Decoding symbols: the apsidal building in the Alun-Piatra Roșie Dacian fortress

Abstract

This article examines the apsidal building at Piatra Roșie, focusing on the decorated iron discs found within its context, which form the basis for a reinterpretation of the structure's functionality. The analysis proposes that these discs, adorned with zoomorphic and vegetal motifs, likely served as an indication of identity and authority, representing clans, tribes or alliances. This interpretation supports the hypothesis that the building functioned as a gathering place for chieftains, where decisions were made and alliances reinforced under the leadership of a high-status figure, possibly the king. This perspective redefines the role of the Piatra Roșie site, traditionally regarded as an isolated defensive fortress, by suggesting its function as a potential royal centre that predates the establishment of Sarmizegetusa Regia.

Full text

63
Annales d’Université Valahia Targoviste,
Section d’Archéologie et d’Histoire, Tome XXVI, 2024, p.63-92 ISSN: 1584-1855; ISSN (online): 2285–3669
Decoding symbols: the apsidal building in the Alun-Piatra Roșie
Dacian fortress
Aurora Pețan*
*West University of Timișoara, Romania, e-mail: aurora.petan@e-uvt.ro
Abstract: This article examines the apsidal building at Piatra Roșie, focusing on the decorated iron
discs found within its context, which form the basis for a reinterpretation of the structure’s functionality.
The analysis proposes that these discs, adorned with zoomorphic and vegetal motifs, likely served as
an indication of identity and authority, representing clans, tribes or alliances. This interpretation
supports the hypothesis that the building functioned as a gathering place for chieftains, where decisions
were made and alliances reinforced under the leadership of a high-status figure, possibly the king. This
perspective redefines the role of the Piatra Roșie site, traditionally regarded as an isolated defensive
fortress, by suggesting its function as a potential royal centre that predates the establishment of
Sarmizegetusa Regia.
Keywords: Dacian architecture, apsidal buildings, heraldic insignia, Piatra Roșie, political and
ceremonial spaces
Introduction
Despite its significant historical importance, the Dacian fortress at Alun-Piatra Roșie
(Hunedoara County) is one of the least studied and understood sites from the Dacian period.
Archaeological research has been sporadic, with a major excavation conducted in the summer
of 1949, shorter investigations in 2004 and a recent resumption of work starting in 2021. A
monograph published in 1954 is the primary source of information about the site; however,
recent technological advances, particularly the use of LiDAR, have provided new insights into
how the Dacians modified the landscape by creating impressive terraces and levelling the
hilltop (A. Pețan, 2021; A. Pețan, A. Hegyi, 2023).
The site on Piatra Roșie Hill (fig. 1) features several important architectural elements.
On the plateau, there is an ashlar enclosure that includes five interior towers – four of which
are positioned at the corners (though one is no longer standing) and a fifth located on the eastern

64
Decoding symbols: the apsidal building in the Alun-Piatra Roșie Dacian fortress
curtain wall. This enclosure protects a large wooden building with two rooms and an apsidal
porch. A secondary enclosure, constructed of wood and local stone, extends down the eastern
slope. This enclosure surrounds a series of artificially created terraces arranged in a stepped
configuration along the hillside. Four residential towers are distributed across the site, two of
which are located at the lower corners of the second enclosure. On the plateau, outside the
stone enclosure, stood a temple with wooden columns and two multi-room buildings. Below
the plateau, on a lower terrace, was an apsidal building. A stone staircase leads from the
entrance of the lower enclosure to the plateau, from where a paved path leads directly to the
apsidal building. The terraces within the secondary enclosure, which may contain more yet
undiscovered constructions, remain unexplored.
Fig. 1 – Piatra Roșie hill (Photo A. Pețan)
The traditional interpretation of the Piatra Roșie site views it as a fortress, a defensive
point intended to protect the access to the Dacian kingdom's capital, Sarmizegetusa Regia, as
part of a broader defensive system that included other fortifications. Most researchers interpret
the building protected by the fortification on the plateau as a barrack, while the structures

65
Aurora Pețan
outside the fortification are considered simple deposits. It is believed that there were no
significant settlements around the fortress, only isolated households. This view was challenged
by K. Lockyear (2004), who argued that such fortresses were more likely to have been noble
residences rather than military structures. G. Florea (2011) partially endorsed this hypothesis
but continued to emphasise the defensive role of the fortress, suggesting that during peacetime,
it served as a residence for a warrior noble.
Recent topographic measurements, however, have shown that the walls of the
fortification on the plateau were primarily retaining walls (A. Pețan, 2019), and LiDAR data
has revealed the existence of extensive settlements surrounding the fortress, organised on
hundreds of artificial terraces (A. Pețan, A. Hegyi, 2023; A. Pețan, 2023) (fig. 2). This new
evidence suggests that Piatra Roșie was the centre of a large territory.
Fig. 2 – Piatra Roșie hill. LiDAR-derived digital terrain model
The presence of luxury items and expensive imports at this site suggests that its
inhabitants held a high social status. Moreover, the variety of household objects found indicates
that the residents were engaged in a typical civilian lifestyle.

66
Decoding symbols: the apsidal building in the Alun-Piatra Roșie Dacian fortress
C. Daicoviciu (1954) proposed three developmental phases of the site, though these
suggestions lack definitive archaeological evidence. The first phase, attributed to the reign of
Burebista, involved the construction of a plateau fortification, the buildings within the
fortification, four residential towers, and a columned temple. The second phase occurred
between the reigns of Burebista and Decebalus and included the addition of three remaining
wooden structures. The third phase, which took place during the reign of Decebalus, is believed
to have responded to the Roman threat, characterised by the hurried construction of a second
enclosure. According to Daicoviciu, the fortress fell in AD 106 when the Romans conquered
the Dacian Kingdom. However, the archaeological material published by C. Daicoviciu
indicates that the site flourished during the first half of the 1st century BC, followed by a decline
after this period. Most imported artefacts discovered at Piatra Roșie date to the 1st century BC,
including bronze lamps, bronze vessels, mosaic glass (millefiori) etc. M. Babeș (1975) showed
that the latest artefact is a spoon-shaped brooch, suggesting that the fortress ceased functioning
in the early 1st century AD. Coin finds further reinforce the 1st-century BC prosperity, with
discoveries including Istros bronze coins, a Thassos imitation, and three Republican denarii,
the most recent of which was issued in 87 BC. Importantly, no imperial denarii or other coins
from the 1st century AD have been found. K. Strobel (1998) proposed a significant revision of
the chronology, suggesting that Piatra Roșie was inhabited as early as the 2nd century BC,
initially serving as a religious complex. According to him, the military constructions appeared
only in the 1st century AD, prompted by defensive needs.
The complex apsidal building at Alun-Piatra Roșie
The most interesting structure at Piatra Roșie is the apsidal building below the plateau
(fig. 3-4). It was partially uncovered in 1949, with excavations resuming only in 2021 and
2022. No further work was conducted afterwards. The building, constructed of wood and clay
on stone foundations, consists of two chambers: one rectangular and one horseshoe-shaped,
measuring 7.50 x 7.80 m and 7.80 x 3.20 m, respectively. The archaeological inventory was
scant, including only a few ceramic sherds, nails, and an interesting iron piece, leading
researchers to conclude that the structure could not have been a simple dwelling but served a
special function (G. Florea, I. V. Ferencz, 1997). The axis of the apsidal plan is oriented NNW-
SSE, a typical alignment for this type of Dacian building in the region, marking the sunrise on

