Papers by Iosif Vasile Ferencz
The Archaeology of Communities and Landscapes in the Carpathian Basin Interdisciplinary Perspectives, 2023
The structures with perhaps the highest visibility among those that appeared in the landscape
in ... more The structures with perhaps the highest visibility among those that appeared in the landscape
in Burebista’s time, or shortly before his reign, were the so-called “fortresses on heights”. They still
attract attention today and are considered true “hallmarks” of the Dacian civilization. They were
designated as “fortresses” by only considering their defensive potential. A large number of such
monuments have been identified inside the Carpathians range, but few have been archaeologically
researched. In many situations, their plan or size is unknown; if they were excavated, there is limited
information about their organization, the constructions inside the enclosures, the development
stages, etc. The purpose of this article is to identify the components of the structures designated as
“Dacian fortresses” to distinguish an organizational model and to better understand their
functionality.
The Archaeology of Communities and Landscapes in the Carpathian Basin Interdisciplinary Perspectives, 2023
Recent archaeological studies focusing on collective feasting in temperate Europe during the
Late... more Recent archaeological studies focusing on collective feasting in temperate Europe during the
Late Iron Age primarily discussed the impact of Mediterranean wine and drinking-related implements
on the dining styles of different communities and social groups. Though it allowed a better understanding
of particular aspects which influenced the local social dynamics, it also overemphasized the importance
of alcohol consumption within these feasts, while other important components sourced locally were
left in the background. One of the locally sourced components was meat, a type of foodstuff for whom
sourcing, preparation and consumption were frequently associated with the male warlike identity. Thus
the article discusses whether meat consumption was also an integral part of the collective feasts in
Late Iron Age Dacia, which were its practical and symbolic functions, and what this practice can tell us
about the local social dynamics. The investigation is based on the contextual analysis of some categories
of archaeological evidence coming from different Late Iron Age Transylvanian sites, including certain
categories of metal artefacts which are commonly used to prepare and serve meat – forks, flesh-hooks,
firedogs, gridirons and skewers – as well as faunal remains.
On this occasion, we are proposing to address a topic still unexplored in the Romanian archaeolog... more On this occasion, we are proposing to address a topic still unexplored in the Romanian archaeological literature, from
the perspective of older or more recent archaeological discoveries. Through the present work, we want to draw attention to some
pulleys discovered in the southwest of Transylvania, still rare objects among the artifacts dating from the Dacian kingdom era.
Such artifacts document a distinct area of ancient technology, namely the ways in which heavy objects were lifted and handled.
The pretext is provided by an artifact discovered in Ardeu in 2009, a piece that is in the collections of the Museum of Dacian and
Roman Civilization Deva.
Miorița, 2022
In the southern areas of the Apuseni Mountains, both watermills and rotary querns were used until... more In the southern areas of the Apuseni Mountains, both watermills and rotary querns were used until the middle of the 20th century. They gradually disappeared and, unfortunately, very few images remain to illustrate them. But in the memory of some people, sequences of an old world are still preserved. Therefore, gathering oral information from those who still remember the image of the mountain village becomes an objective that cannot be postponed.
Old discoveries and new approaches to the Archaeology of the Iron Age in the Tisa-Dniester area, 2022
The Cetăţuie hill from Ardeu, located in the commune of Balșa, in Hunedoara county (Romania), it ... more The Cetăţuie hill from Ardeu, located in the commune of Balșa, in Hunedoara county (Romania), it was been investigated
systematicaly in the last two decades, and the results have been frequently presented. The site was inhabited during several
historical eras, but during the Dacian kingdom it experienced the most intense development. The beginning of the fortification can be
dated, probably during the 1st century BC, perhaps in the middle of that interval, while the end of the Dacian habitation is associated
with the confrontations with the Romans, at the beginning of the 2nd century of the Christian era. Older discoveries, especially
accidental ones, were only rarely analyzed. For this occasion we have proposed to present some of the objects discovered on the
occasion of the beginning of the works for the setting up of the stone quarry.
