9 786066 544030

TRACII ŞI VECINII LOR ÎN ANTICHITATE: ARHEOLOGIE

ȘI ISTORIE / THE THRACIANS AND THEIR NEIGHBOURS
IN ANTIQUITY: ARCHAEOLOGY AND HISTORY

STUDIES IN HONOR OF VALERIU SÎRBU

AT HIS 70th ANNIVERSARY

EDITOR: IONEL CÂNDEA

EDITURA ISTROS A MUZEULUI BRĂILEI „CAROL I”

BRĂILA, 2020
 CUPRINS / SOMMAIRE / CONTENT

IONEL CÂNDEA, O viaţă de arheolog aşa cum a fost VALERIU SÎRBU

la 70 de ani / Une vie d’archéologue telle qu’elle a été
VALERIU SIRBU à son 70e anniversaire................................................ IX
VALERIU SÎRBU - Lista lucrărilor/ List of books and studies.............. 1
VALERIU SÎRBU - Comunicări la manifestări ştiinţifice internaţionale /
Papers at international scientific events............................................. 41
ALEXANDRU AVRAM, Notes d’épigraphie istrienne............................ 65
IOAN BEJINARIU, ALIN HENȚ, A Gold 'Hair-Ring' from the
Collections of the Gherla History Museum......................................... 75
ALEXANDRU BERZOVAN, Considerations Regarding the Etymology
of the Dacian Term dava / deva / daba. A Historical and Linguistic
Journey from the Lower Danube to Anatolia and Transcaucasia...... 97
TOMASZ BOCHNAK, Between Rome and the Celts, Germans, and
Sarmatians: Bronze Situlae without Suspension Loops as the
Testimony of the Mithridatic Wars?.................................................... 133
CRISTINA BODÓ, Patrimoniul arheologic al zonei Deva – Vețel în
preocupările membrilor Societății de Istorie și Arheologie a
comitatului Hunedoara........................................................................ 161
LIVIA BUZOIANU, Observații pe marginea unei descoperiri mai
vechi de la Comana (jud. Constanța): amfora lui Τιμóδικοσ............. 175
DIANA DIMITROVA, The Temple Under the Chetinyova Mound at
Starossel.............................................................................................. 185
MARKO DIZDAR, Riders on the Storm – the Late La Tène Bronze
Buckles of the Horse Gear in the Southeastern Carpathian Basin..... 205
KATARINA DMITROVIĆ, Hair Rings in Western Serbia. An attempt
on a Bronze Age Hairstyle Reconstruction......................................... 223
ANATOLYI R. KANTOROVICH, Images of the Scythian animal style
from the kurgan group Novozavedennoye – III in the Central
Ciscaucasia as the reflection of Scythian contacts............................. 235
LYUBAVA KONOVA, The Foundation of Apollonia Pontica on the
Black Sea Coast. Some Thoughts on the Application of the World-
Systems Analysis Perspective to Archaeological Datasets................. 261
MARIJA LJUŠTINA, Eternal Thread of Life: Notes on Spindle Whorls
in the Bronze Age Grave Inventory in Western Serbia....................... 283
DRAGOŞ MĂNDESCU, Waters as Sedes Deorum in the Iron Age
North - Thracian lands........................................................................ 297
SEBASTIAN MATEI, Amfore locale cu ștampile anepigrafice
descoperite în dava de la Cârlomănești.............................................. 323
OCTAVIAN MUNTEANU, MIHAIL BĂŢ, AUREL ZANOCI, Fibule de
schemă La Tène timpuriu de pe teritoriul Republicii Moldova: un
catalog al descoperirilor din aşezări.................................................. 333
ION NICULIŢĂ, AUREL ZANOCI, MIHAIL BĂŢ, Obiecte de cult din
aşezările getice de la Hansca (Raionul Ialoveni, Republica
Moldova)............................................................................................. 359
LIANA OȚA, Câteva observații despre descoperirile arheologice din
secolul al III-lea p. Chr. în Muntenia................................................ 417
AURORA PEȚAN, Zona sacră a Sarmizegetusei Regia după cucerirea
romană................................................................................................. 443
HOREA POP, CĂTĂLIN BORANGIC, Zăbale de tip tracic descoperite
în Depresiunea Șimleului, Sălaj.......................................................... 477
CRISTIAN SCHUSTER, Zu den befestigten Siedlungen des
Äneolithikums, der Bronze- und Eisenzeit am Argeş-unterlauf.......... 493
SERGEY SKORYJ, On the Interpretation of the Graves of Heavily
Armed Scyhian Warriors on the South of Eastern Europe.................. 509
DAN ȘTEFAN, MARIA-MAGDALENA ȘTEFAN, DAN BUZEA, Rezultate
preliminare ale cercetărilor geofizice şi de teledetecţie de la
Covasna - Cetatea Zânelor.................................................................. 521
VLADISLAV ZHIVKOV, VARBIN VARBANOV, Chronology of
Bagachina – Late Iron Age and Roman Period.................................. 535
BETWEEN ROME AND THE CELTS, GERMANS, AND
SARMATIANS: BRONZE SITULAE WITHOUT
SUSPENSION LOOPS AS THE TESTIMONY OF THE
MITHRIDATIC WARS?

TOMASZ BOCHNAK
(POLAND)

Keywords: bronze situla, Mithridatic wars, Vocontian auxilia,

Poieneşti-Lucăşeuca culture, Przeworsk culture, Roman Province import
Summary. The article presents bronze situlae, some of which have iron
hoops with handles while others do not. The iron hoops were placed around the
necks of the situlae and their ends were riveted together, but they were not
attached in any way to the bronze bodies of the vessels. This type of bronze
vessel is considered to be an early Roman imports found in the Lower Danube
region and in the northern Black Sea littoral. A series of situlae with iron hoops
(or without any traces of suspension fixtures) was found in the assemblages of
the Poieneşti-Lucăşeuca culture. Similar situlae are also known from the areas
occupied by the Celts and by the Germans. In fact, these vessels were produced
in the areas with vivid Celtic traditions but also clear Roman influences, namely,
the new Roman provinces formed at the areas which had been occupied by the
Celts. The finds from Gallia Narbonensis seems to confirm this hypothesis. It is
generally accepted that they were utility vessels. In this author's opinion, thanks
to the Celtic Vocontii serving in the auxilia, the Gallic household vessels may
have arrived in the Pontic region as well as the Prut and Seret rivers' catchment
area.

The early Roman imports found in the Lower Danube region and
in the northern Black Sea littoral include bronze situlae 1, some of which
have iron hoops with handles while others do not. The iron hoops were
placed around the necks of the situlae and their ends were riveted

1
I would like to express my gratitude to Valeriu Sîrbu, whose advice on what to
publish where (and where not to publish!) has allowed me to avoid serious mistakes.
134 Tomasz Bochnak

together, but they were not attached in any way to the bronze bodies of
the vessels. I. Tentuic, V. Bubulici and A. Simalcsick considered these
iron elements as a distinctive feature and determined the situlae with
hoops as Variant Bădragii Noi and the vessels without hoops or any other
suspension fixtures, as Type Mana 2 (Tentuic, Bubulici, Simalcsik, 2016,
p. 47). In this author's opinion the vessels without any suspension fixtures
and those with iron hoops represent one type as the hoop was not attached
to the body and the rivets could have been driven out and taken off
without leaving any traces on the walls of the vessel. Obviously, the
vessels without the hoops were far less functional and they must have had
some fixtures which made them easy to carry.
These situlae in question were forged and as a result their walls
were very thin so suspension loops attached to the them could have been
easily pulled out. That is why metal hoops were used as they allowed to
distribute the pressure over a much larger surface. The use of this less
pretty solution instead of the loops riveted below the rim was thus due to
practical and technological reasons.
A series of situlae with iron hoops (or without any traces of
suspension fixtures) was found in the assemblages of the Poieneşti-
Lucăşeuca culture. Finds from single burials from Bădeni 3 in Romania
(Fig. 1:1), and from Sipoteni, (Fig. 1:2, 3) and Mana III in Moldova do
not have any suspension plates or holes marking the places where they
may have been fixed, even if one of the specimens from Sipoteni shows
traces of numerous repairs (Tentiuc, Bubulici, Simalcsik 2015, p. 230,
231; 2016, p. 41, 42, 45-50). One of the two situlae from Sipoteni was
used as an urn and the other one was most probably 4 part of the grave
goods in the same assemblage. The grave goods also comprised a silver
brooch of mid - La Tène construction, Type B after J. Kostrzewski, an
iron ring, a fragment of undetermined iron artefact and a fragment of a

