Arheovest V1
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
The Catalyst for Warfare: Dacia's Threat to the Roman Empire
The Catalyst for Warfare: Dacia’s Threat to the Roman Empire ______________________________________ ALEXANDRU MARTALOGU The Roman Republic and Empire survived for centuries despite imminent threats from the various peoples at the frontiers of their territory. Warfare, plundering, settlements and other diplomatic agreements were common throughout the Roman world. Contemporary scholars have given in-depth analyses of some wars and conflicts. Many, however, remain poorly analyzed given the scarce selection of period documents and subsequent inquiry. The Dacian conflicts are one such example. These emerged under the rule of Domitian1 and were ended by Trajan2. Several issues require clarification prior to discussing this topic. The few sources available on Domitian’s reign describe the emperor in hostile terms.3 They depict him as a negative figure. By contrast, the rule of Trajan, during which the Roman Empire reached its peak, is one of the least documented reigns of a major emperor. The primary sources necessary to analyze the Dacian wars include Cassius Dio’s Roman History, Jordanes’ Getica and a few other brief mentions by several ancient authors, including Pliny the Younger and Eutropius. Pliny is the only author contemporary to the wars. The others inherited an already existing opinion about the battles and emperors. It is no surprise that scholars continue to disagree on various issues concerning the Dacian conflicts, including the causes behind Domitian’s and Trajan’s individual decisions to attack Dacia. This study will explore various possible causes behind the Dacian Wars. A variety of reasons lead some to believe that the Romans felt threatened by the Dacians. -
By CHRISTER BRUUN King Decebalus of the Dacians Has His
THE LEGEND OF DECEBALus· By CHRISTER BRUUN 1. Introduction King Decebalus of the Dacians has his given place in the series of great en emies of Rome, a series including names such as Hannibal, Viriathus, lugur tha, Mithridates, and Boudicca. Classicists working in many different fields are today very much aware of the king: epigraphers, art historians who ad mire Trajan's Column in Rome, students of Roman military history, scholars who write about the emperor Trajan, and - why not - those with an interest in anthropology who study the ancient practice of beheading enemies or col lecting their heads. 1 Decebalus is also of obvious interest to those who focus on the province of Dacia, and - true to the topic of this volume - the relations between the imperial centre and one of the last provinces to be acquired by Rome will be explored in this paper by means of an investi gation of what I call "the legend of Decebalus". In other words, this study concerns how the memory of King Decebalus lived on in a somewhat different form in Dacia than it did elsewhere. The interest of modem anthropologists in the fate of the Dacian king was of course spurred by the sensational presentation by Professor Michael P. Speidel of the "autobiography" of the "Captor ofDecebalus" in 1970. The funerary inscription commemorating the career of the Roman cavalry officer Ti. Claudius Maximus contains a dramatic description of how Decebalus ended his life: quod cepisset Decebalu(m) et caput eius pertulisset ei Ra- • For helpful comments in Leiden I wish to thank in particular J. -
Semantic and Mental Boundaries in the Romanian-Hungarian Historical Dialogue on Transylvania Case Study: the Historical Film
Semantic and Mental Boundaries in the Romanian-Hungarian Historical Dialogue on Transylvania Case Study: the Historical Film GABRIEL MOISA INCE THE Enlightenment the Romanian and Hungarian historiographies have Shad a permanent dialogue regarding Transylvania. In the context of the amplifi- cation of the Romanian national revival process, beginning with the middle of the 18th century, when bishop Ioan Inocentiu Micu-Klein and his Suplex Libellus Valachorum presented a first articulated view of the rights of the Romanians in Transylvania, the Hungarian reaction did not fail to appear. The Hungarian historiography set up a theory according to which the Romanians emerged as a people south of the Danube and migrated to Transylvania late in the Middle Ages and at the beginnings of moder- nity. The establishment of the modern Romanian state in 1859 gave new impetus to this historiographical movement, politicized by the political power in Budapest. The fact that the Transylvanian Romanians had a state to address their national hopes in a 19th century that essentially belonged to nationalities led to a terrible effort from the part of the Hungarian historiography concerning Transylvania to justify the control over a Transylvania where the Romanian population represented around 65% of the entire pop- ulation. Robert Roesler’s theory according to which the Romanian people emerged south of the Danube and later migrated to Transylvania was formulated precisely in this con- text. The theory was first brought to the attention of the public in 1871, in a volume entitled Romänische Studien. In fact, Robert Roesler articulated in an elevated way the theories of his 18th century predecessors who had argued with the representatives of the Transylvanian School. -
Romanian Historical Film and Romantic Nationalism in the Socialist Era