Sargetia-Acta Musei Devensis, 1999
Sargetia. Acta Musei Devensis, 2020
Acta Musei Napocensis, 2004
Seria Archaeologica III
The scope of this article is to discuss the main components of the social structures which charac... more The scope of this article is to discuss the main components of the social structures which characterized the “Celtic” and the “Dacian” cultural and chronological horizons, and to identify, on the basis of the available archaeological evidence, the means and practices through which social hierarchy and competition was expressed within the communities of each horizon. The rural society specific to the “Celtic” horizon was largely heterarchic, whereas the “Dacian” horizon was characterized by a hierarchic social organization. The differences between these two horizons can be observed in the funerary practices, the organization of the landscape, and the range of visual symbols used in the expression of social status and power by the local elites.
The scope of this article is to discuss the main components of the social structures which charac... more The scope of this article is to discuss the main components of the social structures which characterized the “Celtic” and the “Dacian” cultural and chronological horizons, and to identify, on the basis of the available archaeological evidence, the means and practices through which social hierarchy and competition was expressed within the communities of each horizon. The rural society specific to the “Celtic” horizon was largely heterarchic, whereas the “Dacian” horizon was characterized by a hierarchic social organization. The differences between these two horizons can be observed in the funerary practices, the organization of the landscape, and the range of visual symbols used in the expression of social status and power by the local elites.
Plus, 2022
The scope of this article is to discuss the main components of the social
structures which charac... more The scope of this article is to discuss the main components of the social
structures which characterized the “Celtic” and the “Dacian” cultural and
chronological horizons, and to identify, on the basis of the available archaeological
evidence, the means and practices through which social hierarchy and
competition was expressed within the communities of each horizon. The rural
society specific to the “Celtic” horizon was largely heterarchic, whereas the
“Dacian” horizon was characterized by a hierarchic social organization. The differences
between these two horizons can be observed in the funerary practices,
the organization of the landscape, and the range of visual symbols used in the
expression of social status and power by the local elites.
The Late Iron Age in Transylvania was defined by two cultural and chronological horizons: the "Ce... more 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). Taking into consideration the specific features of the two successive cultural horizons, the paper is going to identify and compare the manner in which warlike identity was expressed in both cases, with a particular focus on southwestern Transylvania. The evolution of the social and cultural expressions related to the warlike identities can be observed through the analysis of the funerary discoveries. These are offering a complex image of the social position and functions of the warriors within the communities from this region. By comparing the standard panoplies of weapons specific to the "Celtic horizon" with those of the "Dacian horizon", it can be observed that they are quite similar in what concerns their functionality. 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. The "Dacian" warrior belonged to a hierarchic society defined by the emergence of hilltop fortresses surrounded by a dependent rural hinterland.
Journal of thermal analysis and calorimetry, Mar 19, 2022
Thermal analysis and infrared spectroscopy are used in the study of various mortar samples clearl... more Thermal analysis and infrared spectroscopy are used in the study of various mortar samples clearly attributed to different
historical periods in south-western Transylvania (Romania). The results obtained will clarify the character of certain samples,
one Medieval period mortar sample, and a few Dacian kingdom period mortar samples. The results may contribute in the
successful identification of the construction techniques used in the buildings from where the samples originate. The area
under investigation is of great importance for Romanian heritage, so restorers have to find and produce mortars similar to
those used in the building of our monuments. The thermoanalytic curves obtained in the case of possibly Dacian period and
medieval mortars are presented in the following. Surface morphology (SEM) and elemental analysis (EDX) were investigated
by scanning electron microscopy. Analysis was completed with XRF. The studies managed to solve the proposed objectives,
namely demonstrated the presence of mortar and the use of limestone from the local site as a raw material to obtain the
mortars analysed and listed above. Furthermore, it provided new data useful for the interpretation of building techniques
used in the region and period, though the data are not sufficient to completely clarify the relevant questions.
