УДК 902(091)(498)”18/19” S.-C. E n e a ROMANIAN PREHISTORIC ARCHAEOLOGY, BETWEEN TRADITION AND INNOVATION * With this text, the author intends to present a short THE ANTIQUARIAN PHASE history of the evolution of Romanian prehistoric ar- th chaeology, from the moment of its appearance in the The 19 century generally represented a peri- 19th century to the present day. Thus, several distinct od of theoretical refinements and crystallization stages that mark this evolution have been detected, of the institutional framework. stages influenced by the charisma and activity of cer- This first stage is characterized by the activ- tain personalities. It can be noticed that the scientific ity of identification and investigation of sites con- foundations of this discipline were laid after World ducted by some enthusiast collectors. A notewor- War I by Vasile Pârvan, the founder of Romanian ar- thy example is Al. Popovici, land surveyor, who chaeology, whose followers have dominated the scien- discovered the first Neolithic settlements from tific discourse to this day. Romanian prehistoric ar- the Romanian Plain in the 1830s; the National chaeology, just like other areas of historical research, museum, where the discoveries were collected, mirrored the political discourse, and, unfortunately, was under its sway during certain periods of time.1 was founded in 1834. The treasure of Pietroasa is discovered by two K e y w o r d s: prehistoric archaeology, Antiquari- locals — who unfortunately destroyed a number anism school of archaeology, Positivism, Marxism, of pieces — in 1837, and in 1842 the hoard enters New Archaeology. into the patrimony of the National museum. A notable collector of the 19th century was Nicolae Prehistoric archaeology appears in Western mavros, one of the founders of the National mu- europe as the result of a long series of intellec- seum, its first and biggest donor, the same who, tual acquisitions, specific to the environment of in 1864, pleaded to Prince Al.I. Cuza in favour of Western european society, and which material- establishing the National museum of Antiquities. izes in the second half of the 19th century through During the first years of the museum, the collec- the emergence of a research domain, a corpus of tion consisted of donations from public figures methods, and a small cohort of specialists [Ang- such as C. Bolliac, D. Sturdza, N. Kretzulescu helinu, 2003, p. 72]. [Dumitrescu, 1993, p. 7—8]. Archaeology has its first beginnings in Roma- The enthusiastic collecting of the antiquarians nia in the 17th and 18th centuries through the con- compromised the archaeological contexts or led to cerns of collectors of coins, inscriptions and an- the estrangement of artefacts, but also contribut- tiquities, but a manifest interest is fostered only ed to saving the numerous heritage objects that, with the beginning the 19th century. via donation or purchase, entered the collections In the evolution of Romanian archaeology we of museums. can distinguish several phases, each with different characteristics and points of contention. THE ROMANTIC PHASE The first theoretical horizons (19th * У статті збережено авторську редакцію. century) was the stage of the intellectuals of 1848 Revolution. They collected particularly the © S.-C. eNeA, 2012 artefacts that were beautiful and not broken, 93 Enea S.-C. Romanian Prehistoric archaeology, between tradition and innovation without attempting a cultural or chronological («Dacia before the Romans», 1880), well-received classification. by his contemporaries. With respect to the theoretical field, we bring In Romania, as almost everywhere in the world, attention to m. Kogălniceanu and N. Bălcescu, archaeology became a science only in the early who stressed the importance of the archaeological, 20th century, through the «union of typology with epigraphic, and numismatic evidence for writing stratigraphy», marking thus the separation from the national history. the antiquarian approach. Cezar Bolliac (1813—1881) is the most Tocilescu was followed by vasile Pârvan both prominent figure of the Forty-eighters’ generation in the management of the museum, and in the in archaeology, also being an active collector; he research endeavour. has the merit of having noted and even surveyed Prehistory research was inaugurated in some pre- and protohistoric sites. He was the moldova by N. Beldiceanu and Gr. Buţureanu, the first to carry out excavations at the Neolithic first archaeologist to dig at Cucuteni [Ursulescu, settlement of vădastra, between 1871 and 1873. văleanu, 2006, p. 21]. The results achieved He created and supported the magazine Răcnetul attracted the interest of foreign archaeologists, Carpaţilor («Howl of the Carpathians»), and including Hubert Schmidt, who