An Exceptional Archaeological Discovery - The Art Gallery in Coliboaia Cave Apuseni Mountains Romania

Cave and Karst Systems of Romania, 2019

The archaeological research of the substantial and diverse Romanian karst has a long history going back to nineteenth-century antiquarians. A more systematic interest emerged, however, in the interwar times and continues to the present day. The earliest proof for the human use of caves in the Romanian Carpathian area belongs to the Last Interglacial Neanderthals, but Last Glacial Mousterian presence was also reported. They all indicate short-lived and possibly recurrent excursions into generally low mountain environmental settings (<1000 m) in search of local game. Despite spectacular palaeoanthro-pological (including the earliest Anatomically Modern Humans in Europe) and parietal art finds, the intensity of cave use by Upper Palaeolithic hunter-gatherers (Aurignacian and Gravettian) was surprisingly low, with most consistent occupations dated only to the final stages of the Pleistocene (Epigravettian/Epipalaeolithic). The small Upper Palaeolithic inventories in caves indicate very short, exploratory stops that correlate to the documented focus of these communities on open-air settings at lower altitudes. From Mesolithic to Medieval times, caves were used with varying intensity, serving as temporary/ seasonally residence, as well as for ritual or economic purposes. Thick Early Neolithic cultural sequences, occasionally spectacular Bronze and Iron Age deposi-tions, much like the Roman and Palaeo-Christian finds are particularly telling for the important residential and ritual/religious role some caves played. Through time, apart from their topography and degree of accessibility, the importance granted to these natural shelters by the various communities depended on the continuous change of the sociocultural and economic contexts.

European Journal of Science and Theology, 2008

The paper presents some of the ancient art assets preserved for centuries at the Sub Piatră hermitage, Sălciua village, Alba County, such as: wood or glass icons, old religious books and liturgical items and furniture. Our attention was focused on icons, namely on the process of restoration to which they were undergone. The restoration and the study were developed at the 'National Complex Astra Museum,-in the Tempera Painting Restoration Laboratory-Sibiu city, during 2005-2006. The study of the documentary archive, the typological and stylistic details of the icons as well as the techniques or the chromatics used by the painters, real masters of iconography, were a great benefit for our museum and for us as professionals. They also enriched the rather poor information about these icons. The restoration and the study of these assets have double aim: first of all to be recovered and assessed and then they deserve to be placed among the other assets created in Transylvania during the 18 th century. The fact this patrimony was preserved for centuries in a small, hidden place just in the very heart of the mountains prove once again the role played by the Romanian Orthodox Church: guardian of the national values. The special care for keeping and preserving the heritage left us by our predecessors is a holy duty and obligation, both for those working and living in the hermitage Sub Piatră as well for us.

Tyragetia, 2021

Brief presentantion of the romanian archaeological society in former Austrian Bukovine. Also about the work and the publications of the founder of this society, Dionisie Olinescu, the most important archaeologist of the last quarter of XIXth century. Many ideas about patrimony, restoration, conservation, about the methods of archaeological excavations.

… Terrae Septemcastrensis …, 2007

FABER Studies in Honour of Sorin Cociș at his 65th Anniversary, 2022

The micro area where today’s city Săcueni lies, namely the southern part of the Ér / Eriu / Ier Plain, was extensively inhabited over the course of time. In the site located at the spot the locals call “Horó” and from certain point onwards, “Horó Farm” etc., various stray finds were repeatedly reported in the past, subsequent to sand exploitation and various development works entailed by the construction of a farm. Following the discovery of an Early Avar burial, archaeological sondages were conducted in 1965–1966, which yielded finds belonging to the Neolithic, Bronze Age, Late Roman Imperial, and Early Medieval habitation. They also yielded an interesting Neolithic burial. The aim of the 1996 sondage was the same, namely the possibility to identify a cemetery or a more restricted group of burials dating to the Early Avar period, and possibly their associated settlement. Beside confirming the site’s simple stratigraphy, the archaeological excavation also pinned down a few prehistoric structures, together with the remains of an Early Medieval house, an inhumation, datable with the aid of a bronze brooch to the Late Roman Imperial period being also investigated. With respect to the Early Avar horizon, together with the burial discovered by chance in 1964, whose grave goods also included an interesting bow brooch, it is likely that other finds are also indicative of a warrior’s grave, and also of another female grave. The entire on‑site situation suggests the presence there of a small group of burials, dated by the turn of the 6th–7th centuries or the first half of the 7th century AD. Keywords: multi‑period inhabitancies, north‑western Romania, burial finds, Late Roman period, the Early Avar period.