Journal of thermal analysis and calorimetry, Mar 19, 2022
Analele Banatului XXVII 2019, 2019
About the archaeological discoveries from Ardeu (Balşa commune, Hunedoara county), many pages hav... more About the archaeological discoveries from Ardeu (Balşa commune, Hunedoara county), many pages have been written over time1. We tried to present a different overview on the site „Ardeu-Cetăţuie”2. On this paper we set out to undertake an exploration of the mythological micro-universe, in the form in which it is still preserved among the members of the community of Ardeu village. %e investigation is based on small sequences collected from local folklore, directly from the locals, during the research campaigns, as well as by the Hunedoara journalist Laura Oana. %e study area is located in the south of the Apuseni Mountains3, in a place dominated by rocky cliffs (Fig. 1) and caves, where there are traces of habitation of populations from many historical times.%e walls of some fortifications, visible for centuries on top of the Cetăţuie hill, were a source of inspiration for the collective imaginary of the place, allowing the adaptation of some archetypes widespread in mythology, to the ...
Федеральное государственное бюджетное образовательное учреждение высшего профессионального образования Забайкальский государственный университет, 2020
Архаика, 2019
An iron object discovered in the 2002 research campaign, on the plateau of the Dacian fortress in... more An iron object discovered in the 2002 research campaign, on the plateau of the Dacian fortress in Ardeu, is the subject of this work. The piece represents a fragment of a pilum-the spear characteristic to the Roman heavy infantryman. Such artifacts are rare in archaeological finds in the Dacian environment. Its presence in Ardeu, in the level o f destruction of the most important construction investigated in that place, seems to be related to the confrontations that ended with the destruction of the Dacian ensemble. The mentioned events probably took place at the beginning of the 2 nd century AD.
In the final decades of the Late Iron Age some changes are recorded within the European civilizat... more In the final decades of the Late Iron Age some changes are recorded within the European civilizations. In Central and Western Europe the oppidum civilization is developing, characterized by sites with Celtic materials. In Transylvania small rural communities continue to exist similarly as during previous centuries. Alongside them fortified settlements and fortresses also begin to appear. Celtic artifacts are missing nearly completely from these sites. The “Cetăţuia” (Citadel) at Ardeu is one of the lesser known monuments in the Hunedoara County. Just a brief glimpse at any map shows that the positioning of the fortress allows it to control the local valley and also to defend the shortest road connecting the capital of the Dacian Kingdom with precious metals deposits in the Apuseni Mountains. In our opinion this is the reason why the settlement and fortress developed and thrived for almost two centuries, before Roman legionaries put an end to its existence. The walls were built of local stone, clay and wood and enclosed an area of about 1/2 ha. Inside the stronghold we identified structures such as: houses, a workshop as well as a tower-dwelling, interpreted as a personal residence of a Dacian nobleman. So far the location of the gate has not been identified but access from the foot of the hill to its summit was by a path, suitable for traveling by foot, horse or mule. In the lower lying area on southern slopes of Ardeu Valley, at Gura Cheilor, we identified a settlement dating from the same period as the fortress. Dacian fortresses appeared in late second and early first century B.C., in Transylvania, in some places outside the arc of the Carpathians, in the Romanian southern Banat, right on the Danube bank. Some of them, probably the richest, were built using blocks of dressed limestone, in a Hellenistic technique, but in most of them local stone was used. Inside some structures were identified, most of them interpreted as noble residences. The Dacian fortress at Ardeu is similar to most other strongholds from that period. It had the same plan and the walls were built from the same type of raw material as most Dacian fortresses of this type. The archaeological material is also similar to that recorded at other sites dated to this period. The positioning of the Cetăţuia stronghold at Ardeu, not very far from Sarmizegetusa Regia, as well as its special features recommend it as an interesting site for further research.
