The Dacian Stones Speak (1975, 2000)

Paul Lachlan MacKendrick (1914-1998) was a classical scholar from the US. He was professor of Classics and History at the University of Wisconsin for more than thirty years (1952-1984) and wrote several books about the history of the ancient world:

** The Mute Stones Speak: The Story of Archaeology in Italy (1960, second edition 1984) 

** The Greek Stones Speak: The Story of Archaeology in Greek Lands (1962, second edition 1984) 

** The Iberian Stones Speak: Archaeology in Spain and Portugal (1969)

** Romans on the Rhine: Archaeology in Germany (1970)

** Roman France (1972)

** The Dacian Stones Speak (hardcover 1975, paperback 2000) 

** The North African Stones Speak (hardcover 1980, paperback 2000)

Dacia is the Roman name for a territory in Eastern Europe which corresponds roughly, but not exactly, to the modern state Romania. The Dacian Stones Speak (which is under review here) is a book about the ancient history of Romania. It has 248 pages and covers Dacia and the region of the Black Sea coast, which is known as Dobruja. The main text is divided into eight chapters. Here is the table of contents:

1. Romania in Prehistory

2. Greek Colonies on the Black Sea

3. The Dacian Heartland

4. The Roman Conquest: A Column and a Trophy

5. Dacia under Roman Rule: AD 106-271

6. Dobruja: 125 BC-AD 275

7. Dacia and Moesia during the Late Empire

8. Religion, Arts, and Crafts

As you can see, chapters 1-7 follow a chronological line from prehistory to the late empire, while chapter 8 covers three different topics which are closely related.

At the end of the book we find a chronology, a bibliography and an index. The chronology covers Romanian history from 3000 BC to AD 704. The bibliography is divided into eight sections, one for each chapter, which is very user-friendly.

What about illustrations? The text is illustrated by 161 maps, drawings and photos in black-and-white. Thirteen of them are photos taken by the author himself during his visit to Romania. The illustrations are placed where we need them, i.e. next to the relevant text, which is very reader-friendly. The illustrations are helpful. They raise the overall quality of the book. It is good to see the author and the publisher pay so much attention to the visual aspect of the book.

This book was written and published during the Cold War (1945-1990) when Romania was located in the eastern bloc, although its government did not always follow the Soviet line. Communication between eastern and western scholars was limited because of the Iron Curtain. The Romanian language was another barrier. Most books and articles about ancient Romania were written by Romanian scholars and published in Romanian. Few people outside Romania could read them.

MacKendrick was a pioneer in his field. He knew many languages. Because he was a classical scholar he could read Latin and Greek. But he also knew several modern languages: Italian, German, French, Spanish, Portuguese, and Romanian.

He used his knowledge of German when he wrote The Romans on the Rhine. He used his knowledge of Spanish and Portuguese when he wrote The Iberian Stones Speak. He used his knowledge of French and Italian when he wrote Roman France and The North African Stones Speak. And he used his knowledge of Romanian when he wrote The Dacian Stones Speak.

While working on this book, MacKendrick crossed two barriers: (1) He crossed the ideological barrier and travelled to Romania to see some of the ancient sites for himself and to meet Romanian scholars of ancient history face to face. (2) He crossed the linguistic barrier and learned the Romanian language, which enabled him to read archaeological excavation reports about ancient sites he did not have time to visit in person.

The bibliography begins with a note which says: 

“Research in Romanian archaeology requires a reading knowledge of Romanian, which, fortunately, can be acquired in six weeks by anyone conversant with Latin or another Romance language.”

A look at the numerous titles listed here, reveals that the majority are written in Romanian. There are very few items in English. This is because almost nothing was available back then. As stated above, MacKendrick was a pioneer. For many years The Dacian Stones Speak was the only book in English about the ancient history of Romania. Only recently have things begun to change:

** Dacia: The Making of a Provincial Society edited by W. S. Hanson & I. P. Haynes was published by the Journal of Roman Archaeology (special supplement # 56) in 2004 (190 pages)

** Dacia: Landscape, Colonization and Romanization by Iona A. Oltean was published in 2007 (264 pages)

** Dacia: Land of Transylvania: Cornerstone of Ancient Eastern Europe by Ion Grumeza was published in 2009 (288 pages).

In his preface, MacKendrick says:

“I count it a privilege to have learned Romanian and to have enjoyed the hospitality of my Romanian hosts…”

Then he names eight Romanian scholars and concludes:

“Thanks to these friends, the most satisfying reward of my work has been the discovery that in the world of classical archaeology there is no Iron Curtain.”

Among the eight Romanian scholars named in the preface, I wish to single out one: Adrian Radulescu (1932-2000), who was Director of the Museum of History and Archaeology in Constanta for more than thirty years (1968-2000).

MacKendrick says Radulescu “opened to me the resources of the Museum of Archaeology in Constanta, and enabled me to visit Trajan’s Trophy at Adamclisi.”