2004

The archaeological inventory discovered is from Eneolithic, Bronze Age and La Tène period. The essential question is what type of monument is Gruiu Darii: a settlennent, a fortress, a necropolis or a sacred enclosure? The methods used in the research of this enclosure were the following: a) Digital archives from excavation and fieldwork; b) Mapping the past binding cartography and archaeological databases using GIS; c) Digital Photography and Video recording; d) Interpretation of imagery using Photogrammetry corrections; e) Virtual Reconstruction of the Past using 3D Virtual Reality.

Shabtiw, shawabtiw, ushabtiw in the collections of the “Vasile Pârvan” InstDACIA, REVUE D’ARCHÉOLOGIE ET D’HISTOIRE ANCIENNE NOUVELLE SÉRIE, LXII-LXII,I 2018-2019, pp. 7-117, 2018

The present study aims to present a special part of the pieces from the collections of the 􀂳Vasile Pârvan􀂴 Institute of Archaeology of Bucharest, that is the ancient Egyptian funerary figurines (9.26-0D9.2B26-0D79.26-0) coming from the antiquarian donations. While there were some early attempts at doing preliminary descriptions of some of the objects of this 􀁎ind, hitherto this is the first in-depth study which investigates on multiple levels these funerary figurines. The Romanian antiquarian collections including ancient Egyptian artifacts and now belonging to the 􀂳Vasile Pârvan􀂴 Institute of Archaeology are dated around the middle of the 19th century. The beginning was made by the National Museum of Antiquities of Bucharest, founded in 1864 by the Prince Alexandru Ioan Cu􀁝a. According to the 1906 catalogue of the National Museum of Antiquities in Bucharest published by its director, archaeologist Grigore G. Tocilescu, in the cabinet no. 3 in Hall No. 1, also named Mavros Hall, on seven boards there were cult objects from the following collections (chronologically): General Nicolae Mavros, Ce􀁝ar Bolliac, Earl Scarlat Rosetti, Mihail 􀀮ogălniceanu, and Procopie Casotti. Among these, Tocilescu recorded 151 Egyptian objects to which he gave brief descriptions but upon closer observation most of these descriptions turned out to be rather inaccurate. Also, he provided no further details about these pieces belonging to the respective collections except those at positions 29-40, donated by Procopie Casotti in 1890. It is 􀁎nown that the Mavros donation included a small si􀁝e collection of Egyptian antiquities (including scarabs, statuettes, amulets, and li􀁎ely a fragment of basalt sarcophagus). Colonel Dimitrie Papa􀁝oglu made also an important donation of a rich archaeological material which, according to the inventory of donations, included a number of Egyptian pieces. Other significant donations of Egyptian antiquities made in the second half of the 19th century included those of Scarlat Rosetti, Nicolae 􀀮ret􀁝ulescu, captain I. Horovit􀁝 (Orovet􀁝). After 1906 the fund of Egyptian objects has increased due to the additions from the collections Len􀜈, Solacolu, Sut􀁝u, Orghidan (the Romanian Academy collection). Currently, there is a fund of 151 Egyptian objects in the collections of the 􀂳Vasile Pârvan􀂴 Institute of Archaeology of Bucharest. The pieces come from various antiquarian private collections, and cover different 􀁎inds of media and styles: 32:052,071; ceramic and alabaster vessels; plastic (statuettes of mummiform or predominantly mummiform funerary servants – of 9.26-0D9.2B26-0D79.26-0 type and fragments of 9.26-0 mummiform % legs); bron􀁝e statuettes (representing 􀁝oomorphic gods); integral or fragmentary anthropomorphic and 􀁝oomorphic statuettes of deities, having mainly funerary destination, as well as magical and religious one; scarabs; amulets with funerary destination, in mummiform context; of mummiform and cultic context type; adornments (nec􀁎laces; bead/axle dis􀁎); 􀃀int pieces; mummies of birds and a fragment of a human mummy (the hand of a woman with a scarab ring), as well as ecofacts (a septarian spheroidal geological formation or a septarian nodule, very similar to a scarab; carcasses of dates). The collection of ancient Egyptian artifacts of the 􀂳Vasile Pârvan􀂴 Institute of Archaeology of Bucharest includes 31 funerary figurines of the 9.26-0D9.2B26-0D79.26-0 type, to which is added one 9.26-0B container covering a period extending from the New 