Plural: History, Culture, Society, 2019
In 2016, while carrying out a campaign on a Dacian "tower-house" type structure identif... more In 2016, while carrying out a campaign on a Dacian "tower-house" type structure identified in earlier years on the Cetățuie Hill in Ardeu, an atypical material was noticed on the inferior surface of a stone block sitting perpendic¬ular on the revetment. Its appearance, of different colour and texture compared to the stone block it was attached to, led us to immediately assume it could be mortar. Based on this working hypothesis a series of questions were formulat¬ed, with the purpose of extracting as much valuable information as possible from the sample. Powder X-ray diffraction and petrographic investigations were carried out in order to answer these questions.
Uploads
Papers by Iosif Vasile Ferencz
in Burebista’s time, or shortly before his reign, were the so-called “fortresses on heights”. They still
attract attention today and are considered true “hallmarks” of the Dacian civilization. They were
designated as “fortresses” by only considering their defensive potential. A large number of such
monuments have been identified inside the Carpathians range, but few have been archaeologically
researched. In many situations, their plan or size is unknown; if they were excavated, there is limited
information about their organization, the constructions inside the enclosures, the development
stages, etc. The purpose of this article is to identify the components of the structures designated as
“Dacian fortresses” to distinguish an organizational model and to better understand their
functionality.
Late Iron Age primarily discussed the impact of Mediterranean wine and drinking-related implements
on the dining styles of different communities and social groups. Though it allowed a better understanding
of particular aspects which influenced the local social dynamics, it also overemphasized the importance
of alcohol consumption within these feasts, while other important components sourced locally were
left in the background. One of the locally sourced components was meat, a type of foodstuff for whom
sourcing, preparation and consumption were frequently associated with the male warlike identity. Thus
the article discusses whether meat consumption was also an integral part of the collective feasts in
Late Iron Age Dacia, which were its practical and symbolic functions, and what this practice can tell us
about the local social dynamics. The investigation is based on the contextual analysis of some categories
of archaeological evidence coming from different Late Iron Age Transylvanian sites, including certain
categories of metal artefacts which are commonly used to prepare and serve meat – forks, flesh-hooks,
firedogs, gridirons and skewers – as well as faunal remains.
the perspective of older or more recent archaeological discoveries. Through the present work, we want to draw attention to some
pulleys discovered in the southwest of Transylvania, still rare objects among the artifacts dating from the Dacian kingdom era.
Such artifacts document a distinct area of ancient technology, namely the ways in which heavy objects were lifted and handled.
The pretext is provided by an artifact discovered in Ardeu in 2009, a piece that is in the collections of the Museum of Dacian and
Roman Civilization Deva.
systematicaly in the last two decades, and the results have been frequently presented. The site was inhabited during several
historical eras, but during the Dacian kingdom it experienced the most intense development. The beginning of the fortification can be
dated, probably during the 1st century BC, perhaps in the middle of that interval, while the end of the Dacian habitation is associated
with the confrontations with the Romans, at the beginning of the 2nd century of the Christian era. Older discoveries, especially
accidental ones, were only rarely analyzed. For this occasion we have proposed to present some of the objects discovered on the
occasion of the beginning of the works for the setting up of the stone quarry.
structures which characterized the “Celtic” and the “Dacian” cultural and
chronological horizons, and to identify, on the basis of the available archaeological
evidence, the means and practices through which social hierarchy and
competition was expressed within the communities of each horizon. The rural
society specific to the “Celtic” horizon was largely heterarchic, whereas the
“Dacian” horizon was characterized by a hierarchic social organization. The differences
between these two horizons can be observed in the funerary practices,
the organization of the landscape, and the range of visual symbols used in the
expression of social status and power by the local elites.
