, dălți, componente ale instalațiilor de aerare, greble), prelucrarea lemnului și a pietrei (topoare, tesle, fierăstraie, cuțitoaie, compasuri, sfredele și dălți), orfevrărie (nicovale), medicină (bisturie, pensete) și altele (foarfeci, frigărui, furculițe, suporți de frigări, cârlige de pescuit și crampoane).
Dacă ar fi să-i caracterizăm pe daci, în funcție de metalul ce le definește civilizația, atunci, i-am putea numi, fără a greși, oamenii fierului. Nicăieri în spațiul românesc antic nu vom întâlni atâtea piese de fier ca la Sarmizegetusa Regia. Am participat la campanii de cercetare arheologică desfășurate în așezări greco-romane celebre precum Histria, Troesmis sau Tropaeum Traiani, în fortificații romane, ca cele de la Cincșor sau Hoghiz (jud. Brașov) sau în așezările de Babadag sau Cioroiul Nou (jud. Dolj), dar vreme de 45 de ani, nicăieri nu am văzut atâtea obiecte de fier ca la Sarmizegetusa. Și nu este vorba doar de număr ci și de volumul acestora (zeci, chiar sute de kilograme de metal), și de calitatea excepțională a metalului. Cine nu ar fi impresionat să aibă sub ochi o sica dacică, veche de peste 2000 de ani, al cărui tăiș să fie încă atât de ascuțit încât să provoace și azi răni mortale, sau să citească în depozițiile judiciare recente, despre turte de fier de peste 300 de kilograme.
Catalogul colegilor Borangic și Bădescu prezintă informații științifice și tehnice detaliate privind marea majoritatea a uneltelor și ustensilelor geto-dacice din secolele VI a. C. – II p. C., aflate în colecția noastră. Prin acestea, lucrarea constituie o contribuție importantă la cunoașterea uneia dintre cele mai fascinate și originale civilizații antice dezvoltate în spațiul românesc și la punerea în valoare a marilor comori ale trecutului păstrate în colecțiile Muzeului National de Istorie a României.
Bogat în date și ilustrații de bună calitate, volumul Civilizația geto-dacică (II). Unelte și ustensile din patrimoniul Muzeului National de Istorie a României, se adresează atât specialiștilor, cât și publicului larg, interesat de istorie, în sensul cel mai cuprinzător al cuvântului.
Apariția volumului este cu atât mai demnă de salutat, cu cât, din motive independente de voința noastră, Muzeul National de Istorie a României este închis din anul 2002, pentru lucrări de consolidare și restaurare a sediului său și cea mai mare parte a patrimoniului de excepțională valoare și semnificație a acestuia nu mai este accesibil publicului. În aceste condiții „de criză” în care se desfășoară activitatea muzeului nostru, prin publicarea unor cataloage de colecție și prin organizarea unor expoziții temporare, încercăm să ne îndeplinim o obligație profesională esențială, aceea de a aduce mai aproape de publicul românesc și străin, ca și de specialiști, marile valori ale trecutului nostru.
Dr. Ernest Oberländer-Târnoveanu

The study consists of five chapters from a still unpublished book written by the Romanian orientalist Constantin Daniel. The book deals with the Thracian cult of Zalmoxis, considered as a cult of mysteries, similar to those practiced in the Hellenistic world.
The first five chapters don’t approach directly the topic of the cult of Zalmoxis; they rather deal with the very tight connexions between the Greek and the Thracian cultures. In the author’s view, the Thracian world represented the origin of many of the cultural and religious ideas of the Greeks. Constantin Daniel depicts Troja as a Thracian city and the Greek religious ideals as being inspired by the realities of the religious life of the Thracs. Hence, the Abioii, the Hyperboreans and the Agathyrses (according to C. Daniel, all these people being Thracians) and their communities are put forward as the models that inspired the Greeks in creating their own religious ideals. Later on, the author will avail of this eulogistic perspective upon the Thracian spirituality in order to justify the elevated, highly spiritual character of the cult of Zalmoxis.

Adrian C. Florescu (1928-1986) was an archaeologist from Iași who dedicated a large part of his career to the research of the early Late Iron Age hillforts from the East Carpathian region of Romania. Starting from 1978 he prepared for publication a dedicated monograph on this subject, but unfortunately, due to unknown reasons, the manuscript was never published. After more than 40 years, the manuscript was published by us (A. Berzovan) in a critical edition.

Archaism, Relic Islands and Continuity (II) Abstract
This is the second part of the text “Archaism, relic islands and continuity”, discussing the importance of areal factors for historical linguistics by using the results of etymological and areal linguistic research. In this part the Dacian substrata words are analyzed from an areal point of view. We comment on the semantic and the areal features of autochthonous elements and the general characteristics of lexical elements of autochthon origin, followed by the complete bibliography for parts 1 and 2.
Cuvinte cheie: etimologie, geolingvistică, substrat, teoria continuităţii, limba română.
Key words: etymology, areal linguistics, substratum, Theory of Continuity, Rumanian language.