􀀮ingdom to the Ptolemaic period. Needless to say, being purchased from dealers by the aforementioned collectors, the history comprising the way of acquisition and the provenance of these 31 funerary figurines also still remains un􀁎nown. The author’s approach is to put in concordance the results of Egyptological research about funerary figurines with the information obtained from the analysis of the thirty-one pieces in the collections of the 􀂳Vasile Pârvan􀂴 Institute of Archaeology. This is why the study contains detailed pictures of each figurine, particularly because a substantial part of them have hieroglyphic inscriptions. Although extensive, the present study is just the first part of a much larger volume which will include the detailed catalogue descriptions of all Egyptian pieces in the collections of the 􀂳Vasile Pârvan􀂴 Institute of Archaeology. The author􀀊s aim is to provide an accurate description as detailed as possible of each object, to integrate it from a historical, chronological, societal and stylistic point of view in the wider framewor􀁎 of the ancient Egyptian artifacts of the same type and, as far as possible, to identify the original owners (the ancient Egyptian ones) of these funerary goods and to contribute to the reconstitution of their funerary treasure, and by means of this, of their role and status in the ancient Egyptian society. Last but not least, another goal would be the identification of the route of origin of the antiquarian type of acquisition. The study is structured in two main parts, starting from general to specific. The first part is a synthetic presentation of the funeral components as guarantors of immortality and of the history of the funerary statuettes of 9.26-0D9.2B26-0D 79.26-0 type. This section is essential for understanding of the role of the funerary figurines of this 􀁎ind in the ancient Egyptian society. The second one is a catalogue of the funerary figurines of this type in the 􀂳Vasile Pârvan􀂴 Institute of Archaeology of Bucharest. To integrate them into the general existing typology, two criteria of classification of the figurines were followed: the chronology and the presence or the absence on their bodies of any inscription. In this way the details of each piece will give scientists deeper insights into their specific history and integrate them into the general typology.

Since the fall of communism in 1989 and even after joining the European Union in 2007, Romania has been in a constant political, economic, social and cultural transition. This has had strong positive and negative effects on research, including archaeological research. The transition allowed Romania to join the international archaeological community and benefit from its wide range of opportunities. Thus, international collaborations have been established, archaeologists have been introduced to new research methods, and offered various academic mobilities and grants. In short, archaeological knowledge and information have been rapidly and extensively exchanged. Despite this, the Romanian archaeological community is somewhat stuck between an open, dynamic and global society, and the rigid, slowly transitioning government administration and often autocratic public institutions which frequently see the modern and the new as threatening. Archaeologists have to meet the expectations of the system (the institution) in which they work, of the community they live in, and of themselves. Thus, there is a (mostly inner) conflict between the archaeologist as a member of modern society, and the archaeologist as a member and representative of the public institution. How do Romanian archaeologists perceive this situation and their role today? Do they have authority and power or are just made to believe they have? Who is in fact creating and influencing heritage discourses? How did heritage discourses change over the last 28 years in Romania? What was and is the role of archaeologists in this change? The aim of this paper is to present and analyse power relationships and heritage discourses in Romanian archaeology over the last three decades, through qualitative interviews with archaeologists, from early career researchers to experts in the field, with background in museums, academia, and government institutions.