67
Aurora Pețan
Fig. 3 – Location of the apsidal building. LiDAR-derived DTM
Fig. 4 – Plan and reconstruction of the apsidal building at Piatra Roșie, based on
archaeological data from 1949 (acc. to D. Antonescu, 1984)

68
Decoding symbols: the apsidal building in the Alun-Piatra Roșie Dacian fortress
the winter solstice. Recent interpretations readily classify the building as a cult structure (G.
Florea, C. Cristescu, 2016). C. Daicoviciu (1954) suggested that the building was constructed
after the decommissioning of the temple on the plateau and was destroyed in a massive fire,
likely in AD 106, during the Roman wars.
Excavations conducted between 2021 and 2022 uncovered a previously unknown
circular chamber with an interior diameter of 20.4 meters surrounding the apsidal chamber (fig.
5). The latter was positioned off-centre, with the apse 1.8-2 m from the outer circle and the
southern side about 6.5 m away (R. Mateescu et al., 2022; 2023). This recent discovery places
the building in the well-known category of constructions with a complex circular plan, which
are frequently found around the capital of the Dacian Kingdom.
Fig. 5 – The apsidal building in 2021(acc. to R. Mateescu et al., 2022)
A key feature of the building is its location on a lower terrace, situated below the level
of the fortress plateau. This positioning raises questions about the hierarchical relationship
between the circular building and the structures on the plateau, particularly in terms of their
functionality and significance within the fortress complex.

69
Aurora Pețan
The decorated iron discs
During the 1949 archaeological excavations, several iron fragments were discovered in
the northwest part of the apsidal chamber, close to the building’s foundation (fig. 6). Initially,
these fragments were interpreted by C. Daicoviciu (1954) as originating from an oval disc
decorated with embossed zoomorphic and vegetal motifs, believed to be either a parade shield
or a religious artefact (fig. 7f). The piece was crafted using the repoussé technique and features
a central medallion depicting an aurochs walking to the left. Subsequent studies demonstrated
that the fragments belonged to at least two distinct pieces, if not more (G. Florea, L. Suciu,
1995; R. Comes et al., 2022).
Fig. 6 – Plan of the apsidal building based on archaeological data from 2021 and the location
of the fragments found in 1949 (acc. to R. Comes et al., 2022)
In 2003, new fragments were discovered in a pit that treasure hunters had dug near an
apsidal building (G. Florea, I. V. Ferencz, 2007). Investigations by the prosecutor revealed that
the looters had found a cache containing seven pieces stacked one on top of another. In 2011,
archaeologists and judicial experts re-examined the pit and uncovered additional fragments,
which have not yet been published. This pit, located approximately 12 meters northwest of the

70
Decoding symbols: the apsidal building in the Alun-Piatra Roșie Dacian fortress
Fig. 7 – Iron disks from Piatra Roșie: a, b. Under Interpol pursuit (acc. to C. Purdea, 2024); c,
d Recovered in 2011 (Photo A. Pețan); e. Donated to MNIT (acc to. C. Purdea, 2024); f.
Discovered in 1949 (acc. to C. Neamțu et al., 2016)

71
Aurora Pețan
apsidal building, was lined with slabs to conceal and protect the items inside (A. Pețan, V.
Sîrbu, 2020). Some of the stolen items were well preserved, confirming that they were circular
rather than oval, as previously thought. The Romanian state recovered two discs in 2011 (G.
Trohani, 2011-2012; M. Sechelariu et al., 2015; C. Purdea, 2024) (fig. 7 c-d). A dealer donated
fragments of another disc to the National Museum of Transylvanian History in Cluj-Napoca
(C. Purdea, 2024) (fig. 7 e). Two looted disks are still under Interpol pursuit (R. Comes et al.,
2021; C. Purdea, 2024) (fig. 7 a-b). New fragments discovered in 2021-2022 remain
unpublished.
The discs were crafted from iron sheets measuring approximately 42 cm in diameter
and 1 to 1.8 mm in thickness, utilising the au repoussé technique (fig. 8). They each weigh
about 1.5 kg. The decorations on the discs are crafted in relief, with a maximum height of 5
cm.
Fig. 8 – Crafting aspects of the iron discs (Photo A. Pețan)

72
Decoding symbols: the apsidal building in the Alun-Piatra Roșie Dacian fortress
The pieces were locally produced and regarded as unique Dacian art masterpieces (G.
Florea, C. Cristescu, 2016). Besides their remarkable artistic quality, they represent some of
the highest achievements in ironworking technology in ancient Europe. These discs are
embossed, requiring many hours of labour – heating and reheating the thick metal plate to red
heat, shaping it in the negative with bronze punches, and employing free forging techniques.
They are the creations of artisans who skilfully blended artistic talent with exceptional technical
expertise (E. O. Târnoveanu, 2022) (fig. 9). The metallographic analyses performed on the two
pieces recovered from the black market showed that the edge of the discs was covered with a
tin film (silver appearance), and the central area was covered with brass (golden appearance)
(B. Constantinescu, 2011). The uniformity in crafting technique indicates that all pieces were
created by the same artisan or workshop, likely based at Piatra Roșie. This points to a
centralised production process, presumably under the authority of the local leader.
No.
Year of
discovery
Context of discovery
Central medallion
Status
1.
1949
Archaeological
excavations
Aurochs walking to the left
+ snake
Partially preserved
2.
1949
Archaeological
excavations
Feline
Fragments
3.
2003/2011
Looted; recovered
Aurochs walking to the right
Complete
4.
2003/2011
Looted; recovered
Griffin
Complete
5.
2003
Looted; under
Interpol pursuit
Aurochs walking to the left
Complete
6.
2003
Looted; under
Interpol pursuit
Deer walking to the left
Complete
7.
2003
Field research
Aurochs
Fragments
8.
2006
Looted; donated to a
museum
Lion + aurochs head + two
waterfowls
Partially preserved
9.
2011
Field expertise
Unpublished
Fragments
10.
2015
Looted; recovered
Unpublished
Fragments
11.
2021-2022
Archaeological
excavations
Unpublished
Fragments
Tab. 1 – Inventory of iron discs known so far