2
I am deeply indebted to I. Tentiuc., V. Bubulici and A. Simalcsik for their
help.
3
For administrative details see the catalogue of finds at the end of the present
text.
4
M. A. Romanovskaâ said that the situlae from Sipoteni come from two
separate assemblages, but this view is not shared by the other researchers (Sergeev 1956,
passim; Lapušnân, Nikulicè, Romanovskaâ, 1974, p. 82-83, Fig. 34/3; Tentiuc, Bubulici,
Simalcsik 2016, passim). It should be noted that in the Poieneşti-Lucăşeuca culture a
burial with two bronze vessels was found in Răcătău, jud. Bacău (Romania) a single
burial with a bronze cauldron and a crater (Vulpe, Căpitanu 1971, passim).
 Between Rome and the Celts, Germans, and Sarmatians 135

clay vessel with a dark surface (Tentiuc, Bubulici, Simalcsik 2016,

passim). This may suggest a relatively early date of the assemblage from
Sipoteni. In his brief description of the situla from Bădeni, M. Babeş
clearly states that it was forged and has no traces of casting or turning
(Babeş 1993, p. 88). Another forged situla without traces of suspension
loops comes from Poieneşti, gr. 1094, however, the information about it is
very vague (Babeş 1993, p. 32, 87, 88).
Two finds from south-eastern Poland seem to be related to the
Poienesti-Lucaseuca culture. The situla from Grave 1 from Zubowice
(Fig. 2:2) which contained a very similar assemblage to that from Mana
III (especially the bowls are almost identical) has a hoop around the neck.
In Przemyśl-Kazanów the funerary context is not certain, but quite
probable (Fig. 2:1). The context in Zubowice includes materials from the
so-called Czerniczyn Group related to the Poieneşti-Lucăşeuca culture
and in Przemyśl, some coins Type Huşi-Vovrieşti, which also suggest
contacts with the Lower Danube catchment area (Bochnak, Opielowska-
Nowak 2017, 173-177). The two situlae as well as the coins probably
appeared in the Polish lands as a result of the exchange between the elites
of the Przeworsk culture and the Poieneşti-Lucăşeuca culture.
Interestingly, it seems that the contacts between these populations were
limited to the exchange of luxury products 5 and there are no finds
indicating any broader relations.

Another group of situlae comes from the assemblages called by M.

B. Ščukin odd complexes (strannye) (Ščukin 1994, 97, 98), namely a
group of 50 compact assemblages from the area between the eastern
Carpathians, the Dneper and the Don rivers, often dug into earlier barrows

5
It should be added that the situlae from Przemyśl-Kazanów and Zubowice are
not the only evidence of the contacts of the Poieneşti-Lucăşeuca culture with the
populations inhabiting the Vistula catchment area. Already T. Dąbrowska indicated the
similarity between the fragments of the bronze vessel from Tarnówko, Inowrocław
district, to the crater from a burial in Răcătău, jud. Bacău in Romania (Vulpe, Căpitanu
1971, passim; Dąbrowska 1988, 190). The said crater has a form popular in Macedonia
and Trace in the 4th and 3rd c. B.C. and as A. Maciałowicz supposes, was probably
stolen during a Bastarns' raid and then was deposited in the burial in Răcătău,
(Maciałowicz 2016, p. 137-140; Fig. 2) dated to the 1st c. According to A. Maciałowicz
the hydria known in literature as the vessel from Warszawa-Brzeziny could have reached
the Polish land in the same way (Andrzejowska, Andrzejowski 2016, passim;
Maciałowicz 2016, p. 139-140; Fig. 3).
136 Tomasz Bochnak

and dated between the 3rd and 1st century B.C. (Dedyulkin 2016, passim;
Glebov 2016, passim; Vdovčenkov 2016, passim). These unusual
assemblages include, i.a., bronze Italo-Celtic helmets (Type
Montefortino), metal vessels and parts of horse gear typical for the
nomadic peoples. According to E. Redina and A. Simonenko these
deposits are connected to the Sarmatian cult zone (Redina, Simonenko
2002, p. 86). V. Bârcă and V. Sîrbu took up a different position,
considering these assemblages as hoards, whereas Û. P. Zajcev called
them ritual or votive deposits (Bârcă 2006, p. 93; Sîrbu, Bârcă 2009, p.
259; Zajcev 2012, p. 67-72). The group of the situlae found in the odd
complexes includes also the finds from Bădragii Noi (Moldova) (Fig.
3:1), Mar’evka (Ukraine), and the settlement of Veselaya Dolina
(Ukraine) in which the situlae (Fig. 3:3) were found together with bronze
helmets (Simonenko, Marčenko, Limberis 2008, p. 18, 55, 56, Fig. 10:1,
2; Tabl. 5:1a; 6:2.2a; Mordvinceva, Redina 2013, passim). Another very
similar vessel, but without an iron hoop or any other suspension fixtures
comes from Novočerkassk 6 (Russia) (Bârcă 2006, p. 168, 169, 373; 400,
Fig. 4:4; 188:2; 140:4; Bârcă, Symonenko 2009, p. 81, Fig. 20:5). A.
Tentiuc, V. Bubulici and A. Simalcsik include in the list of the said finds
the artefact from the village of Chisten’koe, Crimea (Ukraine) (Tentiuc,
V. Bubulici, A. Simalcsik 2015, p. 231). Also the situla from a Sarmatian
burial from the village of Severnyj in Krasnodarskij Kraj (Russia) has
similar features (Fig. 3:2). The vessel has a fragmentarily preserved
suspension fixture, which differs to some extent from the iron hoops
discussed above 223; Fig. 3/III; Marčenko 1996, p. 38; Bârcă 2006, p.
168, 400; Simonenko, Marčenko, Limberis 2008, p. 278; 342; Tabl.
42).278; 342; Tabl. 42).
V. Bârcă and O. Symonenko assign the finds from Bădragii Noi 7,
Mar’evka and Veselaya Dolina to the Sarmatian culture (Bârcă 2006, p.

6
The find from the collection of the Museum of the Don Cossacks in
Novočerkassk B. Raev, A. Simonenko and M. Treister suppose that the situla was found
together with the Montefortino type helmet, also part of the collection of the Museum of
the Don Cossacks (Raev 1988, passim; Raev, Simonenko, Treister 1990, p. 131;
Simonenko 2011, p. 46).
7
In his paper from 2011, A. Simonenko connects the find with the
neighbouring site of Bădragii Vechi (Старые Бедражи) and considers the earlier
attribution as wrong, but does not explain the reasons of this error (Simonenko 2011, p.
46). M Babeş determines the finds from Bădragii Vechi (including the situla) as
materials from the Poieneşti-Lucăşeuca culture (Babeş 1993, p. 230). The Moldovan
 Between Rome and the Celts, Germans, and Sarmatians 137

