UNIVERSITÉ „AL. I. CUZA” I A Ş I FACULTÉ D’HISTOIRE SÉMINAIRE ET CHAIRE D’HISTOIRE ANCIENNE ET D’ARCHÉOLOGIE CENTRE INTERDISCIPLINAIRE DʹÉTUDES ARCHÉOHISTORIQUES STUDIA ANTIQUA ET ARCHAEOLOGICA XVII (2011) EDITURA UNIVERSITĂȚII „ALEXANDRU IOAN CUZA” IAŞI ‐ 2011 COMITÉ SCIENTIFIQUE: Lucrețiu Mihailescu‐Bîrliba (rédacteur en chef) (Iaşi) Acad. Prof. Mircea Petrescu‐Dîmbovița (Iaşi) Acad. Victor Spinei (Iaşi) Nicolae Ursulescu (Iaşi) Attila László (Iaşi) Svend Hansen (Berlin) Martin Hose (München) Christoph Schäfer (Trier) Wolfgang Schuller (Konstanz) Olivier Weller (Paris) Gocha R. Tsetskhladze (Melbourne) Alexader Falileyev (Aberystwyth) Ion Sandu (Iaşi) Alexander Rubel (Iaşi) Adrian Poruciuc (Iaşi) COMITÉ DE RÉDACTION Roxana‐Gabriela Curcă (secrétariat de rédaction) Marius Alexianu, Neculai Bolohan, Octavian Bounegru, Iulia Dumitrache (membres). La responsabilité du contenu scientifique et sur la forme des articles revient intégralement aux auteurs. Les manuscrits, les livres et les revues proposés en échange et pour comptes‐rendus, ainsi que toute la correspondance seront adressés à la Redaction: Universitatea “Al.I. Cuza”, Facultatea de Istorie, Catedra de Istorie Veche şi Arheologie, Bulevardul Carol I, no.11, 700506 – Iaşi, Roumanie. Tel. 032/201614; Fax. 0040.32.201201; 0040.32.201156 E‐mail: sem‐[email protected] ISSN 1224‐2284 SOMMAIRE‐CONTENTS Geophysical Prospecting Techniques Used in Archaeology. Magnetometry ANDREI ASĂNDULESEI ……………………………………………….. 5 Aşezarea din perioada bronzului târziu de la Negrileşti, jud. Galați ADRIAN ADAMESCU, COSTEL ILIE …………………………..….… 19 Documents officiels concernant les prix et les taxes des produits romains à base de poisson IULIA DUMITRACHE …………………………………………….…… 49 Building God’s Dwelling Place. Synagogues And Houses Of Prayer In Anatolia And Eastern Europe During The Roman Period IULIAN MOGA ......................................................................................... 65 La cité romaine du Haut‐Empire D’Ibida (Mésie Inférieure). Considérations historiques selon le dossier epigraphique LUCREȚIU MIHAILESCU‐BÎRLIBA …………………………………. 83 Divine Presence in the Bathhouses of Roman Dacia ANDREA CUMURCIUC ....................................................................... 145 Society and Religion in Ilişua: A Comment ALEXANDER FALILEYEV ……………………………………………155 Some General Considerations Regarding the Discoveries of Roman Glass Vessels from (L)Ibida – Slava Rusă (Tulcea County) SEVER – PETRU BOȚAN, COSTEL CHIRIAC …………………...… 163 La production de projectiles en terre cuite dans le Nord‐Est de la Moesia Inferior. L’exemple du four de potier de Telița «Mamia» DAMIEN GLAD, GEORGE NUȚU ……………………………..…… 183 Piese de centură romane descoperite la Argamum sector „extra muros” GEORGE NUȚU, MIHAELA IACOB ………………………………... 197 Comptes‐rendus …………………………………………………………............ 231 Abréviations ……………………………………………………………………... 243 Studia Antiqua et Archaeologica XVII, 2011 GEOPHYSICAL PROSPECTING TECHNIQUES USED IN ARCHAEOLOGY. MAGNETOMETRY1 ANDREI ASĂNDULESEI2 Keywords: non‐invasive techniques, magnetometry, excavation strategy, cultural resources management. Abstract: Acquainting archaeologists with the basic principles behind non‐invasive archaeological prospecting methods, techniques and equipment, and with the possibilities presented by them and their limits, is imperiously necessary for any research endeavour. Of particular concern are the archaeologists involved in preventive and salvage archaeology, cultural heritage management and those who must elaborate coherent archaeological research strategies. Résumé: Familiariser les archéologues avec les principes de base, les méthodes, les techniques et les équipements de prospection archéologique non‐invasive, et avec les possibilités offertes par eux et leurs limites, est impérieusement nécessaire pour toutes les entreprises de recherche. Les archéologues impliqués dans lʹarchéologie préventive et de sauvetage, dans la gestion du patrimoine culturel, et ceux qui doivent élaborer des stratégies cohérentes de la recherche archéologique, sont particulièrement visés. Rezumat: Familiarizarea arheologilor cu principiile de bază, metodele, tehnicile și echipamentele întrebuințate în cercetarea arheologică non‐destructivă, cu posibilitățile şi limitele acestora, este imperios necesară pentru orice efort științific. Sunt vizați mai ales arheologii implicați în arheologia preventivă și de salvare, gestionarea patrimoniului cultural și cei care trebuie să elaboreze strategii coerente de cercetare arheologică. 1 This work was supported by the the European Social Fund in Romania, under the responsibility of the Managing Authority for the Sectoral Operational Programme for Human Resources Development 2007‐2013 [grant POSDRU/88/1.5/S/47646]. 