73
Aurora Pețan
Each disc was set on a support (probably on the wall of the building) through 12
ornamental studs. The way some discs were deformed suggests they were hastily snatched off
the wall and hidden in the pit close to the building. In front of the danger, the building was
emptied, and the valuable cult pieces were hidden underground (V. Sîrbu, 2006; V. Sîrbu, A.
Pețan, 2020). A few pieces were left inside (the ones discovered in 1949); therefore, they were
not preserved as well as those hidden in the pit since the building was set on fire.
Fig. 9 – Close-up details of the disks recovered in 2011 (Photo A. Pețan)

74
Decoding symbols: the apsidal building in the Alun-Piatra Roșie Dacian fortress
All these discs share a characteristic design: a central medallion depicting real or
mythical animals, surrounded by concentric registers with vegetal decorations. In some cases,
the central medallion features multiple animals. The piece discovered in 1949 depicts an
aurochs in profile, walking to the left, with a snake above it (V. Sîrbu, G. Florea, 1997). The
two recovered discs feature a griffin and an aurochs walking to the right. Other pieces, currently
only known from photographs and still under Interpol pursuit, show a deer and another aurochs.
The fragments found in 2003 also suggest an aurochs. So far, eight pieces have been identified,
although the actual number is likely much higher.
It's important to note that no two discs are identical. The aurochs is the most frequently
depicted: at least five of the eight known pieces feature this animal. Four of them have aurochs
represented in the central medallion in various forms: one paired with a serpent, one walking
to the left, another walking to the right and another fragmentary. The fifth representation of the
aurochs is on the disc housed in Cluj-Napoca, which features a lion in the central medallion,
flanked on the right by an aurochs’ head with two water birds below.
The aurochs (Bos primigenius) was a formidable animal, renowned for its large size
and long, robust horns. It played a significant role in the wildlife of the region corresponding
to present-day Romania until its extinction in the Middle Ages. The last recorded specimens of
aurochs in Europe were seen in the 17th century, in the forests of Poland. In European
mythologies and cultures, the aurochs were often associated with power, courage, and fertility.
Its physical strength and impressive appearance made it a symbol of authority and leadership.
During the medieval period, the aurochs became a heraldic symbol in Moldova, where it
appears on the coat of arms. The aurochs is interpreted as a symbol of power, divine protection,
and the connection between the ruler and the people.
The depiction of a lion on one of the discs is significant, though not surprising. While
lions are not native to the local fauna, they hold an important place in Dacian iconography. A
notable example is a silver statuette of a lioness discovered near the Dacian fortress of Costești-
Blidaru, in an area with temples. This artefact appears to be an import, influenced by Eastern
Hellenistic artistic traditions. Other representations of lions are found on painted ceramics from
Sarmizegetusa Regia (1st century AD). A few centuries earlier, in the Thracian art of the 4th-
3rd centuries BC, the lion symbolised the heroic aristocratic ideal, embodying qualities such
as courage, strength, and royal legitimacy. Known as the "king of beasts," the lion represented

75
Aurora Pețan
the ultimate adversary for rulers, serving as a powerful symbol of bravery and the ultimate test
of personal virtue. In mythology and heroic traditions, hunting or combating a lion was
considered the pinnacle of trials before royal consecration, a symbolic act that legitimised a
leader's claim to power (V. Sîrbu, G. Florea, 1997).
The griffin motif is known in Dacian art through several pieces: the gilded silver phalera
from Surcea (fig. 10), dated to the second half of the 1st century BC, a bronze pendant from
Ocnița, dated to the 1st century BC-1st AD, and several representations on painted pottery from
Sarmizegetusa Regia. On the pendant from Ocnița, two griffins face each other, with a
bucranium between them, an interesting combination recalling the aurochs from Piatra Roșie.
The mythology surrounding griffins revolves around solar, Apollonian symbolism and their
role as guardians of treasures and secrets. Their depiction in flight with spread wings and poised
for attack suggests ideas of strength and aggression (V. Sîrbu, G. Florea, 1997). The
representation on the Piatra Roșie disc is the most elaborate. The griffin is depicted in a
dynamic, flying position, with spread wings and a stylized body, suggesting movement and
strength. Its head is well-defined, combining the features of a feline (probably a lion) with those
of a bird of prey.
Fig. 10 – a. Phalera with griffin form Surcea (* 2022); b. Disk with griffin (detail) from Piatra
Roșie (photo A. Pețan)
Waterfowl, including swans, wild ducks, and geese, are prominent in Dacian
iconography (fig. 11). Their depictions are found in many Dacian sites, in various forms such
as bronze handles (Costești-Cetățuie), iron protomas adorning metal vessels (Sarmizegetusa

76
Decoding symbols: the apsidal building in the Alun-Piatra Roșie Dacian fortress
Regia and Costeşti), spikes featuring stylized waterfowl protomes (Augustin), pendants
(Piatra Craivii), buckles decorated with waterfowl protomas (Piatra Craivii, Costești-Cetățuie),
limestone caps carved with bird heads (Sarmizegetusa Regia), clay statuettes (Cârlomănești)
and others. Numerous curved sica-type daggers feature decorations of birds facing one another.
A detailed analysis by C. Borangic and V. Sîrbu (2023) reveals that waterfowl could be also
identified among these symbols. Their significance is believed to be linked to an unidentified
celestial or solar deity. These birds are closely associated with solar symbolism and the cyclical
renewal of the seasons, demonstrating a thematic continuity that extends from the early Iron
Age to the Dacian Kingdom period.
G. Florea examined the depiction of the snake on the disk from Piatra Roșie, observing
that stylistically, it closely resembles the snakes on silver falerae from Lupu (1st century BC).
The snake is a frequently depicted animal on Dacian artefacts, with the most notable pieces
being the multi-spiral gold and silver bracelets featuring snake heads. The snake is also
Fig. 11 – Waterfowl representations in Dacian art. a Bronze handle from Costești-Cetățuie
(acc. to C. Neamțu et al., 2016); b Iron protomas from Costești-Cetățuie (acc. to C. Neamțu et
al., 2016); c Limestone hemisphere form Sarmizegetusa Regia (photo A. Pețan); d Clay
statuettes from Cârlomănești (acc. to M. Babeș, 1977)