168, 169, 373; 400; Bârcă, Symonenko 2009, p. 81, 82). V. E. Eremenko
dated these odd deposits generally to LT C2, i.e., to 200-120 B.C.
(Eremenko 1997, p. 177). V. Mordvinceva and E. Redina agreed with the
above, stating that the hoard from Veselaya Dolina should be dated to the
first half of the 2nd c. B.C. (Mordvinceva, Redina 2013, p. 398). Many
researchers date the odd complexes to the early 1st c. B.C. and connect
them with the support the Sarmatians accorded to Mithridates VI Eupator
in his campaign against Rome (Raev, Simonenko, Treister 1991, p. 469-
470; Tentiuc, Bubulici, Simalcsik 2015, p. 231; 2016, p. 51, 52, 64, 65).
A. Simonenko assumes that the assemblage from Mar’evka comes from
the second half of the 2nd c. B.C. or the first half of the 1st c. B.C.
whereas the finds from Veselaya Dolina should be dated to the first half
of the 1st c. B.C. (Bârcă, Symonenko 2009, p. 81, 82; V. Bârcă 2014, p.
355). Possibly, the group of the discussed situlae should be extended by
the find from a Zarubintsy culture burial ground in the village of Subotov
(Ukraine), Grave 1, discovered in 1909. The drawing of that situla is not
very exact, but the author of the source publication quotes as its closest
analogy the find from Mar'evka and dates the assemblage to the 1st c.
B.C. The bronze vessel covered with a bowl served as one of the two
burial urns found in the grave (Maksimov 1972, p. 57, 97; Fig. XXV:12).
A. V. Simonenko assigns the horizon of the earliest Roman imports from
the northern Black Sea littoral with the Mithridatic wars and the latter
researcher introduced the concept of the Mithridatic wave of imports
(Simonenko, Marčenko, Limberis 2008; Simonenko 2011, p. 158-160).
The relatively large scope of the area at which the discussed vessels have
been recorded may inspire a question whether in all these cases the
vessels came from western Europe in a relatively short time and thus in
connection with certain short-term historic events. It should be
remembered, however, that the assemblages in which the situlae were
found are assigned to the Sarmatian Siraces who, being nomadic, were
characterised with high mobility.

The situlae without suspension fixtures may derive from the

Roman craftsmanship and resemble other Roman vessels of that time,
representing Eggers Types 18-23 (Bolla, Boube, Guillaumet 1991, p. 12-

scholars noted A. V. Simonenko's remark in the publications issued after 2011, yet they
still consider the said situla as coming from the site in Bădragii Noi (Tentiuc, Bubulici,
Simalcsik, 2015; 2016, p. 66).
138 Tomasz Bochnak

18). For that reason they have been often described with the use of H. J.
Eggers' typology and automatically included in the corpus of the Roman
vessels. It should be noted here that typological assignments aim not only
at organising the data but they also determine the further research actions
and are translated into the current state of knowledge so the site at which
a vessel determined as Type E.20 is then placed at the maps presenting
the distribution of the vessels representing that type and the artefact is
linked to specific waves of influx of imports (cf. Spânu 2003). M. J.
Treister included the vessels with iron hoops to Type Bargfeld after H.
Willers, which is equivalent to Type 22 of the Roman imports by H. J.
Eggers (Willers 1901, p. 101; Fig. 111, 43; 1907, 22; Treister 1993, p.
976). B. A. Raev determined these finds as Type E.20-22 whereas V. E.
Eremenko, as Type E.20 (Raev 1994, p. 350; Eremenko 1997, p. 177). V.
Mordvinceva and E. Redina determined the artefact from Veselaya Dolina
as Type E.18-20 stressing that a more precise determination is impossible
due to the fact that the suspension system has not been preserved
(Mordvinceva, Redina, 2013, passim). A. V. Simonenko initially included
the situlae with iron hoops (and ones bearing no traces of the suspension
loops), found in the Black Sea littoral, in Type E.23, but in his next
publication he determined them as Type Bargfeld (Simonenko,
Marčenko, Limberis 2008, p. 18; Simonenko 2011, p. 46-48).
Interestingly, in Italia only two finds, one of them uncertain, of
such vessels were made. A situla with an iron hoop was discovered in
Grave 8 at a Celtic cemetery in Montefortino di Arcevia (Fig. 4:2) (Brizio
1899-1901, p. 670; Fig. IV:21). The burial assemblage included a mirror,
which, according to the present knowledge should be dated to the 2nd half
of the 3rd century B.C. at the earliest. 8 If this is true, this would be the
earliest known find of a situla without suspension loops. In a footnote to
their description of the said find from Montefortino, E. Brizio states that
Un vaso identico per la forma e per la particolarità del cerchio di ferro
che ne restringe il collo si rinvenne poscia nel 1897 in una tomba presso
Cagli (Brizio 1899-1901, p. 670). A. Vernarecci, describing an accidental
find of a burial near the town of Cagli, mentions a bronze 'hydria' with an
iron handle. The only premise for dating the burial from Cagli is that the
assemblage included a silver coin from the times of the consulate of Caius

8
I owe this information to the kindness of T. Lejars, Dr. Sc. (École normale
supérieure, Paris), a member of the research team directed by P. Piano-Agostinetti and
M. Landolfi, which is reviewing the materials from Montefortino di Arcevia.
 Between Rome and the Celts, Germans, and Sarmatians 139

Vibius Pansa Caetronianus, i.e., from 43 B.C. (Vernarecci 1897, passim).

This would be the youngest find of a vessel with an iron hoop from the
Roman world, but it is not certain if the vessel found in Cagli was similar
to the situla from Zubowice: it may have been, e.g., a repaired vessel.
To sum up, any situlae without attached suspension loops
resemble to some extent the Roman vessels, but they are rarely found in
Italia and the only certain find from the Apennine Peninsula comes from a
La Tène culture burial. Let us also note that the vessels in question have
certain features which are typical of the Celtic craftsmanship. They were
forged, 'drawn' from a semi-product resembling a flower pot in shape. As
a result of that, their walls are rather thin. The Roman vessels had thicker
walls as they were mostly cast and then slightly re-shaped on a wheel and
polished. Thin, forged walls were too flimsy to rivet suspension loops to
them, which could have torn the thin metal sheet. The handle was
suspended from an iron hoop circling the neck as a result of which the
weight was distributed evenly. Riveting and using iron and bronze
together are typically used in Celtic vessels, e.g., cauldrons with iron
hoops. These features indicate that the situlae without suspension loops
have no exact equivalents in the typology of H. J. Eggers. For that reason
J. Wielowiejski did not attempt at classifying the situla from Zubowice
according to H.J. Eggers typology. A similar attitude was taken by M.
Bolla, Ch. Boube, J. P. Guillaumet i V. Bârcă (Wielowiejski 1985, p. 157;
Bolla, Boube, Guillaumet 1991; Bârcă 2014, p. 354, 355). Let us note,
that A. V. Symonenko and V. Bârcă opted for rejecting the
determinations of the situlae with iron hoops as Types E. 18-20 or E.21
and preferred the descriptive approach suggested by J. Wielowiejski and
M. Boll, Ch. Boube and J.-P. Guillaumet (Bolla, Boube, Guillaumet 1991,
p. 12-18; Bârcă, Symonenko 2009, p. 81). This opinion has been shared
by S. Cociş (Bârcă, Cociş 2011, p. 175). In my view the technological and
typological features indicate that the situlae without suspension loops
were made in the workshops following the Celtic craftsmen's' traditions,
but their shapes clearly refer to the Roman vessels.
For that reason I believe that these vessels were produced in the
areas with vivid Celtic traditions but also clear Roman influences,
namely, the new Roman provinces formed at the areas which had been
occupied by the Celts (Fig. 5). The finds from Gallia Narbonensis seem to
confirm this hypothesis. Many researchers analysing the situlae in
question mention a large series of similar vessels from Toulouse (Fouet
140 Tomasz Bochnak

