Crossroads and Barriers on the Roman Border: Institutional Authority, Roman Heritage and the “Đerdap” Projects

IF 0.3 Q4 ANTHROPOLOGY
Tatjana B. Cvjetićanin
{"title":"Crossroads and Barriers on the Roman Border: Institutional Authority, Roman Heritage and the “Đerdap” Projects","authors":"Tatjana B. Cvjetićanin","doi":"10.21301/EAP.V15I3.4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Institutional authority, Roman heritage and the “Đerdap” projects \nAlthough “the archaeological research in the Đerdap area represents the most important crossroad in Serbian archaeology” (Bikić i Šarić 2017, 67), the role of the two large research projects Đerdap I and II in the development of the discipline and the local archaeological community remains to be thoroughly reconsidered. In search for the answer whether the vast corpus of archaeological material and information gained in the course of these projects influenced the shift in interpretation of the Roman past and in presentation of the Roman frontier on the Danube, the paper presents certain scientific and research aspects and the consequences of the projects for the interpretive framework of the Roman period. \nIt may be expected that, just as the fieldwork itself was a large opportunity for professional training and growing, the huge amount of information on the Roman border collected during the projects became a constant source for further consideration and disciplinary growth. The innovations introduced – multi-disciplinarity, interdisciplinarity, preventive conservation and integral protection of heritage – foreshadowed the space for testing of ideas. However, the archaeological record of the Roman period, approached from the culture-historical point of view, dominant at the time, is still principally interpreted according to the concepts formed in 19th century and significantly reconsidered over the last couple of decades. The majority of the recovered material is not published yet, the limited access to the “finds in boxes” obliges current researchers to work on the base of available publications, and the confidence in “discoveries” induces the transfer of ideas of original researchers without further reconsideration. The abandonment of the concept of Romanization is slow, mainly due to the institutional “keepers”, as illustrated by chosen examples, e.g. the monograph Vivere Militare est. From Populus to Emperors – living on the Frontier (Golubović, Mrđić 2018) and the exhibition Roman Limes and Cities in Serbia, organized on the occasion of the 24th International Limes-Congress, as well as the new permanent display of the National Museum, opened in 2018. It may be concluded that the constant affirmation of institutional authority, where the archaeological heritage of the Roman frontier acts as an academic symbolic capital, is more important than multivocal interpretation and presentation.","PeriodicalId":43531,"journal":{"name":"Etnoantropoloski Problemi-Issues in Ethnology and Anthropology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2020-11-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Etnoantropoloski Problemi-Issues in Ethnology and Anthropology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21301/EAP.V15I3.4","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ANTHROPOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Institutional authority, Roman heritage and the “Đerdap” projects Although “the archaeological research in the Đerdap area represents the most important crossroad in Serbian archaeology” (Bikić i Šarić 2017, 67), the role of the two large research projects Đerdap I and II in the development of the discipline and the local archaeological community remains to be thoroughly reconsidered. In search for the answer whether the vast corpus of archaeological material and information gained in the course of these projects influenced the shift in interpretation of the Roman past and in presentation of the Roman frontier on the Danube, the paper presents certain scientific and research aspects and the consequences of the projects for the interpretive framework of the Roman period. It may be expected that, just as the fieldwork itself was a large opportunity for professional training and growing, the huge amount of information on the Roman border collected during the projects became a constant source for further consideration and disciplinary growth. The innovations introduced – multi-disciplinarity, interdisciplinarity, preventive conservation and integral protection of heritage – foreshadowed the space for testing of ideas. However, the archaeological record of the Roman period, approached from the culture-historical point of view, dominant at the time, is still principally interpreted according to the concepts formed in 19th century and significantly reconsidered over the last couple of decades. The majority of the recovered material is not published yet, the limited access to the “finds in boxes” obliges current researchers to work on the base of available publications, and the confidence in “discoveries” induces the transfer of ideas of original researchers without further reconsideration. The abandonment of the concept of Romanization is slow, mainly due to the institutional “keepers”, as illustrated by chosen examples, e.g. the monograph Vivere Militare est. From Populus to Emperors – living on the Frontier (Golubović, Mrđić 2018) and the exhibition Roman Limes and Cities in Serbia, organized on the occasion of the 24th International Limes-Congress, as well as the new permanent display of the National Museum, opened in 2018. It may be concluded that the constant affirmation of institutional authority, where the archaeological heritage of the Roman frontier acts as an academic symbolic capital, is more important than multivocal interpretation and presentation.
罗马边境的十字路口和障碍:制度权威、罗马遗产和“Đerdap”项目
虽然“Đerdap地区的考古研究代表了塞尔维亚考古学中最重要的十字路口”(bikiki i Šarić 2017, 67),但两个大型研究项目Đerdap i和II在学科发展和当地考古社区中的作用仍有待彻底重新考虑。为了寻找在这些项目过程中获得的大量考古材料和信息是否影响了对罗马过去的解释和对多瑙河上罗马边界的介绍的转变的答案,本文提出了某些科学和研究方面以及这些项目对罗马时期解释框架的影响。可以预期,正如实地考察本身是专业训练和成长的巨大机会一样,在这些项目中收集到的关于罗马边境的大量信息也成为进一步考虑和学科发展的持续来源。引入的创新——多学科、跨学科、预防性保护和遗产的整体保护——预示着思想测试的空间。然而,罗马时期的考古记录,从文化历史的角度来看,在当时占主导地位,仍然主要根据19世纪形成的概念来解释,并在过去的几十年里进行了重大的重新考虑。大多数回收的材料尚未发表,对“盒子里的发现”的有限访问迫使当前的研究人员在现有出版物的基础上工作,对“发现”的信心诱导了原始研究人员的思想转移,而无需进一步考虑。罗马化概念的放弃是缓慢的,主要是由于机构的“守护者”,如所选择的例子所说明的那样,例如专著《军队生活:从胡杨到皇帝——生活在边境》(golubovic, Mrđić 2018),以及在第24届国际石灰大会期间组织的塞尔维亚罗马石灰和城市展览,以及2018年开放的国家博物馆的新永久展览。可以得出的结论是,制度权威的不断肯定,其中罗马边境的考古遗产作为学术象征性资本,比多种声音的解释和呈现更重要。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
50.00%
发文量
1
审稿时长
10 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信