77
Aurora Pețan
represented in fantastic or composite forms, the most famous of which is the combination of a
wolf's head with a snake's body, present in the Dacian flag. The symbolism of the snake is
complex, representing both protection and malevolence. It is commonly linked to darkness and
the underworld, often serving an apotropaic purpose (V. Sîrbu, G. Florea, 1997).
The presence of the lion and griffin, exotic and fantastical symbols, suggests not only
external influences but also a deliberate intention to convey prestige and authority. Elites across
ancient cultures often adopted exotic symbols to demonstrate their ties to distant realms or to
project power, prestige and uniqueness.
Most researchers agree today that they cannot be shields, but most probably cult objects,
panels or icons, decorating the walls of the apsidal building, making up a sort of frieze or
involved in ritual activities (offerings or images associated with worship) (G. Florea, I. V.
Ferencz, 2007; G. Florea, C. Cristescu, 2016; C. Borangic, A. Bădescu, 2017). However, E. O.
Târnoveanu (2022) believes that they are parade or symbolic shields, with no practical use. An
isolated (and unsupported) hypothesis is that of B. Constantinescu, who thinks they are parmae
of Roman signiferi (B. Constantinescu, 2011).
The interpretation of these objects as religious remains unsatisfactory and is closely tied
to the hypothesis that the entire building functioned as a temple – an assumption lacking
sufficient evidence. The exclusive presence of animals in the central medallions suggests more
than a presumed "religious narrative." The repetition of aurochs five times suggests that these
disks did not have a purely decorative purpose. More plausible is that the aurochs served as the
central emblem of a dominant clan and the disks were heraldic insignia of clans or their
representatives. E. O. Târnoveanu (2022) observed that shield umbones not only protected the
body but also had a symbolic function, representing heraldry or indicating membership in a
specific group. This observation is significant. While the discs discovered at Piatra Roșie were
not actual shields and lacked the typical dimensions of an umbo (C. Borangic, A. Bădescu,
2017), they may have served as symbolic shields or heraldic insignia for clans or tribes, rather
than being mere "religious tableaux" with unclear meanings.
The animals on the iron discs may have served as symbolic emblems representing the
identity, values, or spiritual beliefs of the chieftains or tribes they signified. These motifs could
embody qualities such as strength, courage, or protection, linking the owner to specific traits
associated with the animals while also reinforcing alliances and hierarchical structures within
the Dacian elite.

78
Decoding symbols: the apsidal building in the Alun-Piatra Roșie Dacian fortress
The repeated depiction of the aurochs suggests that it represented branches of the same
family or groups derived from the same clan or tribe, maintaining the primary symbol while
differentiating themselves through specific details of its representation. Discs featuring
multiple animals (e.g., aurochs-serpent, lion-aurochs-birds) may indicate alliances or
intermarriages. The orientation of the animals (right/left) could relate to geographic territories
or the positioning of these groups relative to a central power. Animals depicted alone might
represent a single group or a distinct political entity. The arrangement or positioning of animals
on the discs could reflect the status of each group within the alliance.
These pieces ornamented with heraldic symbols could be interpreted as equivalents of
modern flags. Just as flags today represent the identity of member states within an international
institution, these insignia might have symbolised the clans or alliances of Dacian chieftains.
This practice underscores the importance of visual symbols as markers of belonging and
recognition—a universal feature found across various historical periods.
Discussions regarding the functionality of the apsidal buildings
Buildings featuring an apse can be categorised into two types: simple plan and complex
plan. Structures with a simple plan are all located outside the Carpathian arc, while those with
a complex plan, which includes concentric sections, are found only in the area of the capital of
the Dacian Kingdom (fig. 12). Among the buildings in the first category are those from Malaja
Kopanja (Mala Kopanea), located on the Upper Tisa in Ukraine and dated 1st century BC,
which are considered to be dwellings (V. Kotigoroško, 1995). Notable examples also include a
large structure with a presumed cultic role at Cârlomănești, from the 1st century BC, two
buildings from Brad in Bacău County, one interpreted as a temple and the other as a palace, a
structure from Popești dating to the 2nd century BC (fig. 13), another from Tei-București,
which dates back to the 5th-4th century BC, and others (C. Bodó, 2000).
The second category has evolved from the first and includes constructions dating from
the 1st century BC to the 1st century AD. The main difference is the addition of a circular
delimitation surrounding the apsidal building. This circle is made of worked or semi-worked
stones, which could serve as a foundation for a portico or the walls of a room. Sometimes, a
second circular circle can be found outside the first one. This category also includes buildings
considered temples and some identified as dwellings.

79
Aurora Pețan
At the Fețele Albe settlement near Grădiștea de Munte, three circular dwellings with
complex layouts (a central apsidal room and one or two concentric external structures) have
been excavated (I. Glodariu, 1983). In the central area of the settlement, two other buildings
with similar plans were identified, situated on terraces reinforced with finely cut stone walls.
Fig. 12 – Distribution of apsidal buildings. 1. Piatra Roșie; 2. Pustiosu; 3. Muncelului Hill; 4.
Fețele Albe; 5. Rudele; 6. Meleia.
Fig. 13 – Apsidal building with simple plan at Popești (acc. to D. Antonescu, 1984)

80
Decoding symbols: the apsidal building in the Alun-Piatra Roșie Dacian fortress
These structures featured luxurious inventories, suggesting a special status (A. Pețan, V. Sîrbu,
2023). Particularly debated are the constructions from Grădiștea de Munte on the heights of
Rudele and Meleia (C. Bodó, 2000). There are several dozens of these constructions, which are
situated at high altitudes (1300–1400 m) (fig. 14). Some researchers consider them to be
temples or dwelling-temples inhabited by monks (A. Vulpe, 1986; V. Sîrbu, 2006). Earlier
studies, however, proposed interpretations such as shepherds’ dwellings (C. Daicoviciu et al.,
1959) or blacksmiths residences (I. Glodariu, E. Iaroslavschi, 1979). A similar layout
characterises the building on Pustiosu Hill.
Fig. 14 – Apsidal buildings with complex plan at Rudele, Meleia and Pustiosu (acc. to C.
Neamțu et al. 2016)
The closest analogy to the apsidal building at Piatra Roșie is found in the site of
Augustin-Tipia Ormenișului (Brașov County). (I. Glodariu, F. Costea, 1991; F. Costea, 2006).
This structure consists of an outer stone circle with a diameter of 19.30 m, constructed from
roughly shaped limestone and ophiolite slabs. The second circle, made of white tuff blocks
shaped into arcs, has a diameter of 16.50 m. The interior construction is off-centred and features
two rooms: one rectangular, measuring 7 x 6.50 m, and another apsidal, with a maximum apse
depth of 2.30 m (fig. 15). Its layout is defined by limestone and ophiolite slabs that supported
walls made of wood coated with a thick layer of clay. Near the dividing wall between the two