2 ʺAlexandru Ioan Cuza” University of Iaşi, ARHEOINVEST Research Platform; e‐mail: [email protected]; Web: http://arheoinvest.uaic.ro/asandulesei. 6 ANDREI ASĂNDULESEI Introduction Among scientists involved in archaeological research it is known the fact that today the archaeological sites are increasingly vulnerable to risks of natural and, particularly, anthropic origin. Given the nature of their work, the archaeologists are currently more concerned than ever by this problem. A judicious management of the tangible cultural heritage requires a classification of the archaeological sites by placing them into three categories: a. Those found in areas unaffected by the above‐mentioned risk factors; b. Those found in areas which are going to be affected by anthropic works or in which the risk of natural hazards is increased; c. Sites which are going to be entirely destroyed and thus require an urgent gathering and recovering of information. In any of these situations, any technique for non‐destructive investigation used in the process of site inspection and evaluation can help in acquiring crucial scientific information; therefore, the capital importance of such endeavours is proved. The information thus obtained, combined with that gathered from field surveying or probing (represented by specific symbols on topographical maps), can produce important data on the past human activity. A preliminary analysis of the material obtained from ordinary fieldwalking can easily set the site within a chronological timeline, but it does not allow for an exact assessment of the surface area occupied by the site, the areas with agglomerations of archaeological material, or the depth at which they lie. All of these questions can be easily answered by employing non‐invasive research methods and techniques. Archaeological research increasingly uses land geophysical investigations as an ancillary science which, co‐jointly with aerial photography, 3D laser scanning, and satellite imaging, constitute a category of quick, economical and flexible methods applicable in any archaeological environment. These methods provide the possibility of delivering high‐ GEOPHYSICAL PROSPECTING TECHNIQUES IN ARCHAEOLOGY 7 quality data, using GIS (Geographic Information System) software, of the nature and features of the detected archaeological remains. The dataʹs processing and rendering in formats accessible and intelligible to archaeologists, coupled by a rigorous understanding of the possibilities and limits presented by these methods, can lead to the elaboration of a suitable methodology which can ensure the success of the research campaign. Initially applied particularly in geology, the geophysical methods can measure the various physical properties of the soil and rocks, while also being sensitive to anthropically induced changes. The methods required adaptation and calibration because the archaeological features are found at a much smaller scale, of a magnitude of several centimetres or metres at best, that the geological ones which can span for kilometres; only some of the methods were suitable for this kind of research.3 Usually, the geophysical methods are classified, according to the type of equipment used, into two major groups: passive and active. In the case of the former, the amplitude of the signal generated by the archaeological features is measured directly, while in the case of the latter, an artificial impulse is fed into the soil and subsequently recorded, with its more‐or‐less altered traits.4 A short history The beginnings of magnetic research in archaeology are to be found in England. Following a conference held by the Canadian physicist John Belshe, the archaeologist Graham Webster pondered whether the same technique could be applied in archaeology, for the in situ identification of kilns. The fact that the magnetic approach was viable was previously demonstrated by Belshe following a project of experimental archaeology in which he managed to detect the magnetic signal of a reconstructed Romano‐British kiln.5 In search of practical solutions to his problem, Webster referred it to Martin 3 WEYMOUTH 1986, 313; WYNN 1986, 245. 4 WEYMOUTH 1986, 313‐314; PIRO 2009, 28. 5 AITKEN 1958, 24; 1986, 15. 8 ANDREI ASĂNDULESEI Aitken and Eduard Hall from the Laboratory for Archaeology and Art History Research, from the University of Oxford. The two researches had already been interested by this problem, and despite having only two months at their disposal for resolving the challenge, they manage, by March 1958, to design and build an implement which could be used for detecting underground archaeological structures (Figure 1).6 The same spring, the first volume of the Archaeometry journal7, and in an article published in 1986 in the Italian publication