1958, p. 123; Fig. 5, 12:15; Labrousse, Vidal, Muller 1976, passim; Vidal
1991, p. 170-172, 178, 179, 186, Fig. 2, 5; 8:20, 22; 19:314, 315; 39:5, 6;
Bolla, Boube, Guillaumet 1991, p. 13; Tentiuc, Bubulici, Simalcsik, 2016,
p. 49). The most numerous series of vessels of this type were discovered
in the 'funerary wells' from Toulouse, Vieille-Toulouse and Toulouse
Estarac. The fillings of the 'funerary wells' comprised mainly pottery
(including amphorae), metal or wooden vessels, ornaments, weapons and
querns, dating from before the turn of the 2nd and 1st c. BC to the turn of
the eras (Vidal 1991, passim), and thus the time when Tolosa was one of
the main cities in Gallia Narbonensis, but when the Celtic traditions were
still alive there (107 B.C. saw the uprising of the Volcae Tectosages, put
down in the next year by Q. Servilius Caepio). M. Vidal believed these
features functioned as sepulchres, noting, however, that only 30% of the
'funerary wells' contained cremation remains (not specifying whether
these were burnt human bones), yet this interpretation has been
questioned and at present it is assumed that they had domestic functions,
perhaps partly used for cult purposes. The situlae found in the wells
would thus have been used to draw water (Vidal 1991, p. 169; Verdin et
al. 2004; Moret 2008, passim; 2008, p. 302-304). This interpretation is
confirmed by the observation made by G. Fouet who found that one of the
situlae from the site of Vieille Toulouse had a deformed bottom, probably
by the weight of the transported liquid (Fouet 1958, p. 123). Situlae with
iron hoops, differing in sizes (classified by M. Vidal as Type E.22) were
discovered in 'wells' no I, XI, XVI, and XXIII from Vieille-Toulouse and
'well' 9 from Toulouse Estarac (Fouet 1958, p. 123; Fig. 5, 12:15;
Labrousse, Vidal, Muller 1976, passim; Vidal 1991, p. 170-172, 178, 179,
186, Fig. 2, 5; 8:20, 22; 19:314, 315; 39:5, 6; Bolla, Boube, Guillaumet
1991, p. 13). In the 'wells' other bronze vessels similar in shape to the
discussed situlae but without the iron hoops were also found (Vidal 1991,
p. 172, 178, 179, 182; Fig.. 8:21; 19:316, 317; 24:294).
The excavations in Toulouse yielded altogether 14 situlae, which
makes about 30% of all the known finds of this vessel type. At present it
is generally accepted that they were utility vessels. It may be thus inferred
that they were commonly available products made in local workshops
cultivating the Celtic traditions and using the locally developed
technologies.
The further two specimens from Gallia Narbonensis were found in
Narbonne, dep. Aude, site Gendarmerie (Bolla, Boube, Guillaumet 1991,
 Between Rome and the Celts, Germans, and Sarmatians 141

p. 13; Sanchez 2009, p. 103, Fig. 69:1, 2). The list should be extended by
the finds from a well in the oppidum of Ermitage near Agen, dep. Lot-et-
Garonne (Verdin; Bardot 2007, p. 251, Fig. 14:H22) and from
Castelnaudary, dep. Aude, site Parc Logistique Nicolas Appert (Feugère
2017). Remains of a similar vessel with an iron hoop were found in
Verna, dep. Isère in a burial dated to 100-80 B.C. Importantly, the vessel
was one of the grave goods and not a burial urn (Perrin, Schönfelder
2003, p. 44-46). Significantly, all the finds from today's France come
from the former Gallia Narbonensis or its vicinity. The northernmost find
is the specimen fished out in Pouilly-sur-Saône 9 from the Saône river
(Fig. 4:1), which was one of the main routes connecting Gallia
Narbonensis with Gallia Comata (Bochnak, Opielowska-Nowak, in
print).
Besides the situlae from the Roman provinces, there were some
from the Iberian Peninsula, especially the vessel found in the Roman
camp in Numantia 10 dated to 153 B.C. and the specimen from Villanueva
de Córdoba in Spain where in a similar vessel a hoard of 130 denari was
hidden. The earliest coin is dated to 104 B.C. (Wielowiejski 1985, p. 157;
1991, p. 151). K. Raddatz dated this hoard to between 105 and 90/80 BC
(Raddatz 1969, p. 53). One more specimen may represent the discussed
group of situlae, namely, the find from Ayamonte in Spain, yet the poor
state of preservation of its upper part makes it impossible to state it with
certainty (Pozo 2004, p. 439; Fig. 4).
In conclusion, it seems that M. Bolla, C. Boube and J.-P.
Guillaumet were right considering the vessels as La Tène forms coming
from central Italia which then spread to southern Gaul and north-eastern
part of the Iberian Peninsula. By 'spreading' we should understand not
only the distribution of the products from central Italia but the popularity
of vessel type, which were most probably made in local workshops. The
claim that the vessels were produced in many workshops is supported by
the fact that the situlae have different shapes, sizes and proportions with
the basic technological principles being preserved. The situlae without

9 9
I would like to thank Mme Laurence Brebant (Vice-president for Tourism &
Culture, Communauté de communes Rives de Saône at Seurre, dép. Côte-d'Or, France)
for her help.
10
The administrative details about the sites with the situlae with iron hoops or
their parts are presented in the catalogue at the end of the article.
142 Tomasz Bochnak

suspension loops were thus produced in the Roman provinces but with the
use of the Celtic traditions.
The vessels also reached beyond the Roman limes, to the areas
occupied by the La Tène population. Such finds were registered in Siscia
(Sisak) and Sotin-Zmajevac, Grave I in Croatia (Fig. 4:3) (Hoffiller 1908,
p. 120; nr 34; Majnarić-Pandžić 1996, p. 26, 27; Ryc. 2:1). The artefact
from Sotin-Zmajevac comes from a double burial dated to the turn of the
eras where it was used as a burial urn. In the LT D1 burial from Mali
Bilač, a damaged part of a the hoop used for attaching the handle was
unearthed (Dizdar, Potrebica 2014, p. 365-367). Another situla was found
in an unknown place in Serbia while at the burial ground in Belgrade-
Karaburma stray remains of semi-circular rods and an iron handle were
found, which together make up a system of fastening the hoop on a vessel
(Todorović 1971, p. 163; Pl. 76:1). At the Late La Tène and Early Roman
cemetery at Pécs-Hőerőmű, Grave 8 (Hungary), an upper part of a bronze
vessel with an iron hoop and a handle was found, which makes this find
similar to the situlae in question. Grave 8 is dated to Phase LT D1 (Maráz
2008, 86, Fig 11:6). It is possible to notice a pivotal change of the
function of the said vessels: in the La Tène culture situlae with iron hoops
were used for burials and are found in rich graves, often together with
weapons, including swords. Most probably, the imported vessels,
originally meant for household use, in the new milieu were considered as
rich grave goods indicating high social status.
Iron hoops similar to those encircling the situlae are known from
the oppida (Wielowiejski 1985, p. 237; 1991, p. 151). They were
discovered in the fortified settlement of Amöneburg, Lkr. Marburg
Biedenkopf and in Manching, Lkr. Pfaffenhofen a.d. Ilm in Germany
(Jacobi 1974, p. 135, 297, Fig. 31; Tabl. 38:647, 648). A similar hoop is
also known from the famous site of Sanzeno, Italy (Nothdürfter 1979, p.
67, Tabl. 49:668). However, we cannot be entirely certain that in each
case they were parts of metal vessels. Let us recall that traces of iron
hoops or bands encircling the necks were found on some situla-like
pottery vessels in the La Tène culture (Poleska 2006, p. 75). These traces
are interpreted as traces of repair (Meduna 1980, p. 110, 111) or of a
suspension system (Kappel 1969, p. 48).
How to explain the presence of the situlae representing Celtic
traditions and coming from the Roman provinces in the Pontic region?
Are they traces of the presence of Celtic mercenaries in the Pontic region?
 Between Rome and the Celts, Germans, and Sarmatians 143