81
Aurora Pețan
rooms, a charred wooden beam was discovered inside the building containing 18 iron hooks
with swan-shaped heads, interpreted as supports for offerings. The inventory included a variety
of ceramic fragments – jars, „fruit bowls”, cups, and large storage vessels – considered to have
been used for storing offerings. The building was destroyed in a violent fire, conventionally
attributed, like at Piatra Roșie, to the Roman conflict and dated to 106 AD, although this lacks
firm archaeological evidence. A recent revaluation of the archaeological material concludes
that the monumental phase of Tipia Ormenișului dates to the 1st century BC, while a weaker
presence in the 1st century AD cannot be excluded (M.-M. Ștefan, D. Ștefan, 2022), a situation
very similar to that of Piatra Roșie.
Fig. 15 – Plan of the complex apsidal building at Augustin-Tipia Ormenișului
(acc. to I. Glodariu, F. Costea, 1991)
The most significant circular building with a complex layout is the one from the capital
city of the Dacian Kingdom, located in Grădiștea de Munte (commune Orăștioara de Jos,
Hunedoara County) and known as the Great Circular Temple (R. Mateescu, 2012). It consists
of two concentric chambers and a conical shingle roof (fig. 16). The outer chamber, circular in
plan, was constructed from vertically placed wooden beams coated with fine clay plaster, while

82
Decoding symbols: the apsidal building in the Alun-Piatra Roșie Dacian fortress
the inner chamber had an apsidal shape. A double ring of stone elements enclosed the
construction. The inner circle comprised 240 andesite pillars placed closely together in groups
of seven – six vertical and one horizontal – repeated 30 times. The outer circle consisted of 104
andesite blocks. The structure has a total diameter of 29.40 meters. A hearth was located within
the ring-shaped chamber.
The archaeological inventory associated with the building is minimal, consisting mainly
of wall fragments and construction materials such as nails and hooks, possibly used for
suspending objects. Positioned centrally on Terrace XI, the building is accessed by a stone-
Fig. 16 – Plan and virtual 3D reconstruction of the large circular building at Sarmizegetusa
Regia (Mihai Stancu/ http://www.romaniadevis.ro)

83
Aurora Pețan
paved path extending from the citadel’s main pavement. The path widens into a paved plaza
upon reaching the circular structure. Since its discovery in 1804, the building has been
attributed to a religious function. Over the 19th century, it underwent various interpretations,
but systematic excavations conducted during the interwar period cemented its classification as
a temple (A. Pețan, 2018). Its impressive dimensions, commanding position, proximity to
smaller temples and an altar, the pathway and paved plaza suggest the Great Circular Temple
held an extraordinary role within the monumental complex on Grădiștii Hill.
It is important to note that there are also circular buildings without apses, some of which
are identified as temples (e.g., the small circular temple at Sarmizegetusa Regia and the circular
temple at Fețele Albe) and others are classified as dwellings or even "palaces," such as the large
circular building in the western civilian settlement of Sarmizegetusa Regia. (C. Daicoviciu et
al., 1955).
Recent LiDAR data has revealed numerous circular structures within Dacian
settlements across the Grădiștea de Munte area (A. Pețan, 2023) (fig. 17). These findings
highlight the need for further research, which could provide significant insights into the
functionality of these structures and their roles within the Dacian communities.
Fig. 17 – Circular buildings at Grădiștea de Munte. Digital Terrain Model based on LiDAR
data
The data presented above show two important things. First, complex apsidal buildings
are later developments that evolved from simpler ones. Second, the functionality of apsidal

84
Decoding symbols: the apsidal building in the Alun-Piatra Roșie Dacian fortress
buildings can vary: in some cases, they are considered temples, in others, dwellings, while in
certain instances, only the apse itself is thought to have served a specific, distinct
functionseparate from the rest of the structure. Given this variety of interpretations, a crucial
question arises: what criteria can definitively determine the intended function of these
buildings? C. H. Opreanu (2016, 2019) argues that buildings typically identified as temples
often lack evidence to support their designation as religious structures. He emphasises that
sacred functions should only be attributed to structures when supported by clear archaeological
evidence, such as altars, offerings, or ritual deposits, and argues against relying solely on
architectural forms to designate a building as a temple. This approach aligns with the
methodology proposed by Colin Renfrew, who advocates for identifying religious spaces based
on a convergence of evidence, including artefacts, spatial organisation, and patterns of ritual
activity. Renfrew’s model stresses that the attribution of sacredness must be rooted in material
culture and context, avoiding assumptions based on form alone.
Opreanu further critiques the modern dichotomy between sacred and profane, arguing
that this distinction does not adequately reflect the realities of ancient societies, where the
sacred often permeated all aspects of life, including political, social, and administrative
activities. By recognising this fluidity, he suggests that the sacred and profane were not
mutually exclusive domains but rather intersecting dimensions that shaped the use of
architectural spaces.
Opreanu's methodological critique provides a valuable framework for reinterpreting
Dacian architecture. While I am not entirely convinced by his interpretation of the alignments
as potential horrea, I agree with his critique and with the observations regarding the circular
and apsidal buildings.
For most researchers, the religious purpose of the circular buildings is „obvious”.
However, in many cases, the archaeological findings from these structures do not include ritual
offerings, altars, or other elements typically associated with temples (C. Bodó, 2000). The most
notable exceptions are the apsidal buildings at Popești and Cârlomănești, the former including
decorated hearths, while the latter featuring clay statuettes of animals and mounted figures. I.
Glodariu (1976) proposed that the complex apsidal plan initially belonged to secular
architecture and was later adapted for religious architecture, thus explaining the differences in
interpretations for various buildings. R. Mateescu (2012) argues that the large circular temple
at Sarmizegetusa Regia possesses characteristics similar to the Greek tholos.

85
Aurora Pețan
Interpreting the ornamented disks as heraldic symbols of clans or tribes, the apsidal
building at Piatra Roșie can be seen as a political and social space designated for meetings of
chieftains or representatives from various Dacian tribes. The length of the apse, measuring
10.80 m, suggests that its wall could have accommodated more discs than those recovered. In
this context, the building might have served either as a physical meeting place for leaders or as
a symbolic space where the emblems of each clan or tribe were displayed, signifying their
belonging and authority within the community.
The apsidal building may have served as a public venue for various functions, including
meetings, consultations, negotiations, judicial proceedings, treaty signings, receiving
embassies, etc. These gatherings would have involved chieftains from various regions under
the authority of a leader whose residence was at Piatra Roșie. The apse might have held a sacred
function, while the rectangular room, spacious enough to accommodate several dozen
participants, likely served as the primary meeting area. This interpretation aligns with previous
suggestions that the apse alone could fulfil a special role (V. Sîrbu, G. Florea, 1997). It is also
conceivable that the apse was reserved exclusively for the leader or that it hosted all
representatives seated in a semicircle, with each symbol displayed on the wall behind them to
signify their identity and status.
The semicircular or apsidal design of the building reflects a well-established
architectural tradition in the ancient world, often employed for political and social spaces. In
Greece, the bouleuterion served as the venue where local councils (boule) deliberated on
administrative and political matters, while in Rome, curiae fulfilled similar roles for senatorial
debates. These structures were designed to ensure equal visibility and optimal interaction,
features suited for deliberations and ceremonial purposes. The building at Piatra Roșie aligns
with this tradition, functioning as a space for leaders to engage in discussions and collective
decision-making, while also carrying a symbolic dimension through its decoration with
heraldic discs.
As C. H. Opreanu highlighted, the modern distinction between sacred and profane
presents a methodological challenge when applied to ancient societies. In the context of Dacian
architecture, this division often proves artificial, as many activities now considered secular,
such as political meetings or judicial proceedings, were deeply intertwined with religious
rituals and sacred practices. Circular and apsidal structures exemplify this blend of symbolic
and practical functions. It is plausible that, following a rigorous and objective analysis, one