historical periods in south-western Transylvania (Romania). The results obtained will clarify the character of certain samples,
one Medieval period mortar sample, and a few Dacian kingdom period mortar samples. The results may contribute in the
successful identification of the construction techniques used in the buildings from where the samples originate. The area
under investigation is of great importance for Romanian heritage, so restorers have to find and produce mortars similar to
those used in the building of our monuments. The thermoanalytic curves obtained in the case of possibly Dacian period and
medieval mortars are presented in the following. Surface morphology (SEM) and elemental analysis (EDX) were investigated
by scanning electron microscopy. Analysis was completed with XRF. The studies managed to solve the proposed objectives,
namely demonstrated the presence of mortar and the use of limestone from the local site as a raw material to obtain the
mortars analysed and listed above. Furthermore, it provided new data useful for the interpretation of building techniques
used in the region and period, though the data are not sufficient to completely clarify the relevant questions.
in Burebista’s time, or shortly before his reign, were the so-called “fortresses on heights”. They still
attract attention today and are considered true “hallmarks” of the Dacian civilization. They were
designated as “fortresses” by only considering their defensive potential. A large number of such
monuments have been identified inside the Carpathians range, but few have been archaeologically
researched. In many situations, their plan or size is unknown; if they were excavated, there is limited
information about their organization, the constructions inside the enclosures, the development
stages, etc. The purpose of this article is to identify the components of the structures designated as
“Dacian fortresses” to distinguish an organizational model and to better understand their
functionality.
Late Iron Age primarily discussed the impact of Mediterranean wine and drinking-related implements
on the dining styles of different communities and social groups. Though it allowed a better understanding
of particular aspects which influenced the local social dynamics, it also overemphasized the importance
of alcohol consumption within these feasts, while other important components sourced locally were
left in the background. One of the locally sourced components was meat, a type of foodstuff for whom
sourcing, preparation and consumption were frequently associated with the male warlike identity. Thus
the article discusses whether meat consumption was also an integral part of the collective feasts in
Late Iron Age Dacia, which were its practical and symbolic functions, and what this practice can tell us
about the local social dynamics. The investigation is based on the contextual analysis of some categories
of archaeological evidence coming from different Late Iron Age Transylvanian sites, including certain
categories of metal artefacts which are commonly used to prepare and serve meat – forks, flesh-hooks,
firedogs, gridirons and skewers – as well as faunal remains.
the perspective of older or more recent archaeological discoveries. Through the present work, we want to draw attention to some
pulleys discovered in the southwest of Transylvania, still rare objects among the artifacts dating from the Dacian kingdom era.
Such artifacts document a distinct area of ancient technology, namely the ways in which heavy objects were lifted and handled.
The pretext is provided by an artifact discovered in Ardeu in 2009, a piece that is in the collections of the Museum of Dacian and
Roman Civilization Deva.
systematicaly in the last two decades, and the results have been frequently presented. The site was inhabited during several
historical eras, but during the Dacian kingdom it experienced the most intense development. The beginning of the fortification can be
dated, probably during the 1st century BC, perhaps in the middle of that interval, while the end of the Dacian habitation is associated
with the confrontations with the Romans, at the beginning of the 2nd century of the Christian era. Older discoveries, especially
accidental ones, were only rarely analyzed. For this occasion we have proposed to present some of the objects discovered on the
occasion of the beginning of the works for the setting up of the stone quarry.
structures which characterized the “Celtic” and the “Dacian” cultural and
chronological horizons, and to identify, on the basis of the available archaeological
evidence, the means and practices through which social hierarchy and
competition was expressed within the communities of each horizon. The rural
society specific to the “Celtic” horizon was largely heterarchic, whereas the
“Dacian” horizon was characterized by a hierarchic social organization. The differences
between these two horizons can be observed in the funerary practices,
the organization of the landscape, and the range of visual symbols used in the
expression of social status and power by the local elites.
historical periods in south-western Transylvania (Romania). The results obtained will clarify the character of certain samples,
one Medieval period mortar sample, and a few Dacian kingdom period mortar samples. The results may contribute in the
successful identification of the construction techniques used in the buildings from where the samples originate. The area
under investigation is of great importance for Romanian heritage, so restorers have to find and produce mortars similar to
those used in the building of our monuments. The thermoanalytic curves obtained in the case of possibly Dacian period and
medieval mortars are presented in the following. Surface morphology (SEM) and elemental analysis (EDX) were investigated
by scanning electron microscopy. Analysis was completed with XRF. The studies managed to solve the proposed objectives,
namely demonstrated the presence of mortar and the use of limestone from the local site as a raw material to obtain the
mortars analysed and listed above. Furthermore, it provided new data useful for the interpretation of building techniques
used in the region and period, though the data are not sufficient to completely clarify the relevant questions.