FROM BIRTHING TO SEXING THE NATION: ROMANIAN HISTORICAL FILM AND ROMANTIC NATIONALISM IN THE SOCIALIST ERA LUCIAN ȚION* Abstract Using the historical saga Columna/The Column (Mircea Drăgan, 1968) as case study, in this article1 I attempt to show that early socialist-era cinema in Romania (and particularly historical film) endeavored to redefine the nation in the 1960s following the precepts of pan-European romantic nationalist movements proliferated in Romania particularly in the poetry of the 19th century. In the process of turning myth into visuals and film into a history textbook, I identify the ambivalence in which the socialist leadership was caught when attempting to erase the country’s colonial past, paralleling the early Roman conquest of Dacia in antiquity with the long history of imperial occupation. This ambivalence, I argue, left an indelible imprint on the film, following which a particular brand of nationalism survived unscathed in Romanian collective consciousness. Keywords: ethnogeny, national identity, nationalist-communism, colonial past, myth. In this article I argue that, just as ‘print capitalism’ helped create nationalities in the late middle-ages,2 Romanian historical saga films of the late 60s and early 70s helped construct Romanian nationalism as a result of a premeditated effort directed from the top of the socialist leadership. I look at the this effort as represented in the crowd-pleaser Columna (Mircea Drăgan, 1968) and I claim that – judged in its temporal context – this resembled any other engineering project initiated by nationalist-communism, that is, by the predominantly nationalistic practices of an otherwise socialist leadership. Propagandist as this effort may have been, I analyze this historical film from a scholarly angle. -
The Dacian War
THE DACIAN WAR The author of the commentary is unknown, we only know his dedication: “nunc spernitur lux, nuper gloriam Romae vidi” Now the days are wasted, once the glory of Rome I saw. PREAMBLE I - When (in 44 BC) Burebista, first king of the Dacians, was assassinated, the kingdom that he established (the present Romania and part of Hungary), fell apart, splitting into four parts. Burebista in the Roman civil war had supported Pompey against Caesar, after the victory of the Divine Julius at Pharsalus (48 BC.), and shortly after the death of Pompey, his position was weakened to the point that his enemies killed him. However as weakened by internal divisions, already at the time of the Divine Augustus, when the Danube froze, Dacian most warlike tribes often attempted to penetrate into Moesia and Pannonia, to make raids into Roman provinces. Every time they were driven back, nevertheless they continued to be a constant threat, forcing us to maintain armed garrisons along the Danube, to defend the “limes” (border) of the Empire. With the passage of time, encouraged by our lack of decisive response, they began to design more daring attacks. It so happened that Diurpaneo, one of the Dacian kings, assailed (69 AD), the Roman “castra” (encampment) of Viminacium (today Kostolac in Serbia), in Moesia Superior, but, rejected by our legionnaires, he was forced to retreat. This defeat persuaded Diurpaneo that first he had to strengthen himself inside Dacia. To this purpose he committed all forces to reunite the kingdom. When the bold enterprise succeeded (75 AD), it became clear that the danger he represented could not be long ignored. -
OVERCOMING the BARBARIAN. DEPICTIONS of ROME's ENEMIES in TRAJANIC MONUMENTAL ART by J.C.N
OVERCOMING THE BARBARIAN. DEPICTIONS OF ROME'S ENEMIES IN TRAJANIC MONUMENTAL ART By J.C.N. COULSTON' Discourse on Roman imperialism has traditionally centred on a perspective finnly reflecting ancient elite sources, with the actions and motives of the Roman state being of paramount concern. Opponents to Roman ordering of the world, the 'neighbours' outside the empire, have generally taken second place in a hierarchy of scholarly priorities. This has been the case for a number of readily comprehensible reasons, not least of which is the symbiosis between Roman imperial studies and the past outlooks of researchers working against a contemporary imperial backdrop or in a post-colonial world still dominated by imperial 'consequences'. The priority of a Roman cultural gradient over both 'native' societies within the boundaries of the empire, and neighbouring groupings without, is striking and continues to be prominent in discourses on 'Romanisation'. Reference to the 'native background' in Roman provincial discussions before the 1990s, automatically both reinforced and perpetuated traditionalist models of culture change. Certainly there was 'Romanisation' whereby elements of Roman Mediterranean culture did have an impact on a great range of core and hinterland societies. Urban institutions and elite practices, religious mechanisms, language and the 'contact culture' of military systems undeniably spread - the 'benefits of civilisation' in the traditional view. However, it has less often been seriously asked how cultural contacts and the existence of empire reflected back on the dominant culture, how the barbarians changed Rome whilst they were being acculturated. Moreover, a conservative over-dependence on the ancient elite literary record to provide both framework and outlook for the treatment of other, mainly • The writer is very grateful to Lukas de Blois for his invitations to take part in the Impact ofEmpire conference in Rome and to contribute to the present volume. -