digs at Cucuteni also joined the Archaeological Committee that in 1909—1910, and publishes the monograph of managed the National museum of Antiquities. the excavation in 1932. He established the three From 1865, Bolliac focused his excavations on the stages of the Cucuteni culture (A, A—B, B). For Getae-Dacian sites of Tinosu, Piscul Crăsani, and the research methodology, the monograph of the Zimnicea, while continuing the excavations of the German archaeologist played an important role Neolithic settlement from vădastra. in the development of the Romanian archaeology Al. Odobescu (1834—1895) remained in [Ursulescu, văleanu, 2006, p. 26]. the memory of the archaeologists as a cabinet Archaeological research in southwest archaeologist, mainly because of his conceptual Transylvania stood at the beginnings of the 20th and theoretical assessments, being the one that century under the sign of the powerful personality truly entrenched Romanian archaeology as a of Fr. laszlo. Starting with 1904, he directed his scientific discipline; he is arguably the first great attention to the site of Ariuşd, after seeing the Romanian archaeologist, and the founder of private collection of J. Teutsch. Romanian scientific archaeology. Between 1907 and 1913 he will carry Odobescu introduced the critical spirit into systematic excavations on the site of Dealul archaeology, calling into question any discovery; Tyiszk. The excavation was restarted in 1925, he had a rich field activity that resulted in the contributing substantially to defining the area identification of several archaeological sites. In and characteristics of the painted pottery 1874 he taught the first course in Archaeology at civilization from Transylvania. The research in the University of Bucharest. He was constantly Ariuşd was the first systematic excavation on concerned with the introduction of a rigorous Romanian territory, preceding by three years system for prehistoric research, being basically the those of H. Schmidt at Cucuteni. In 1908, after two first one to introduce scientific methods into the excavation campaigns, and then again in 1909, archaeological approach. Thus, he employed the the site from Ariuşd was visited by H. Schmidt three-age system, divided into the Stone, Bronze, himself, who took part in the digging activity for and Iron ages, and insisted on both the need for a two days, expressing his favourable opinion on chronological classification of the archaeological the excavation techniques used (the impressive findings (based on stratigraphic and typological discoveries from Ariu d also piqued the interest principles), and on their ethnic attribution. of G. Childe). He publishes in Paris le Trésor de Pétrossa. ș Étude sur l’orfèvrerie antique (I—III, 1889, 1896, EARLY TWENTIETH CENTURY, 1900) [László, 2006, p. 58], a seminal work to this day. UNTIL WORLD WaR I In the Department of Archaeology from the University of Bucharest, and in Romanian During this time span, the confusions and fables archaeology, he is followed by Grigore Tocilescu of the antiquarians’ period were finally eliminated (1850—1909); it is the age in which archaeology through the use of more systematic methods; pre- becomes a separate field of study. Tocilescu history detached itself from history and geology, dug extensively, even if not always with an achieving full methodological autonomy [Anghe- adequate methodology, as his excavations were linu, 2003, p. 101]. conducted using approximated techniques. The emergence of archaeology in Romania is Unfortunately, there are very few reports left of linked to the search, development and affirmation his excavations. He is the one who introduced in of the national identity. As an auxiliary science, Romanian archaeology the idea of co-joint work archaeology followed history in its aim to estab- with foreign archaeologists [Dumitrescu, 1993, lish the origins of the Romanian people; in the first p. 10; László, 2006, p. 59). He is also the author of decades of the 20th century, Romanian prehistoric a monumental work, Dacia оnainte de romani archaeology tried to reduce the distance that still 94 Enea S.-C. Romanian Prehistoric archaeology, between tradition and innovation First romanian archaeologists 95 Enea S.-C. Romanian Prehistoric archaeology, between tradition and innovation separated it from the norms of european prehis- v. Pârvan founded modern Romanian archae- toric research. ology. He continued his research in Classical An- After the excavations from Cucuteni in 1909— tiquity, but he did not neglect the study of prehis- 1910, there followed an interruption in the inves- tory, and allotted a significant portion of his work tigation of prehistoric civilizations on moldavian to the pre- and protohistory of the Carpathian- territory;