As it has been said above, some researchers connect the popularity of

situlae in the 'Sarmatian group' with the support given to Mithridates VI
Eupator by the nomadic tribes from the Black Sea steppes. However, they
were not the only allies of the king of Pontus. It should be noted here that
according to Appian of Alexandria the strongest allies of Mithridates
were the Bastarni (Appian, Mithridatic wars, 15, 69), today commonly
identified with the Poieneşti-Lucăşeuca culture population (Babeş 1993,
p. 168-180). This alliance is also confirmed by Plutarch (Plutarch,
Moralia, De fortuna Romanorum, 324c.). Also, Marcus Junianus Justinus
Frontinus (Justin), basing on the record of Pompeius Trogus, a historian
from the Celtic tribe of the Vocontii, says that at the outset of the wars
with Rome, Mithridates sought military support and sent envoys to the
Cymbrians, Galogrecians, Sarmatians, and Bastarni (Justin, Philippic
History and Origins of the Entire World and All of its Lands, XXXVIII:3)
(McGing 1986, p. 61; Ñaco del Hoyo, Arrayás-Morales 2016, p. 17). If
we accept the claim that the situlae with iron hoops appeared in the Black
Sea littoral in connection with the Mithridatic wars then we can do the
same to explain the presence of these vessels at the Poieneşti-Lucăşeuca
culture sites. The vessels captured during the Mithridatic wars were taken
by the Bastarni to the basin of the Prut and Seret rivers where, like in
other cultures of the central European Barbaricum, they were used as urns
in the cremation burial rites. Were thus the bronze situlae part of the
military equipment the Roman troops brought by them to the Pontic
region and then captured by Mithridates' allies?
There may be some other explanations. The influx of the situlae
without suspension loops may have been owed to the Scordisci, who
invaded Macedonia and Greece during the Mithridatic wars (Appian,
Illyrian wars, 5) (Sampson 2013, p. 87). It is also known that during the
third Mithridatic war with Rome, the king of Pontus was supported by
Quintus Sertorius, a military leader and politician who tried to create in
Spain a state independent from Rome. In the context of this rather exotic
alliance M. B. Ščukin remarked that it may have fostered the influx of
materials from the Iberian Peninsula to the northern Black Sea littoral
(Ščukin 1989, p. 239; 1994, p. 143). M. B. Ščukin's ideas were supported
by A. V. Simonenko who noted that Montefortino helmets from southern
Ukraine have no precise equivalents in the helmet typologies by H. R.
Robinson and F. Coarelli, and the closest analogies described by J.
Garcia-Mauriño Múzquiz and F. Quesada Sanz, dated to the 3rd - 1st c.
144 Tomasz Bochnak

B.C. are found on the Iberian Peninsula (Robinson 1975, p. 13; Coarelli
1976, passim; García-Mauriño Múzquiz 1993, p. 123, 124, Fig. 35;
Quesada Sanz 1997, passim; Simonenko 2009, p. 145).
The influx of the Celtic elements to the northern Black Sea littoral
has been a subject of many discussions. The helmets from Ukraine were
initially considered as a sign of the presence of Celtic mercenaris (Raev,
Simonenko, Treister 1990; Treister 1993, p. 791-798), however, it has
been recently noted that such military protective gear was rather used by
the Roman soldiers whereas the LaTene warriors preferred iron artefacts
(Paddock 1993, p. 469-471; Simonenko 2011, p. 9-18; Kazakevich 2012,
p. 187, 188). It should be noted that not every researcher agrees with this
opinion. V. Mordvinceva and E. Redina consider the helmet Type
Montefortino from the hoard from Veselaya Dolina is a Celtic import
(Mordvinceva . Redina 2013, p. 397, 398; Mac Gonagle 2015, p. 55, Fig.
9). Also the finds of cheek guards from a sacrificial site of Gurzufskoe
Sedlo in Crimea are considered as Celtic. M. V. Novičenkova connects
them with the finds from Gallia and points at the close analogies from
Switzerland: from Giubiasco, canton Ticiono and the area of Port, Nidau,
and the Thielle / Zihl river, canton Bern (Novičenkova 2013, passim). In
this author's opinion also in this case it may be possible that the cheek
guards were originally part of Roman military gear. Let us remember that
the situale with iron hoops were found in Numantia and Villanueva de
Córdoba in Spain (and perhaps also the find from Ayamonte, former
Ostiuim Fluminis Anae) so it may be possible that the metal vessels
arrived along the same route as the helmets. M. B. Ščukin allowed for the
possibility that some of the presumed Spanish imports may have come
from the 2nd or even 3rd c. B.C. (Ščukin 1989, p. 239; 1994, 143;
Simonenko 2011, p. 18, 19, 239). Let us note here that the finds from the
Iberian Peninsula need not necessarily have been produced locally but
may have come there from Gallia.

Let us return to the question posed in the title of this paper. Can
the bronze situlae be testimonials of the Mithridatic wars with Rome? In
this author's opinion some very important information can be found in the
Epitoma historiarum philippicarum Trogi Pompei by Justin. This is, as
Justin writes, a collection of the most interesting and important facts from
the work of a Roman historian, Gneius Pompeius Trogus, active in the
Augustan times, Historiae Philippicae Epitome. Chapter XLIII presents a
 Between Rome and the Celts, Germans, and Sarmatians 145

key piece of information: : In postremo libro Trogus : maiores suos a

Vocontiis originem ducere; proauum suum Trogum Pompeium Sertoriano
bello ciuitatem a Cn. Pompeio percepisse, patruum Mithridatico bello
turmas equitum sub eodem Pompeio duxisse; […]. (Justin, Epitoma,
XLIII, 5: 11, 12). 11
This fragment of a sentence is the only written piece of
information mentioning the Vocontian auxilia from the times of the
Republic. We learn that auxiliary forces from Gallia Narbonensis
supported the army of Pompey the Great against both Sertorius and
Mithridates VI Eupator. Let us add that the Vocontii mentioned by Justin
inhabited the eastern part of Gallia Narbonensis. As L. Pernet noted, no
archaeological find confirms the existence of a Vocontian auxilia from
the times of the Republic, yet it is known that in the times of the Empire
there existed two Alae Vocontiorum. It is also known that already in the
Republican times also the Volcae and Tectosages living in the vicinity of
Toulouse served in the auxilia and it is this unit that some of the helmets
from the well in Vieille Toulouse and Toulouse-Estarac are associated
with (Pernet 2010, p. 142, 220, 222; Pl. 82A; 89:1, 2; 90). In this author's
opinion, thanks to the Celtic Vocontii (and perhaps also Volcae, although
there are no written sources confirming their participation in the wars
with Sertorius and Mithridates) serving in the auxilia, the Gallic
household vessels may have arrived both in Spain and in the Pontic
region as well as the Prut and Seret rivers' catchment area. This may be
one more example of the material sources reflecting the events, which can
be obtained thanks to the methods from the borderland between
archaeology and history.

Situlae without suspension loops. Catalogue.

1. Agen, dép. Lot-et-Garonne, France;
2. Amöneburg, Lkr. Marburg Biedenkopf, Germany;
3. Ayamonte, prov. Huelva, Spain;
4. Bădeni, jud. Iași, Romania;

11
At the end of this book Trogus relates that his ancestors had their origin from
the Vocontii; that his grandfather, Trogus Pompeius, received the right of citizenship
from Cnaeus Pompeius in the war against Sertorius; that his uncle led a troop of cavalry
under the same Pompeius in the war with Mithridates […] (trad. J.S.Watson,
http://www.attalus.org/translate/justin7.html#43.1.org/translate/justin7.html#43.1,
12.05.2019).
146 Tomasz Bochnak