THE ROMANIAN LANGUAGE YESTERDAY and TODAY Renée
Journal of the American Society of Geolinguistics Volume 38 2012 THE ROMANIAN LANGUAGE YESTERDAY AND TODAY Renée Nishan (Baruch College, retired) Introduction Mihail Eminescu, the 19th century Romanian poet, said that “a language is a system of measurement for the civilization of a people” and that “if a language was not to reflect the character of its people, then why were there so many languages on the earth?” The Romanian language is an Indo-European language; it belongs to the Italic group of languages that devolved from Latin such as French, Italian, Portuguese, Spanish, and others. The Romanian language is, however, unique in the sense that in its formation it developed a distinct phonology and a grammar system different from the other Romance languages because it preserved more closely the character of the Popular Latin that circulated through the Roman Empire. Romanian is spoken by over 24 million people mostly in Romania but also in the Republic of Moldova and around the world wherever Romanian communities are established. When we look at the map of Romania we can see that the most eminent geographical features of the country are the Carpathian Mountains, the Danube River and the Black Sea. Ancient historical records indicate that the territory of present-day Romania as early as the 6th century BC was inhabited by Getae and Dacians. The Geto-Dacian tribes spoke the same language, had the same Thracian origin, and the same culture. They shared between them the Carpato-Danubian area; the Getae occupied mainly the Carpathian plains and the two banks of the lower Danube. -
Romans, Dacians, Thracians, Slavs, Or Pelasgians? a History of the Debate on the Ethnogenesis of the Romanian People Since 17Th Century Until the Computer Agei
Romans, Dacians, Thracians, Slavs, or Pelasgians? A history of the debate on the ethnogenesis of the Romanian people since 17th century until the computer ageI Francesco ZavattiII Abstract: Romania: land of conquest by Romans, Huns, Turks, last outpost of Christendom in Eastern Europe, part of the Eastern front during the 20th century wars, a Soviet satellite and, finally, member of the European Union and of NATO. Romania has always been subject to different ideas of identity meant to define its essence: latinity or dacianism? Europe or authochthonism? The essay aims at analysing the debate regarding the ethnogenesis of the Romanian people since its origin in the 17th century, through the debates of the 19th century and the interwar period and, finally, analysing the debate between latinity and dacianism during the Ceauşescu regime in the light of the cultural politics of the regime and of the debate between different factions of intellectuals. Keywords: Romanian Historiography, Dacians, Latins, representation of romanian past Resumo: Romenia: terra de conquista pelos romanos, hunos, turcos, último posto avançado da Cristandade na Europa Oriental, parte da frente oriental durante as guerras do século 20, um satélite soviético e, por fim, membro da União Europeia e da OTAN. A Romenia tem sempre sido sujeita a diferentes idéias de identidade pretende definir a sua própria: latinidade ou dacianismo? Europa ou autoctonismo? O artigo pretende analisar o debate sobre a etnogênese do povo romeno desde as origens do século XVII, através dos debates do século XIX e do período entre guerras e, finalmente, analisar o debate entre latinidade e dacianismo durante o regime Ceauşescu à luz de sua política cultural e do debate entre diferentes grupos de intelectuais. -
Letters from the “Eternal City” Hadrian Daicoviciu - Constantin Daicoviciu
DANIELA COMŞA1 LETTERS FROM THE “ETERNAL CITY” HADRIAN DAICOVICIU - CONSTANTIN DAICOVICIU Abstract: This study presents the correspondence between the archaeologist and university Professor Dr. Hadrian Daicoviciu (1932-1984), during a scholarship in Rome (1963), and his father, Acad. Constantin Daicoviciu (1898-1973), Rector of Babeş-Bolyai University. Constantin Daicoviciu, an eminent scientist, professor, and brilliant orator, distinguished himself in the professional circles from the country and abroad through a vast activity as an archaeologist, epigraphist, philologist and historian of antiquity. From 1924 on, he led the excavations in the capital of Roman Dacia, Ulpia Traiana Sarmizegetusa, and the campaign of archaeological excavations from the Dacian fortresses in the Orăştie Mountains (Piatra Roşie, Grădiştea de Munte, Blidaru, Costeşti, Rudele, Feţele Albe). With a valuable scientific work, reflected in the research he conducted in the major archaeological resorts of antiquity, and in fundamental works that explore the ancient period of Romanian history, with outstanding teaching abilities, Constantin Daicoviciu was a veritable leader of the school of archaeology in Transylvania and his virtues were greatly appreciated by the highest national and international scientific milieus. C. Daicoviciu participated in numerous international congresses, conferences and reunions: the congresses of Greek and Latin epigraphy from Rome, Vienna, Munich, etc.; the “Eirene” international congresses of classical philology; the international congresses -
Refusal to Be Romanized?: Identity and Romanization at Sarmizegetusa, Dacia