86
Decoding symbols: the apsidal building in the Alun-Piatra Roșie Dacian fortress
might conclude that the great circular temple at Sarmizegetusa Regia served as a venue for
governing bodies under the authority of the king, functioning both as a space for decision-
making and as a symbolic structure within a multifunctional public complex, surrounded by
temples or other types of public buildings, akin to the Greek agora or Roman forum. However,
it is important to note that not all apsidal buildings necessarily served this role. Some may have
been dwellings, while others could have had a primarily religious function. Determining the
precise functionality of each structure requires a case-by-case analysis, guided by the
methodological criteria outlined above.
Though often imprecise, the orientation of the apses toward the solstices may indicate
a symbolic connection between the intended function of the building and significant moments
in the natural cycle. Practical considerations likely also played a role in the round shape of the
building, offering enhanced protection against winds, as noted for apsidal structures in other
cultures (Garcia D., Tréziny H., 2010). In Transylvania, the prevailing winds predominantly
blow from the north and northwest, influenced by the westerlies that shape Central Europe's
climate. This wind pattern aligns with the orientation of apses in all buildings within this region.
However, 2,000 years ago, these wind patterns might have been different due to climatic and
environmental changes, though the precise dynamics remain uncertain without definitive data.
The circular design of all the buildings on the crests of Rudele and Meleia hills, situated at
altitudes of 1,300-1,400 m, may reflect their constant exposure to strong winds. In contrast,
this is not observed at sites such as Cârlomănești, Malaja Kopanja, or București-Tei, where the
apses are oriented toward the north, despite wind directions differing (today) in those areas.
From Piatra Roșie to Grădiștii Hill: A Royal Legacy
According to the traditional narrative, the apsidal building at Piatra Roșie, along with
the entire site, was set on fire in 106 AD during the wars with the Romans. Consequently, the
iron discs were also dated by Daicoviciu and his successors to the early 2nd century AD, despite
their style and iconography clearly pointing to the 1st century B.C. Even C. Daicoviciu (1954)
acknowledged that these artefacts exhibit characteristics of late Hellenistic art.
This narrative not only lacks archaeological evidence but is contradicted by other
chronological indicators suggesting an earlier period of use for the apsidal building. On the
same terrace, outside the apsidal building, the 1949 excavations uncovered a richly decorated
perforated bronze yoke end from a horse wagon (fig. 18). This artefact is comparable to items

87
Aurora Pețan
discovered at other La Tène sites in Slovakia and Croatia, dated to the Late La Tène period,
specifically phases LTD2a and LTD2b (circa 100–30 BC) (R. Čambal, 2016). The intricate
design and craftsmanship of these yoke ends highlight their dual purpose as both ornamental
and practical objects, likely associated with high-status individuals or elite activities. The
presence of such an artefact at Piatra Roșie strongly suggests that the apsidal building and its
surrounding complex were active during the same timeframe.
Fig. 18 – Bronze yoke end from Piatra Roșie (acc. to C. Daicoviciu 1954)
As M. Babeș (1975) suggested, Piatra Roșie flourished during the 1st century B.C.
There are no indications of the fortress being destroyed during the Roman wars, which supports
this hypothesis. The apsidal building was likely destroyed earlier, in the 1st century BC. This
timeline also aligns with the chronology of Costești-Cetățuie, another site that thrived during
the 1st century BC (H. Daicoviciu, I. Glodariu, 1976). It is clear that the two fortresses were
not constructed to protect the centre on Grădiștii Hill. This site had not yet evolved into a
significant capital, or it may not have existed at all, as the earliest evidence of activity there
dates no earlier than the mid-1st century BC (A. Pețan, V. Sîrbu, 2023). From this viewpoint,
the issue regarding the status of the two fortresses in the region becomes significant. Some
researchers propose that Costești-Cetățuie served as the first capital during Burebista's reign,

88
Decoding symbols: the apsidal building in the Alun-Piatra Roșie Dacian fortress
suggesting that the capital later moved to Grădiștii Hill after his death (I. Glodariu, 1995).
However, no concrete evidence supports the idea of a centralised power at this location, and
the presence of two large tower-houses does not indicate a clear hierarchical structure. The
discovery of the collection of heraldic emblems at Piatra Roșie suggests the possibility that a
high-status leader resided there. This individual may have had the authority to command the
loyalty of multiple chieftains, potentially positioning them as a king. The extraordinary efforts
to reshape the Piatra Roșie hill, revealed through recent volume calculations (V. Cetean et al.,
2022) and LiDAR scanning, the striking anthropised landscape, and the presence of luxury
goods and expensive imports all support this interpretation. It remains a mystery whether this
king was Burebista itself, as E. O. Târnoveanu (2022) suggests, and if the end of the building
was connected to his assassination in 44 BC. Strabo (VII, 3, 11) states that Burebista died due
to a conspiracy, and his kingdom was divided into several regions. Evidence of disturbances in
the years following his dethronement in the area of Piatra Roșie includes the concealment of
coin hoards near the fortress. One hoard, located a few hundred meters from the site, ends with
a Republican denarius from 43 BC (V. Pavel, I. Andrițoiu, 1994), while another, discovered in
Târsa, a few kilometres away, ends with a Republican denarius from 39 BC (C. Găzdac et al.,
2006).
Finally, the hypothesis that this architectural and functional model was later transferred
to Grădiștii Hill deserves further investigation. The similarities between the complex apsidal
building at Piatra Roșie and the one at Sarmizegetusa Regia suggest a possible continuity in
design and purpose. This raises questions about the role of such buildings in consolidating
political authority and their symbolic significance in Dacian society.
This reinterpretation highlights Piatra Roșie not as an isolated fortress, but as an earlier
capital, playing a central role in the evolution of political and architectural traditions that later
culminated in the establishment of Sarmizegetusa Regia as the dominant seat of power.
However, this interpretation requires further data for solidification. Unfortunately, the study of
apsidal and circular structures in Dacian sites remains incomplete. Many such buildings have
yet to be systematically researched, and the results of several past excavations remain
unpublished. Although recent research focused on the Piatra Roșie fortress, its chronology and
broader significance are still unclear due to the limited publication of findings. Continued
investigation and dissemination of both existing and future results are essential for advancing
our understanding of this remarkable Dacian power centre.