5. Bădragii Noi/Bădragii Vechi, rai. Edineţ, Moldova;

6. Belgrade-Karaburma, okr. loco, Serbia;
7. Cagli (les environs), prov. Pesaro e Urbino, Italy;
8. Castelnaudary, dép. Aude, France;
9. Chisten’koe, Autonomous Republic of Crimea, Ukraine;
10. Mali Bilač, žup. požeško-slavonska, Croatia;
11. Mana III, rai. Orhei, Moldova;
12. Manching, Lkr. Pfaffenhofen a.d. Ilm, Germany;
13. Mar’evka, obv. mikolayovksyi, Ukraine;
14. Montefortino di Arcevia, prov. Ancona, Italy;
15. Narbonne, dép. Aude, France;
16. Narbonne, dép. Aude, France;
17. Novočerkassk, obv. rostovskyi, Russia;
18. Numancia (vicinity), prov. Soria, Spain;
19. Pécs-Hőerőmű, kom. Baranya, Hungary;
20. Poieneşti, jud. Vaslui, Romania;
21. Pouilly-sur-Saône (from the Saône river), dép. Côte d’Or, France;
22. Przemyśl-Kazanów, pow. przemyski, Poland;
23. Sanzeno, prov. Trento, Italy;
24. Severnyj, Krasnodarskij Kraj, Russia;
25. Sipoteni, rai. Călăraşi, Moldova;
26. Sipoteni, rai. Călăraşi, Moldova;
27. Sisak (Siscia), žup. sisačko-moslavačka, Croatia;
28. Subotov, obv. čerkasskyi, Ukraine;
29. Sotin-Zmajevac, žup. vukovarsko-srijemska, Croatia;
30. Toulouse, site Estarac, well 9; dép. Haute Garonne, France;
31. Toulouse, site Estarac, well 9; dép. Haute Garonne, France;
32. Toulouse, site Vieille Toulouse, well I, dép. Haute Garonne, France;
33. Toulouse, site Vieille Toulouse, well XVI, dép. Haute Garonne, France;
34. Toulouse, site Vieille Toulouse, well XVI, dép. Haute Garonne, France;
35. Toulouse, site Vieille Toulouse, well XVI, dép. Haute Garonne, France;
36. Toulouse, site Vieille Toulouse, well XVI, dép. Haute Garonne, France;
37. Toulouse, site Vieille Toulouse, well XXIII, dép. Haute Garonne, France;
38. Toulouse, site Vieille Toulouse, well XXIII, dép. Haute Garonne, France;
39. Toulouse, site Vieille Toulouse, well XXIII, dép. Haute Garonne, France;
40. Toulouse, site Vieille Toulouse, well XXIII, dép. Haute Garonne, France;
41. Toulouse, site Vieille Toulouse, well XXIII, dép. Haute Garonne, France;
42. Toulouse, site Vieille Toulouse, well XXIII, dép. Haute Garonne, France;
 Between Rome and the Celts, Germans, and Sarmatians 147

43. Toulouse, site Vieille Toulouse, well XXIII, dép. Haute Garonne, France;
44. Verna, dép. Isère, France;
45. Veselaja Dolina, obv. odeskyi, Ukraine;
46. Villanueva de Córdoba, prov. Córdoba, Spain;
47. Zubowice, pow. zamojski, Poland;
48. Serbia, localisation unknown.

Tomasz Bochnak
Instytut Archeologii Uniwersytetu Rzeszowskiego
tbochnak@univ.rzeszow.pl

Bibliography

Andrzejowska, M., Andrzejowski, J. 2016. Feliksa Łopieńskiego

przygoda z archeologią, p. 27-35, 112-118. In: Brązy
warszawskie: dzieła, twórcy, kolekcjonerzy i badacze (Eds. M.
Bryl, A. Badach), Stowarzyszenie Historyków Sztuki, Warszawa.
Babeş, M. 1993. Die Poieneşti-Lukaševka-Kultur. Ein Beitrag zur
Kulturgeschichte im Raum östlich der Karpaten in den letzten
Jahrhunderten vor Christi Geburt, (= Saarbrücker Beiträge zur
Altertumskunde, 30). Rudolf Habelt, Bonn.
Bârcă, V. 2006. Istorie şi civilizaţie. Sarmaţii în spaţiul est-carpatic (sec.
I A. Chr. – începutul sec. II P. Chr.) / History and civilisation. The
Sarmatians in the East Carpathians Region (1st century BC –
beginning of the 2nd century AD), Argonaut, Cluj-Napoca.
Bârcă, V. 2014. A. V. Simonenko, Rimskij import u sarmatov Severnogo
Prichernomor’ya [Roman Import for the Sarmatians of North
Pontic Region], St. Petersburg State University, Faculty of
Philology ‒ Nestor-Historia, St. Petersburg, 2011, 271 p., 117 fig.,
Dacia, N.S. LVIII, p. 349-358.
Bârcă, V., Cociş, S. 2011. Aleksandr Simonenko, Ivan I. Marčenko,
Natali’ja Ju. Limberis, Römische Importe in sarmatischen und
maiotischen Gräbern zwischen Unterer Donau und Kuban,
(Archäologie in Eurasien 25), Verlag Philipp von Zabern Mainz,
2008, 629 p., 57 fig., 14 maps, 390 pl., ISBN 978-3-8053-3954-4,
Ephemeris Napocensis 21, p. 171-205.
148 Tomasz Bochnak

Bârcă, V., Symonenko, O. 2009. Călăreţii stepelor. Sarmaţii în spaţiul

nord-pontic / (Horsemen of the steppes. The Sarmatians in the
North Pontic region), (=The Centre of Roman Military Studies 3),
Editura Mega, Cluj-Napoca.
Bochnak, T., Opielowska-Nowak, Z. 2017. Zubowice, pow. zamojski,
stan. 1 – brązowa situla z grobu kultury przeworskiej
świadectwem kontaktów wzdłuż tzw. „szlaku bastarneńskiego”?,
Materiały i Sprawozdania Rzeszowskiego Ośrodka
Archeologicznego, 38, p. 155-184.
Bochnak, T., Opielowska-Nowak, Z. in print. « Designed in Italy.
Assembled in Gaul » – À propos de la situle en bronze provenant
de la Saône à Pouilly-sur-Saône et de ses analogies
paneuropéennes, In: Itinéraires d'hommes, trajectoires d'objets.
Mélanges offerts à Daniele Vitali (Eds. A. Esposito, N.
Delferriere, A. Fochesato, Editions Universitaires de Dijon, Dijon.
Bolla, M., Boube, C., Guillaumet, J.-P. 1991. Les situles, p. 7-21. In: La
vaisselle tardo-républicaine en bronze (Eds. M. Feugère, C.
Rolley) Actes de la table-ronde CNRS organisée à Lattes du 26 au
28 avril 1990 par l’UPR 290 (Lattes) et le GDR 125 (Dijon),
Dijon.
Brizio, E. 1899-1901. Il sepolcreto gallico di Montefortino presso
Arcevia, Monumenti Antichi dei Lincei, 9, p. 617-792.
Coarelli, F. 1976. Un elmo con iscrizione latina arcaica dal Museo di
Cremona, p. 157-179. In: L'Italie préromaine et la Rome
républicaine, Mélanges J. Heurgon, (= Collection de l'École
française de Rome, 27), Roma.
Dąbrowska, T. 1988. Wczesne fazy kultury przeworskiej. Chronologia-
zasięg-powiązania, Państwowe Wydawnictwo Naukowe,
Warszawa.
Dedyulkin, A. V. 2016. Šlemy attičeskogo tipa s kozyrʹkom i votivnye
klady III-I vv. do n.è, Stratum plus, 3/2016, (= Tretij do…
poterânnoe stoletie), p. 163-196.
Dizdar, M., Potrebica, H. 2014. Late La Tène warrior grave from Mali
Bilač (Požega Valley, Croatia), p. 355-376. In: Studia
Praehistorica in Honorem Janez Dular (Ed. S. Tecco Hvala), (=
Opera Instituti Archaeologici Sloveniae, 30).
 Between Rome and the Celts, Germans, and Sarmatians 149