The bibliography for chapter 4 includes a book about Trajan’s monument at Adamclisi written by Radulescu. It was published in Romanian in 1972.

According to the illustration credits on page xix, Constanta’s Museum of History and Archaeology supplied eight illustrations to MacKendrick’s book.

Later in his life Radulescu wrote a book about the Roman poet Ovid, who was exiled to Tomis (which is the ancient name of Constanta), and this book was translated into English. Sadly, neither Radulescu nor MacKendrick lived long enough to hold it in their hands. Ovid in Exile was published in 2002, two years after Radulescu died and four years after MacKendrick died. But I am happy to discover – long after the fact – that Paul MacKendrick from the US was able to meet and work with Adrian Radulescu and other Romanian scholars, in spite of the ideological barrier that separated east and west during the Cold War.

Ovid is mentioned four times in The Dacian Stones Speak – the most extensive passage is found in the beginning of chapter 6 (pp. 146-147). The picture of the modern statue of Ovid that appears on page 147 is one of the illustrations supplied by Constanta’s Museum of Archaeology. I am sure MacKendrick would have enjoyed Radulescu’s book about Ovid.

The Dacian Stones Speak was a milestone in the world of ancient scholarship. Many ancient sites are presented here, some of them in great detail. Chapter 4 provides a careful analysis of Trajan’s Column in Rome as well as Trajan’s Trophy at Adamclisi in Romania. 

[A full-scale reconstruction of this monument was completed in 1977, two years after the publication of this book.] 

Throughout the book important archaeological evidence is presented and discussed, often supported by illustrations. This is the strong side of the book. But not everything in this book is great. There are some flaws as well:

(1) The structure of the book. The author has two objectives. He wants to present the ancient history of Romania, which calls for a chronological approach. He also wants to present some of the sites where traces of the ancient culture can still be seen, which calls for a geographical approach. The two methods do not go well together.

Unfortunately, MacKendrick chose a chronological approach for most of the book, chapters 1-7, even though his main source (the ancient stones) seems to call for a geographical approach. This is a fatal flaw of this book and of the other books in the series.

The conflict between the two methods means that there are several cross-references within the book. He mentions something, but then he has to stop himself and say that he will cover this in a later chapter, because it does not fit the chronology. Examples:

** Page 114 – “… Oriental gods (to be discussed in chapter 8)…”

** Page 116 – “its later phases will be described in chapter 7.” 

** Page 116 – “Such evidence as there is … will be described in chapter 8.”

** Page 117 – “a fascinating citadel which we shall be discussing in chapter 7.” 

** Page 126 – “The tablets are described in the last chapter.”

** Page 132 – “Details on … are reserved for the final chapter.”

** Page 150 – “This evidence will be discussed in the next chapter.”

** Page 159 – “other pieces will be illustrated and described in greater detail in the last chapter.”

The ancient cities in Dobruja on Romania’s Black Sea coast are described in chapter 2: Histria, Tomis, Callatis (today Istria, Constanta, and Mangalia). But these locations also pop up again in chapter 6 and 7. Why? In chapter 2 they are colonies founded by the Greeks; in chapter 6 and 7 they are part of the Roman Empire.

Therefore, in the beginning of chapter 6, the author has to provide a cross-reference to chapter 2 in order to remind the reader what he said a while back: “When we last looked at Histria, Tomis, and Callatis, the Greek coastal cities of Dobruja, the time was the late second century BC…” Now, in chapter 6, they are part of the Roman Empire.

If you ask me, everything the author has to say about an ancient city should be said in one place; it should not be split up in two or three parts.

There is one remarkable case where MacKendrick decides to abandon the chronological approach: on page 132, in chapter 5, he explains that the Romans stationed detachments in strongholds all over the three subdivisions of Dacia, and then he says: “These can best be discussed geographically, under ten heads.”

In this case, as you can see, he admits that my criticism of the chronological approach is justified!

(2) Ancient inscriptions are mentioned several times, but MacKendrick gives only one or two facts about them before moving on to something else. In these cases I feel the book does not live up to its title. If there is a case when a mute stone speaks, it must be when an inscription is written on it. I think the reader deserves to know everything the inscription can tell us. Not only the date of a monument or the name of a soldier. Here are some examples:

** A diploma from Gherla, a bronze certificate of honorable discharge is mentioned on page 137. A photo of the diploma appears on the next page; illustration 5.17.

** The treaty between Rome and Callatis, perhaps from 72-71 BC, is mentioned on page 145. A photo and a line drawing of the treaty appears on the preceding page; illustration 6.1.

** An inscription about Emperor Aurelian from Tropaeum Traiani is mentioned on page 161. According to MacKendrick, it is written “in bad Latin, with misspellings and mistakes in gender.” But he does not elaborate and there is no illustration.

** An inscription about Emperor Constantine, also from Tropaeum Traiani, is mentioned on page 172. MacKendrick gives only a summary of the text and there is no illustration.