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.
Aurel Rustoiu s-a remarcat pe parcursul ultimelor trei decenii și jumătate printr-o lungă serie de studii abordând cu predilecție subiecte de istorie veche și arheologie cu accent pe civilizația celtică și cea dacică în Transilvania, Banat și în Bazinul Carpatic. Într-un astfel de cadru cronologic și spațial se înscrie și demersul pe care îl prezentăm cu acest prilej.
Ancient bone objects were found in relatively large quantities in the entire Mediterranean, from Spain to Syria and Egypt to France, where they were manufactured between the Neolithic and Medieval periods. The art of carving animal bones involves especially antler and horn. However, the spectrum of the worked bone objects recovered from Anatolia, rest of the eastern Mediterranean, Near East, the Black Sea area and Balkans is very varied, and reflects different characteristics of Graeco-Roman and Byzantine daily life. In these areas they were also utilised as grave goods secondarily. They were exported or imported over the entire ancient Graeco-Roman and Byzantine worlds.
In this conference papers dealing with ancient artefacts or objects manufactured by worked bone, antler, ivory, animal teeth, mother of pearl and cockleshell will be included. Main material groups made by bones are as follows: items connected to personal grooming, weaponry, artifacts used in to spinning or in pottery decoration, artifacts related to cosmetics, jewellery, combs, pins for clothing and women’s hair, items related to dressmaking and textile (particularly sewing needles, weaving implements or buttons), parts of soldiers’ equipment, items used for leather working, amulets and other magical items, knife handles, musical instruments, playing stones (e.g., lopsided dices), frames of various kinds (e.g., of mirrors), furniture (including fittings, wood sidings and inlayed decoration), boxes, plaques, writing items (for example, κάλαμοι, calami in Lat.), liturgical and religious items (e.g., crosses and reliquaries), half-finished products and miscellania. Just as in other Roman sites in the rest of the ancient world, hairpins are the most numerous artifacts made of bone or antler in the Eastern part of the Empire. Gaming pieces represent the other widespread and customary instrumentum category of the worked bones. Several other material groups also used during the proceesing of bone artefacts, for example, some objects may have been filled with coloured wax to make them to stand out.
So far the study of this material group has been overlooked, whereas there is still a huge amount of unpublished material from excavations, field surveys and museums in the entire Mediterranean and rest of the ancient world. There is a regular conference series of the Worked Bone Research Group (WBRG; cf. <https://www.wbrg.net/>) which include almost all periods and areas. In our e-meeting in 2025 we only focus on bone objects between the fourth century B.C. and the sixth century A.D., and attempt to set out a comprehensive model for the study of bone objects, including their definition, typology, chronology, contexts, function, regional characteristics, production and distribution patterns in the whole eastern Mediterranean geographies, including the Near East, Black Sea area and Balkans. The increasing number of recent finds in our concerned areas over the last thirty years, thanks to the development of preventive archaeology, has tended to challenge our previous observations and assumptions on Graeco-Roman and Byzantine worked bone objects.
It is also our intention to create a complete bibliography of previous publications on bone objects for several areas and chronologies.