Eggers, H. J. 1951. Der römische Import im freien Germanien. (= Atlas

der Urgeschichte, 1), Hamburgisches Museum für Völkerkunde
und Vorgeschichte, Hamburg.
Eremenko, V. E. 1997. “Kel’tskaja vual’” i zarubineckaja kul’tura. Opyt
rekonstrukcii etnopolitičeskih processov III-I vv. do n. e. v
Central’noj i Vostočnoj Evrope, Izdatelʹstvo Sankt-
Peterburgskogo Universiteta, Sankt-Peterburg.
Feugère, M. 2017. Situle à col cerclé, type Eggers 20-22 (Artefacts : SIT-
3012) (http://artefacts.mom.fr/result.php?id=SIT-3012),
29.05.2017.
Fouet, G. 1958. Puits funéraires d'Aquitaine : Vieille-Toulouse, Montmaurin,
Gallia, 16, p. 115-196.
Gajewski, L. Gurba, J. 1981. Civilisation de Przeworsk dans la région
de Lublin, Inventaria Archaeologica, Pologne, fasc. 45, Pl. 274.
García-Mauriño Múzquiz, J. 1993. Los cascos de tipo Montefortino en
la Península Ibérica. Aportación al estudio del armamento de la IIª
Edad del Hierro, Complutum,4, p. 95-146.
Glebov, V. P. 2016. O variantah obrâda zahoroneniâ «ritualʹnyh kladov»
III-I vv. do n. è, Stratum plus, 3/2016, (= Tretij do… poterânnoe
stoletie), p. 145-161.
Hoffiller, V. 1908. Antike Gronzefäße aus Sissek, Jahreshefte des
Österreichischen Archäologischen Institutes in Wien, 11, Beiblatt,
p. 117-134.
Jacobi, G. 1974. Werkzeug und Gerät aus dem Oppidum von Manching,
(= Ausgrabungen in Manching, 5). Franz Steiner Verlag,
Wiesbaden.
Kappel, I. 1969. Die Grafittonkeramik von Manching. (= Die
Ausgrabungen in Manching, 2), Franz Steiner Verlag, Wiesbaden.
Kazakevich, G. 2012. Celtic Military Equipment from the Territory of
Ukraine: Towards a New Warrior Identity in the Pre-Roman
Eastern Europe, p. 177-212. In: Transforming Traditions: Studies
in Archaeology, Comparative Linguistic and Narrative (Eds. M.
Fomin, V. Blažek, P. Stalmaszczyk), (= Studia Celto-Slavica, 6),
Łódź.
Labrousse, M., Vidal, M., Muller, A. 1976. Le puits funéraire XVI de
Vieille-Toulouse, p. 63-95. In: Actes du 96e Congrès National des
Sociétés Savantes, Toulouse 1971, Archéologie, I, Paris.
150 Tomasz Bochnak

Lapušnân, V. L. , Nikulicè, I. T., Romanovskaâ, M. A. 1974.

Pamâtniki rannegoželeznogo veka. Arheologičeskaâ karta
Moldavskoj SSR, 4. Štiinca, Kišinev.
Mac Gonagle, B. 2015, Celto-Scythians and celticization in Ukraine and
the North Pontic region, MAIASK. Arheologiâ, istoriâ,
numizmatika, sfragistika i èpigrafika, 7, p. 50-58.
Maciałowicz, A., Rudnicki, M., Strobin, A. 2016. "With gold and
sword...", p. 136-140. In: The Past Societies. Polish lands from the
first evidence of human presence to the early Middle Ages, vol. 4:
500 BC - 500 AD, (Ed. A. Rzeszotarska-Nowakiewicz). Instytut
Archeologii i Etnologii PAN, Warszawa.
Maksimov, E. K. 1972. Srednee Podneprovʹe na rubeže našej èry.
Naukova Dumka, Kiev.
Majnarić-Pandžić, N. 1996. Cornacum (Sotin) and Cibalae (Vinkovci)
as Examples of the Early Romanization of La Tène Communities
in Southern Pannonia, p. 23-33. In: Kontakte längs der
Bernsteinstrasse (zwischen Caput Adriae und den Ostseegebiet) in
der Zeit um Christi Geburt, (Ed. Z. Woźniak), Oficyna Cracovia,
Kraków.
Maráz, B. 2008. Archäologische Angaben zur mittleren und späten La-
Tène-Zeit in Südostdanubien, Communicationes Archæologicæ
Hungaricæ, 2008, p. 65-93.
McGing, B. C. 1986. The Foreign Policy of Mithridates VI Eupator,
King of Pontus. E. J. Brill, Leiden.
Meduna, J. 1980. Die latènezeitlichen Siedlungen in Mähren,
Československá akademie věd, Praha.
Mordvinceva, V., Redina, E. 2013. Der Depotfund von Veselaja Dolina,
p. 394-401. In: Die Krim. Goldene Insel im Schwarzen Meer.
Griechen – Skythen – Goten. Begleitbuch zur Ausstellung. LVR-
LandesMuseum Bonn: 4. Juli 2013 – 19. Januar 2014. LVR-
LandesMuseum Bonn.
Moret, P. 2008. Tolosa, 106-47 av. J.-C.: topographie et histoire, Pallas,
76, p. 295-329.
Nothdurfter, J. 1975. Die Eisenfunde von Sanzeno im Nonsberg, (=
Römisch-Germanische Forschungen 38), P. v. Zabern, Mainz a. R.
Novičenkova, M. V. 2013. K nahodkam dvuh naŝečnikov šlemov iz
svâtiliŝa u perevala Gurzufskoe Sedlo, p. 311-313. In: Šestaâ
 Between Rome and the Celts, Germans, and Sarmatians 151

Meždunarodnaâ kubanskaâ arheologičeskaâ konferenciâ:

Materialy konferencii, Krasnodar.
Ñaco del Hoyo, T., Arrayás-Morales, I. 2016. Rome, Pontus, Thrace
and the Military Disintegration of the World Beyond the
Hellenistic East, p. 3-19. In: Rome and the Worlds beyond Its
Frontiers, (Eds. D. Slootjes, M. Peachin), Brill, Leyden.
Paddock, J. 1993. The Bronze Italian Helmet: the Development of the
Cassis from the Last Quarter of the Sixth Century BC to the Third
Quarter of the First Century AD, t. 2, Doctoral thesis, University
of London, London. (https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/
1348999/2/338165_vol2.pdf,) 22.11.2019.
Pernet, L. 2010. Armement et auxiliaires gaulois : (2. et 1. siècles avant
notre ère). (= Protohistoire européenne, 12), Monique Mergoil,
Montagnac.
Perrin, F., Schönfelder, M. (Eds.). 2003. La tombe à char de Verna
(Isère) : témoignage de l’aristocratie celtique en territoire
allobroge. Alpara, Lyon.
Poleska, P. 2006. Celtycki mikroregion osadniczy w rejonie
podkrakowskim, (= Biblioteka Muzeum Archeologicznego w
Krakowie, 2), Muzeum Archeologiczne, Kraków.
Pozo, S. F. 2004. Bronces romanos de Aratispi (Villanueva de Cauche-
Antequera, Málaga). Notas sobre la vajilla y el mobiliario
doméstico Romano, Mainake, 26, p. 431-455.
Quesada Sanz, F. 1997. Montefortino-type and related helmets in the
Iberian Peninsula : a study in archaeological context, Journal of
Roman Military Equipment Studies, 8, p. 151-166.
Raddatz, K. 1969. Die Schatzfunde der iberischen Halbinsel vom Ende
des dritten bis Mitte des ersten Jahrhunderts vor Chr. Geb.. De
Gruyter, Berlin.
Raev, B. A. 1988. Bronzovyj šlem iz kolekcii Novočerkasskogo muzeja,
Kratkie Soobščenija Instituta Arheologii, 194, p. 36-39.
Raev, B. A. 1993. Bronzovaâ posuda èpohi pozdnego latena v Sarmatii,
Antičnyj mir i arheologiâ, 9, p. 160-175.
Raev, B. A. 1994. Bronze Vessels of the late La-Tène-Period from
Sarmatia, p. 347-353. In: Akten der 10. Internationalen Tagung
über antike Bronzen. Freiburg, 18.–22. Juli 1988. (= Forschungen
und Berichte zur For- und Frühgeschihte in Baden-Würtemberg,
45), Stuttgart.
152 Tomasz Bochnak