89
Aurora Pețan
References
*Dacia. Ultima frontieră a romanității, 2022, Muzeul Național de Istorie a României,
750 p.
Antonescu D., 1984, Introducere în arhitectura dacilor, Editura Tehnică, București,
220 p.
Babeș M., 1975, Problèmes de la chronologie de la culture gèto-dace à la lumière des
fouilles de Cîrlomănești, Dacia, N.S., Tome XIX, p. 125-139.
Babeș M., 1977, Statuetele geto-dace de la Cîrlomăneşti (jud. Buzău), Studii și
Cercetări de Istorie Veche și Arheologie, 28, p. 319-352.
Bodó C., 2000, Construcțiile cu absidă din Dacia preromană, Istros, X, p. 251-274.
Borangic C., Bădescu A., 2017, Civilizația geto-dacică, II, Unelte și ustensile din
patrimoniul Muzeului Național de Istorie a României, Muzeul Național de Istorie a
României, București, 134 p.
Borangic C, Sîrbu V., 2023, An insight into the spiritual content of sica curved daggers
(2nd century BC – 1st century AD). Avimorphic representations on blades, in V. Sîrbu, C.
Schuster, D. Hortopan (eds.), Warriors and their weapons in Bronze and Iron Ages.
Proceedings of The 21st International Colloquium of Funerary Archaeology 25th-28th May,
2023, Târgu Jiu, Gorj County (Romania), Ed. Istros, Târgu Jiu – Brăila, p. 25-93
Cetean V., Pețan A., Stancu M., 2022, Historical Use of the Ashlar Limestone at Piatra
Roșie Dacian Fortress; Interdisciplinary Approach in a World Heritage Site. Sustainability,
14(19), 11811. https://doi.org/10.3390/su141911818
Comes R., Grec C., Neamțu C., Găzdac C., Mateescu-Suciu L., 2021, Intangible
heritage? Not anymore. From photo to 3D printed cultural heritage assets replicas. The two
missing iron discs from the Dacian hillfort of Piatra Roșie (Romania), Journal of Ancient
History and Archaeology, 8 (1), p. 134-145. https://doi.org/10.14795/j.v8i1.622
Comes R., Neamțu C. G. D., Grec C., Buna Z. L., Găzdac C., Mateescu-Suciu L., 2022,
Digital Reconstruction of Fragmented Cultural Heritage Assets: The Case Study of the Dacian
Embossed Disk from Piatra Roșie, Applied Sciences, 12(16), 8131.
https://doi.org/10.3390/app12168131
Constantinescu B., 2011, Studii de arheometalurgie pe aurul şi Argintul dacic folosind
metode performante de spectrometrie de raze X, presentation within the project no PN-II-ID-
PCE-2011-3-0078.
Costea F., 2006, Augustin – Tipia Ormenișului, Ed. C2 Desugn, Brașov, 384 p, 76 fig.
Čambal R., 2016, Spätlaténezeitliche Jochendbeschläge aus dem Gebiet von
Bratislava, Annales Musei Nationalis Slovaci/Zborník Slovenského Národného Múzea,
Archeológia, 26, p. 125-132.
Daicoviciu C., 1954, Cetatea dacică Piatra Roșie. Monografie arheologică. Bucureşti,
167 p. + XXII pl.

90
Decoding symbols: the apsidal building in the Alun-Piatra Roșie Dacian fortress
Daicoviciu C., Bodor A., Ferenczi Ș., Gostar N., Rusu M., Winkler I., Crișan I.,
Ferenczi G., 1955, Şantierul arheologic Grădiştea Muncelului - Blidaru, Studii și Cercetări de
Istorie Veche, VI, 1-2, p. 195-238.
Daicoviciu C., Gostar N., Daicoviciu H., 1959, Șantierul arheologic Grădiștea
Muncelului – Costești, Materiale și cercetări arheologice, VI, p. 331-358.
Daicoviciu H., Glodariu I., 1976, Puncte de reper pentru cronologia cetatilor si
asezarilor dacice din muntii Orastiei, Acta Musei Napocensis, XIII, p. 71-80.
Florea G., 2011, Dava et Oppidum. Débuts de la genèse urbaine en Europe au deuxième
âge du Fer, Académie Roumaine, Centre d'Études Transylvaines, Cluj-Napoca, 190 p.
Florea G., Cristescu C., 2016, Artă, identitate și imaginar / Art, identity and imaginary,
in: C. Neamțu, G. Florea, G. Gheorghiu, Bodó C. (eds.), Când viața cotidiană antică devine
patrimoniu UNESCO. Scanarea, restaurarea digitală și contextualizarea artefactelor dacice
din Munții Orăștiei / When ancient everyday life becomes UNESCO heritage. The scanning,
digital restauration and contextualization of Dacian artefacts from Orăștie Mountains, Only
One, Cluj-Napoca, 250 p., p. 141-163
Florea G., Suciu L., 1995, Observații cu privire la scutul de la Piatra Roșie, Ephemeris
Napocensis V, p. 47-61.
Florea G. A., Ferencz I. V., 2007, Un nouveau „bouclier” de la fin de deuxième âge du
Fer découvert à Piatra Roşie, Acta Musei Napocensis, 41-42, I, p. 47-54.
Garcia D., Tréziny H., 2010, Maisons à absides dans le monde grec et en Gaule
méditerranéenne, in: H. Tréziny (éd.), Grecs et indigènes de la Catalogne à la mer Noire,
Publications du Centre Camille Jullian, https://doi.org/10.4000/books.pccj.587
Găzdac C., Călian L., Alföldy-Găzdac Á., 2006, Roman Republican Coinage in the
National History Museum of Transylvania, Editura Mega, Cluj-Napoca, 124 p.
Glodariu I., 1976, L’origine de la conception architectonique des sanctuaires
circulaires daces, Thraco-Dacica I, p. 249-258.
Glodariu I., 1983, Arhitectura dacilor. Civilă și militară (sec. II î.e.n. – I e.n.), Ed.
Dacia, Cluj-Napoca, 196 p.
Glodariu, I., 1995, Addenda aux „Points de repère pour la chronologie des citadelles
et des établissements daciques de Monts d’Orăştie”, Acta Musei Napocensis, 32/1, p. 119-134.
Glodariu I., Iaroslavschi E, 1979, Civilizația fierului la daci, Editura Dacia, Cluj-
Napoca, 188 p. + 75 fig.
Glodariu I., Costea F., 1991, Sanctuarul circular al cetății dacice de la Racoș,
Ephemeris Napocensis I, p. 21-40.
Kotigoroško V., 1995, Ținuturile Tisei superioare în veacurile III î.e.n. – IV e.n.
(perioadele La Tène și romană), Institutul roman de Tracologie, București, 338 p.
Lockyear K., 2004, The Late Iron Age background to Roman Dacia, in: Hanson W. S.,
Haynes I. P. (Eds.), Roman Dacia: the Making of a Provincial Society, Journal of Roman
Archaeology. Supplementary Series, Portsmouth, p. 33-74.
Mateescu R., 2012, Istoriile unui templu, Ed. Mega, Cluj-Napoca, 210 p.
Mateescu R., Florea G., Mateescu-Suciu L., Cristescu C., Bodó C., Cioată D., Henţ A.,
Mălinescu E., Gheorghiu G., Pupeză P., Ciubotaru N., Vasilache Ș., 2022, 48. Luncani, com.