** A Christian ornament from Biertan is mentioned on page 192. A photo of the ornament appears on the next page; illustration 8.7. MacKendrick provides the name of the man who made it (or had it made). But he does not give the Latin words, even though the inscription is not very long: only three short lines.

** Wax tablets from the gold mines of Alburnus Maior (today Rosia Montana) are mentioned on page 206. Photos of two tablets appear on the next page; illustrations 8.23a and 8.23b. MacKendrick provides a summary of the text, but he does not give the Latin text.

** The tombstone of a Dacian gladiator, whose name is Skirtos, is mentioned on page 208. A photo of the tombstone appears on the next page; illustration 8.26. MacKendrick provides a summary of the text, but he does not give the original text, which appears to be in Greek.

In each case I would like to have the original text in full (whether Latin or Greek) and a translation in English. Please do not get me wrong: I am happy to see this evidence presented in the book. But I think the presentation is too superficial. I believe MacKendrick could have done much more with this evidence than he did. A missed opportunity.

Regarding the Rome-Callatis treaty, I can refer to Legitimacy and Law in the Roman World by Elizabeth Meyer (2004), page 48

Regarding the Christian ornament from Biertan, I can tell you that it was discovered in 1775 and that the Latin text reads as follows:

EGO ZENO-

VIUS VOT-

UM POSUI

In English: 

“I, Zenovius, made this offering.”

Regarding the wax tablets from Alburnus Maior (today Rosia Montana), I can refer to an MA thesis by Heather Ann Pundt, which is available online: “Mining Culture in Roman Dacia: Empire, Community, and Identity at the Gold Mines of Alburnus Maior, ca. 107-270 CE” (Portland State University, 2012).

(3) On page 90 MacKendrick writes: 

“Recently a young American scholar discovered in the Cavala museum, in northern Greece, the tombstone of the soldier who brought Decebalus’s head to Trajan.”

This passage is surprisingly short and anonymous. What is the name of the American scholar and what is the name of the Roman soldier? Why are the names not given? The name of the Roman soldier is Tiberius Claudius Maximus. His memorial was discovered in Philippi in northern Greece. The inscription is available online. The official reference is AE, 1985 # 721.

(4) It is not always clear if the description of an ancient site is based on the author’s personal observations or an excavation report written by someone else. He never reveals how many sites he visited during his stay in Romania. When a photo taken by him is used, we know he was there. Counting his photos, we can see that he was in Zlatna (page 46), Costesi (page 55), Adamclisi (page 94), Buciumi (page 136), Histria (page 185), and Constanta (page 193). Obviously, he may have visited other sites where he did not use his camera.

One case is quite clear: on pp. 165-167 he describes a citadel in Sucidava, today Celei. This account is not based on a written report. He is there with some Romanian archaeologists. They discover an ancient spring in an ancient tunnel: 

“the spring still holds water. The excavation foreman finds it potable; it made me, an unwitting martyr to archaeology, deathly ill.”

This piece of personal information is the exception. In all other cases the presentation is neutral and he does not talk about himself.

Why did the Romans come to Dacia? Why did Trajan decide to invade this territory? On this matter MacKendrick is clear. The motive was economic. The Romans came for the gold – this is stated on page 71 and repeated on page 206.

There is a chapter about Dacia in Terry Jones’ Barbarians by Terry Jones and Alan Ereira (2006, 2007). On page 114 they say the Romans came for the gold. They are right, but they are not the first ones to point out this fact.

Jones and Ereira like to claim that modern scholars ignore the economic aspect of the Dacian operation. We can point to MacKendrick’s book published in 1975 and state that this claim is completely unfounded. By the way, The Dacian Stones Speak is not listed in the bibliography of Jones & Ereira.

The inhabitants of ancient Romania were – as MacKendrick puts it - “victims and beneficiaries of Rome’s last-acquired and first-abandoned province” (page 3).

What, if any, were the long term consequences of the Roman invasion and colonization of Dacia and Dobruja?

At the end of chapter 7, on page 186, he gives this answer: 

“One of the lasting legacies of the long Roman presence in Dobruja is the Latin elegance of the Romanian language.”

At the end of chapter 8, on page 211, he elaborates a bit and says: 

“It is no small tribute to the staying power of the Roman Empire that when the Dacian stones speak, their language is Greek and Latin.”

MacKendrick’s book about ancient Romania was published more than thirty years ago. Obviously, it is not up-to-date on every aspect. But as you can see, my criticism does not concern the age of the book. I only point out flaws which the author could (and should) have corrected before handing his manuscript to the publisher.

The Dacian Stones Speak was - and still is - a monumental work. But as I have documented in this review, there are some flaws as well, and therefore I cannot give it more than four stars.

***

Paul MacKendrick,

The Dacian Stones Speak,

The University of North Carolina Press,

Hardcover 1975, paperback 2000, 248 pages

***

This picture of Paul MacKendrick is borrowed from his book
The Iberian Stones Speak
(1969)

* * *