Raev, B. A., Simonenko, A. V., Treister, M. Y. 1991. Etrusco-Italic and

Celtic Helmets in Eastern Europe, Jahrbuch des Römisch-
Germanischen Zentralmuseums Mainz, 38, p. 465-496.
Redina, E. F., Simonenko, A. V. 2002. “Klad” konca II-I v. do n.è. iz
Veseloj Doliny v krugu analogičnyh drevnostej Vostočnoj Evropy,
Materialy i issledovaniâ po arheologii Kubani, 2, p. 78-96.
Robinson, H. R. 1975. The Armour of Imperial Rome. Arms & Armour
Press, London.
Sampson, G. C. 2013. The Collapse of Rome: Marius, Sulla and the First
Civil War (91-70 BC), Pen & Sword Military, Barnsley.
Sanchez C. 2006. Narbonne à l’époque tardo-républicaine (IIe-Ier s. av.
n. é.), chronologies, commerce et artisanat céramique, (=
Supplément à la Revue Archéologique de Narbonnaise, 38),
Éditions de l’Association de la Revue archéologique de
Narbonnaise, Montpellier.
Ščukin, М. B. 1989. Fibuly tipa Aleziâ iz Srednego Podneprovʹâ i
nekotorye problemy rimsko-varvarskih kontaktov na rubež,
Sovetskaâ arheologiâ, 3/1989, p. 61-70.
Ščukin, М. B. 1994. Na rubeže èr. Opyt istoriko-arheologičeskoj
rekonstrukcii političeskih sobytij III v. do n. è. – Ì v. n. è. v
Vostočnoj i Centralʹnoj Evrope, (= Rossijskaâ arheologičeskaâ
biblioteka, 2), Farn, Sankt Petersburg,
Sergeev, G. P. 1956. Nahodka mednyh sosudov w Moldavii, Izvestiâ
Moldavskogo Filiala AN SSSR, 4 (31), p. 135-141.
Simonenko, A. V. 2011. Rimskij import u Sarmatov severnogo
Pričernomor’â, Filologičeskij Fakulʹtet Sankt-Peterburgskogo
Gosudarstvennogo Universiteta, Sankt Peterburg.
Simonenko A., Marčenko I. I., Limberis N. Ju. 2008. Römische
Importe in sarmatischen und maiotischen Gräbern, (=
Archäologie in Eurasien, 25), P. v. Zabern, Mainz.
Sîrbu, V., Bârcă V. 2009. Figurative Representations on the Phalerae
Found between the Ural, the Caucausus and the Balkan Mountains
(2nd - 1st Century BC), p. 225-256. In: Circumpontica in
Prehistory: Western Eurasian Studies (Eds. L. Nikolova, M.
Merlini, A. Comşa), British Archaeological Reports, International
Series 10144, Oxford.
 Between Rome and the Celts, Germans, and Sarmatians 153

Skripkin, A. S. 1984. Dva pogrebenija rannego železnogo veka iz

Prikuban'ja, p. 218-224. In: Drevnosti Evrazii v skifo-sarmatskoe
vremea, Nauka, Moskva.
Spânu, D. 2003. Un posibil inventar funerar Latène târziu din zona
Porţilor de Fier, „European Archaeology online“,
http://www.archaeology.ro/dsh_portile.htm (1.6.2017).
Tentiuc, I., Bubulici, V., Simalcsik, A. 2015. A cremation burial of a
horseman near the village of Mana (the Orhei district), Tyragetia.
Arheologie Istorie Antică, Serie Nouă, 9 (24), nr 1, p. 221-248.
Tentiuc, I., Bubulici, V., Simalcsik, A. 2016. Despre mormântul de
incineraţie în situlă de bronz de la Sipoteni (sec. II-I a. Chr.),
Tyragetia. Arheologie Istorie Antică, Serie Nouă, 10 (25), nr 1, p.
39-74.
Todorović, J. 1972. Praistorijska Karaburma I, Nekropola mlađeg
gvozdenog doba. (= Musej Grada Beograda Monografija, 3),
Musej Grada Beograda, Beograd.
Treister, M. J. 1993. The Celts in the north Pontic area : a reassessment,
Antiquity, 67, p. 789-804.
Verdin, F., Bardot, X. 2007. Les puits de l’oppidum de l’Ermitage
(Agen, Lot-et-Garonne), p. 237-257. In: Les âges du Fer dans le
Sud-Ouest de la France. (Eds. M. Vaginay, L. Izac-Lambert).
XXVIIIe colloque de l’AFEAF Toulouse, 20-23 mai 2004 (=
Aquitania, Supplément, 14/1), Bordeaux.
Verdin, F. et al. = Verdin, F., Vidal, M, coll. Arramond, J.-C., Requi,
C. 2004. Pourquoi, pour qui ces puits?, p. 57-59. In: Gaulois des
pays de Garonne IIe-Ier siècle avant J.-C., Musée Saint-Raymond,
Toulouse.
Vernarecci, A. 1897. Regione VI (Umbria), Notizie degli scavi di
antichità communicate alla R. Accademia dei Lincei per ordine di
S. E. Ministro della pubb. Istruzione, Anno 1897, p. 7.
Vidal, M. 1991. La vaisselle tardo-républicaine en bronze en Gaule du
sud-ouest. Étude chronologique et jonction dans les contextes
clos, p. 169-192. In: La vaisselle tardo-républicaine en bronze
(Eds. M. Feugère, C. Rolley) Actes de la table-ronde CNRS
organisée à Lattes du 26 au 28 avril 1990 par l’UPR 290 (Lattes)
et le GDR 125 (Dijon), Dijon.
Vdovčenkov, E. V. 2016. Kočevničeskie žertvenno-pominalʹnye
kompleksy («strannye kompleksy») III—I vv. do n. è.: socialʹnaâ
154 Tomasz Bochnak

interpretaciâ âvleniâ, Stratum plus, 3/2016, (= Tretij do…

poterânnoe stoletie), p. 197-215.
Vulpe, A., Căpitanu, V. 1971. Une tombe isolée de l’époque de Latene à
Răcătău, Apulum, 9, p. 155-164.
Wielowiejski, J. 1985. Die spätkeltischen und römischen Bronzegefasse
in Polen, Bericht der Römisch- Germanischen Kommission, 66, p.
123-340.
Willers, H. 1901. Die römischen Bronzeeimer von Hemmoor, Hahnsche
Buchhandlung, Hannover-Leipzig.
Willers, H. 1907. Neue Untersuchungen über die Bronzeindustrie von
Capua und von Niedergermanien, Hahnsche Buchhandlung,
Hannover–Lepizig.
Zajcev Û. P. 2012. Severnoe Pričernomorʹe v III-II vv. do n.è.: ritualʹnye
klady i arheologičeskie kulʹtury (postanov (postanovka problemy),
p. 67-72. In: Drevnosti Severnogo Pričernomorʹâ III-II vv. do n.è.,
(Ed. N. P. Telʹnov). Pridnestrovskij Posudarstvennyj Univ. im. T.
G. Ševčenko, Tiraspolʹ.

Translated by S. Twardo
 Between Rome and the Celts, Germans, and Sarmatians 155

Fig. 1. Situlae from Poieneşti-Lucăşeuca culture. 1 – Bădeni; 2, 3 – Sipoteni. (according

to Tentiuc, Bubulici, Simalcsik 2015)
156 Tomasz Bochnak

Fig. 2. Situlae from Przeworsk culture. 1 – Przemyśl-Kazanów (according to Bochnak,

Opielowska in print); 2 – Zubowice, gr. 1 (according to Gajewski, Gurba 1981)
 Between Rome and the Celts, Germans, and Sarmatians 157

Fig. 3. Situlae from Sarmatian zone. 1 – Bădragii Noi (according to Tentiuc, Bubulici,
Simalcsik 2015); 2- Severnyj; 3 - Veselaya Dolina (2, 3 according to Simonenko 2011)
158 Tomasz Bochnak

Fig 4. Situlae from La Tène culture. 1 – Saône at Pouilly-sur-Saône (according to

Bochnak, Opielowska in print), 2 - Montefortino di Arcevia, gr. 8 (according to Brizio
1899–1901); 3 – Sotin-Zmajevac (according to Majnarić-Pandžić 1996)
 Between Rome and the Celts, Germans, and Sarmatians 159

Fig. 5. Situlae without suspension loops spread across the Europe.

 one situla without iron hoops;
 two situlae without iron hoops;
 one situla with iron hoops;
 two situlae with iron hoops;
 one situla with iron hoops (identification uncertain);
 iron hoops only.
The numbers on the map correspond to the numbers in the catalog catalogue (according
to Bochnak, Opielowska 2017, supplemented)