Refusal to be Romanized?: Identity and Romanization at Sarmizegetusa, Dacia Item Type text; Electronic Thesis Authors Ells, Shannon Marie Publisher The University of Arizona. Rights Copyright © is held by the author. Digital access to this material is made possible by the University Libraries, University of Arizona. Further transmission, reproduction or presentation (such as public display or performance) of protected items is prohibited except with permission of the author. Download date 04/10/2021 03:20:37 Link to Item http://hdl.handle.net/10150/620700 Ells 1 REFUSAL TO BE ROMANIZED?: IDENTITY AND ROMANIZATION AT SARMIZEGETUSA, DACIA By Shannon Ells _______________________ Copyright © Shannon Ells 2016 Thesis Submitted to the Faculty of the DEPARTMENT OF CLASSICS In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements For the Degree of MASTER OF ARTS In the Graduate College THE UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA 2016 Ells 2 STATEMENT BY AUTHOR The thesis titled Thesis Title prepared by Student Name has been submitted in par- tial fulfillment of requirements for a master’s degree at the University of Arizona and is deposited in the University Library to be made available to borrowers under rules of the Library. Brief quotations from this thesis are allowable without special permission, pro- vided that an accurate acknowledgement of the source is made. Requests for permis- sion for extended quotation from or reproduction of this manuscript in whole or in part may be granted by the head of the major department or the Dean of the Gradu- ate College when in his or her judgment the proposed use of the material is in the in- terests of scholarship. -
The Actions and Reactions of Trajan and Decebalus: a Brief Reconsidering of the Causation of the Dacian Wars
Student Publications Student Scholarship Fall 2019 The Actions and Reactions of Trajan and Decebalus: A Brief Reconsidering of the Causation of the Dacian Wars Wesley C. Cline Gettysburg College Follow this and additional works at: https://cupola.gettysburg.edu/student_scholarship Part of the Ancient History, Greek and Roman through Late Antiquity Commons, and the Military History Commons Share feedback about the accessibility of this item. Recommended Citation Cline, Wesley C., "The Actions and Reactions of Trajan and Decebalus: A Brief Reconsidering of the Causation of the Dacian Wars" (2019). Student Publications. 765. https://cupola.gettysburg.edu/student_scholarship/765 This open access student research paper is brought to you by The Cupola: Scholarship at Gettysburg College. It has been accepted for inclusion by an authorized administrator of The Cupola. For more information, please contact [email protected]. The Actions and Reactions of Trajan and Decebalus: A Brief Reconsidering of the Causation of the Dacian Wars Abstract While one camp of historians have followed the words of Cassias Dio, that Trajan began the war to avenge the defeats of his predecessor Domitian and put down the ever growing power of the Dacians and subsequently was forced to fight a second war which was inevitably for conquest, the other camp argues that Trajan aimed for military glory and sought to conquer Dacia from the onset of hostilities. Neither camp has yet to conclusively utilize Decebalus’ and Trajan’s actions as a way to definitively prove their argument. By analyzing these two military leaders’ orders and strategies, it becomes clear that Trajan always intended for a large war of conquest and fabricated or at least distorted the truth to place the blame on the Dacians. -
The Column of Trajan in the Light of Ancient Cartography and Geography
Archived version from NCDOCKS Institutional Repository http://libres.uncg.edu/ir/asu/ The Column of Trajan in the light of ancient cartography and geography By: John Stephenson Abstract The spiral reliefs of the Column of Trajan at Rome present the narrative of the Dacian Wars upon a continuous and elongated cartographic landscape, in which a wealth of landforms, including mountains, rivers, streams, springs, and forests serve not only as a setting of human actions, but become elements of the narrative in themselves, as they yield to the relentless efforts of Trajan and his army and engineers. In depicting the campaigns, the reliefs celebrate to a remarkable degree the military engineers and agrimensores (surveyors) who transformed the land as they cleared, measured, and built during the wars. In a circuit from participation in the historical events to their commemoration, the work of these surveyors ultimately contributed to the design of the Column and the stylistic choices of the Column reliefs themselves. Not only the subjects, but the innovative spiral format and the mode of depiction of the Reliefs are indebted in part to the conventions of cartographic practice, while the conceptual framework within which the column’s topographic depictions communicate their ideological freight is tied to traditions of ancient geography. Writers such as Strabo, Pliny and Dio Cassius, while providing inconclusive evidence on the locations of topography in the Reliefs, point to the worldview they express: civilizing, imperial, scopic, rational, organizing, controlling nature. This essay examines the Column reliefs as embedded in wider topographical and geographical traditions during Trajan’s reign and in Roman antiquity, and proposes some new avenues for understanding the reliefs in these terms Stephenson,John(2013)"The Column of Trajan in the light of ancient cartography and geography" Journal of Historical Geography V.