We warmly invite contributions by scholars and graduate students from a variety of disciplines related to this material group. Intended to bring together scholars of Greek, Roman and Early Byzantine instrumenta / artefacts’ archaeology to discuss a range of issues concerning this material group characteristics, this video conference should be an excellent opportunity to increase our knowledge about ancient worked bones. The following theme groups are the main questions of the conference which are prescriptive:
- Bone objects from archaeological field projects, museums and private collections,
- Graeco-Roman bone objects in comparison with the bone objects of the Paleolithic, Mesolithic, Neolithic periods, Bronze and Iron Ages,
- Graeco-Roman bone objects in comparison with the Minoan and Mycenaean bone objects,
- Etymology of bone objects in ancient Near Eastern, eastern Mediterranean and Aegean languages,
- Ancient Greek, Latin and Byzantine textual sources on bone objects,
- Typological evolution and design of bone objects,
- Selection criteria for some certain animal genres for bone-working,
- Decoration of bone objects, as detailed chronologies should be established for both the produced forms and their decoration,
- Chronologies of these objects that can highlight the social spread of these products,
- Manufacturing technics, manufacturing tools, major production centers and workshops of bone objects in the Hellenistic, Roman and Early Byzantine periods, their organisation and interactions.
- Distribution of bone objects, economic and social aspects: in what type of socio-economic context are they found?,
- Typological and functional features of bone objects during the Hellenistic, Roman and Early Byzantine periods: what might the utilitarian, social and/or symbolic functions or practices of these objects have been?
- Identification of the economic factors that contributed to the standardization in the bone-working,
- What ancient Greeks, Romans and Byzantines thought about afterlife? Bone objects in the eastern Mediterranean funerary contexts,
- The role of monastic or religious economy on Early Byzantine bone-working,
- Commodities and their trade through bone objects,
- Relations of bone objects to metal, terracotta, glass, wooden or stone objects: how did this material group fit in with objects made from different materials, particularly metal, glass, or wood? Can any stylistic links be found between them?
- Roman bone objects in the eastern and western Mediterranean and Europe, and their differences,
- Hellenistic and Roman gravestones and other iconographic media depicting bone objects,
- Conservation of worked bone objects, especially excavated finds: current strategies and future approaches,
- Archaeometric analyses of these objects,
- Miscellanea.
On these themes and questions, all approaches and methods susceptible to bring some progress to our current knowledge are of course welcome: archaeology, physical anthropology, archaeozoology, osteoarchaeology, bioarchaeology, palaeohistology, ancient history, history of art, cultural anthropology etc.
A special focus of the workshop is the identification of workshops from different regions, cities and areas, in particular capital cities (such as Byzantium, Ephesus, Pergamum, Antioch-on-the-Orontes, Alexandria, Athens, Rome etc.) with main workshops. A regional approach will enable us to understand the influences and contacts between workshops. Were these exclusively urban activities, or also rural? What motivated their establishment? Political powers, raw materials, the development of urban centres and the urban elite (merchants, craftsmen, religious orders, etc.) or economic outlets? And, are there any imitations or copies in certain localities suggesting competition between workshops?
Another important topic is the manufacturing techniques which were varied and depended on the composition and morphology of each raw material type as much as on the artefact to be produced. Regardless of the raw material, the manufacturing process of an ancient bone object was usually multi-stage:
1. Selection and acquisition of the raw material;
2. Preparation of the raw material, including cleaning, drying and cutting into pieces;
3. The appropriate working processes using instruments like knives, chisels, files, lathes and bow-drills;
4. Finishing the worked objects by grinding, polishing and colouring.
The previous finds reflect that mostly manufacturing techniques were related to an organized production where the different manufacturing stages were standardized and predefined which can be identified as a chaîne opératoire. Particular attention should be paid to these technical aspects, which are the integral parts of the uniqueness of most of the ancient worked bone objects.
We also need to look at the distribution of these objects on a local, regional, and even supra-regional scale, and trade networks. Some have crossed the overseas, such as Anatolian products unearthed in England. How can these exchanges be explained?
Our conference is primarily virtual, and will take place on Zoom; but if any of participant will wish to appear in Izmir physically, she/he is welcome to present her/his paper in our conference room to the audience which will also be livestreamed and broadcasted simultaneously on Zoom. The conference is free.