91
Aurora Pețan
Boşorod, jud. Hunedoara Punct: Cetatea dacică de la Luncani – Piatra Roşie, Cronica
Cercetărilor Arheologice din România, Campania 2021, Oradea, p. 240-244.
Mateescu R., Florea G., Mateescu-Suciu L., Ciubotaru N., Cristescu C., Tutilă O., Bodó
C., Măgureanu D., Cioată D., Vasilache Ș., Henț A., Malinescu E., Teodorescu A., Gheorghiu
G., Pupeză P., 2023, Luncani - Piatra Roşie, com. Boşorod, jud. Hunedoara. Punct: Piatra
Roșie - Cetatea dacică, Cronica Cercetărilor arheologice din România, Campania 2022,
Târgoviște, p. 231-236.
Neamțu C., Florea G., Gheorghiu G., Bodó C. (eds.), 2016, Când viața cotidiană antică
devine patrimoniu UNESCO. Scanarea, restaurarea digitală și contextualizarea artefactelor
dacice din Munții Orăștiei / When ancient everyday life becomes UNESCO heritage. The
scanning, digital restauration and contextualization of Dacian artefacts from Orăștie
Mountains, Only One, Cluj-Napoca, 250 p.
Opreanu C. H., 2016, Profan vs. sacru la Sarmizegetusa Regia, Analele Banatului, S.N.,
Arheologie – Istorie, 24, p. 233-254.
Opreanu C. H., 2019, The enigmatic Dacian architecture at Sarmizegetusa Regia:
Profane vs. sacred purpose, Ephemeris Napocensis, 29, p. 181-196.
Pavel V., Andrițoiu I., 1994, Tezaurul de monede romane republicane de la cetatea
dacică de la Piatra Roșie, Apulum, 31, p. 79-121.
Pețan A., 2018, Sarmizegetusa Regia. 1. Redescoperirea cetății, Ed. Dacica, Alun, 600
p, XXXIII pl.
Pețan A., 2019, Cetatea dacică Piatra Roșie. Observații cu privire la planul fortificației
de pe platou, in Forțiu S. (ed.), ArheoVest VII. In Honorem Sabin Adrian Luca,
Interdisciplinaritate în Arheologie, Timişoara, 23 noiembrie 2019, vol. 1, JATEPress Kiadó,
Szeged, p. 315-338
Pețan A., 2021, Ansamblul terasat fortificat de la Alun-Piatra Roșie, In: ArheoVest IX.
In Honorem Valeriu Sîrbu. Interdisciplinaritate în Istorie și Arheologie, Ed. Mega, Cluj-
Napoca, p. 389-419, https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8309830
Pețan A., 2023, Settlements on terraces in the central area of the Dacian Kingdom.
Some aspects revealed by airborne laser scanning, Acta Musei Porolissensis, 43, p. 205-216.
Pețan A., Hegyi A., 2023, Freely available LiDAR-derived digital terrain model (DTM)
uncovers the heartland of the Dacian Kingdom, Digital Application in Archaeology and
Cultural Heritage, vol. 31, e00292, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.daach.2023.e00292
Pețan A., Sîrbu V., 2020, Temples and cult artefacts from the Dacian sites Alun-Piatra
Roșie and Grădiștea de Munte-Fețele Albe, in V. Sîrbu, A. Pețan (Eds.), Temples and Cult
Places form the Second Iron Age in Europe, Editura Dacica, Alun, 2020, 352 p., p. 145-164.
Pețan A., Sîrbu V., 2023, Revisting Fețele Albe, an important Dacian site near
Sarmizegetusa Regia, in V. Sîrbu, A. Pețan (eds.), Inventory, offerings and rituals in the pre-
Christian temples and sacred places of continental Europe and Mediterranean area (7th c.
BC-2nd c. AD), Editura Dacica, Alun, 2023, 248 p., p. 189-220.
Purdea C., 2024, Braconarea patrimoniului arheologic din Munții Șureanu. Istorie
și jurisprudență, Editura Mega, Cluj-Napoca, 736 p.

92
Decoding symbols: the apsidal building in the Alun-Piatra Roșie Dacian fortress
Sechelariu M., Tobă P., Vasile V., Pitulescu M., Carp. B. (eds), 2015, Millenia opes.
Reîntregirea bogăției milenare a României, Fundatia Collegium XXI, Bucureşti, 250 p.
Sîrbu V., 2006, Oameni și zei în lumea geto-dacilor: mărturii arheologice/ Man and
gods in the Geto-Dacian World: archaeological testimony, Brașov, 280 p.
Sîrbu V., Florea G., 1997, Imaginar și imagine în Dacia preromană, Editura Istros,
Brăila, 224 p.
Sîrbu V., Pețan A., 2020, Who destroyed the Dacian temples? Some considerations
about Sarmizegetusa Regia, the capital of the Dacian Kingdom, in V. Sîrbu, A. Pețan (Eds.),
Temples and Cult Places form the Second Iron Age in Europe, Ed. Dacica, Alun, 2020, 352
p., p. 237-265.
Ștefan M.-M., Ștefan D., 2022, Defileul Oltului din Munții Perșani – o cale de acces
pentru romani în timpul războiului de cucerire a Daciei? / The Olt Gorge in Perșani Mountains
– a Roman Road in the War for the Conquest of Dacia?, in M.-M. Ștefan, A. Popa, D. Ștefan
(eds.), Arheologia trecerii de la epoca târzie a fierului la epoca romană în Dacia. Contacte
și conflicte în secolele I – II p. Chr., Ed. Cetatea de Scaun, Târgoviște, 386 p., p. 171-211.
Strobel K., 1998, Dacii. Despre complexitatea mărimilor etnice, politice și culturale
ale istoriei spațiului Dunării de Jos (II), Studii și Cercetări de Istorie Veche și Arheologie, 49,
2, 1998, p. 207-227.
Târnoveanu E. O., 2022, Umbo de scut, in Dacia. Ultima frontieră a romanității,
Muzeul Național de Istorie a României, 750 p., p. 448-449.
Trohani G., 2011-2012, Câteva bunuri arheologice de valoare excepțională pentru
cunoașterea civilizației geto-dacice recuperate recent. Expertize arheologice, Cercetări
Arheologice, XVIII-XIX, 2011-2012, p. 159-185.
Vulpe A., 1986, Despre unele aspecte ale spiritualității dacice¸Thraco-Dacica, VII, 1-
2, p. 101-111.