Stiintele socio-umaniste in contextul evolutiei globalizate
- dezvoltarea si implementarea programului de studii si cercetare postdoctorala

Work experience

Occupation or position held: TA (1991-2000), Reader (2000-), Head of Department (2008-2012)

Main activities and responsibilities: Scientific duties: Courses and seminars in World Prehistory, Archaeology, Archaeological research

Administrative duties: responsibilities related to the office of Head of Department of Archaeology

Name and address of employer: ”Alexandru Ioan Cuza” University, Faculty of History, Carol I, 11, Iasi, 700506,Iasi County, Romania

Type of business or sector: Education, Research, Administration

Education and training

Dates 1988-2004

Title of qualification awarded: BA (1983-1987), PhD (1999-2006)

Principal subjects/occupational skills covered: Archaeology

Name and type of organisation providing education and training: University of Bucharest, Faculty of History, Romania (for BA) and”Alexandru Ioan Cuza” University, Faculty of History (for PhD).

History of the artifacts from Neolithic, Eneolithic and Metal Age. From the archaeological context to the interdisciplinary approach

Accustomed to applying various evolutionary approaches, in the attempt to decipher and explain the past, nowadays archaeologists are rather prone to focus on the material functions of the artifacts and in their capitalization as museum exhibits. Thus, for la long period, the archaeological research did not benefit from the insights implied by the interdisciplinary approach. In Romania, the archaeological research was characterized by arduous attempts at analyzing the artifacts by specific means and methods. Although successful, this approach failed at providing a conventional language which could yield the universal means of communication within the various areas encompassed by the archaeological research.

The grounds of this project lay in the three activities implied by my academic work: teaching, research and sharing the results of my research. First, my experience as a professor provided me with the opportunity to build an ever-changing discourse on artifacts, infused by the insights gained by working directly with students. Through this type of interactions, I gathered suggestions as to the different options one had when it came to naming and characterizing the artifacts in accordance with their different contexts of emergence. Secondly, working in the field, I was able to analyze directly the artifacts in the context of their finding. This allowed me to research them thoroughly, from the first step of classifying them up to their ultimate analysis in an interdisciplinary framework. Thirdly, I sought to share the results of my research in a twofold manner: I have published the data in specialized journals and discussed them at archaeological workshops and symposia. Simultaneously, I was able to interact with a less specialized audience, thanks to project of experimental archaeology. Furthermore, in my PhD thesis, Civilizatiile de la sfarsitul Epocii bronzului din spatial sud-carpatic al Romaniei si relatiile lor cu cele din sud-estul Europei (The Late Bronze Age Civilizations of South- Carpathian Romania and Their Connections to the South-Eastern Civilizations), and in my articles I have included thorough analyses of artifacts, studied in their archaeological and historical contexts.

Which is the novelty of this project? First, it aims at putting together a pattern for the interdisciplinary analysis of artifacts and at compiling a conventional language applicable to the study of artifacts. Secondly, for the purposes of this study, I seek to work with a team of different specialist, who will work on the functional and structural analysis of artifacts. This pattern will include a database cataloging the typology of artifact pathology. In assembling this database, the archaeologist will work with the curator, employing state of the art technologists used in the field of natural scientists. The artifacts that lie at the core of this project come from different areas and historical periods. Nowadays, the conventional pattern of archaeological analysis needs to be correlated with the type of analysis characteristic of natural sciences. This approach would enrich and diversify the standard archaeological and historical discourse.

There are several prerequisites to the success of this project. It requires open mindedness/adaptability, a thorough knowledge of contemporary methods and theories dedicated to artifacts and the constant assessment of the results. I believe that my credentials prove that I fulfill the aforementioned prerequisites. I gained the necessary experience and expertise through my work as a professor, archaeologist and through my involvement in projects meant to raise the archaeological awareness among a non-specialized audience. There have been, in the Romanian academia, some attempts at combining the research in the field of Humanities with the results obtained by the natural sciences or engineering. The attest studies dedicated to interdisciplinary archaeology convinced me of the imperious necessity to apply this kind of holistic approach to the contemporary archaeological research in Romania. Sometimes, this type of approach comes with the integration within a new dynamic and architecture of cultural phenomena. Thus, I consider that the proposed subject is financially feasible and advances a theoretical and methodological approach new to the academic landscape of Romania. This holistic enterprise would lay grounds to the pluridisciplinary research in the archaeological research of Romania.

Abridged list of publications

• An essay concerning the Trans-Balkan relations during the Middle and Late Bronze Age, He Periphereia tou Mykinaikou Kosmou, B’ Diephnes Diepistimoniko Symposio (Lamia 26-30 Septembriou 1999), 99-107.
• Cross-cultural relations within the Balkans during the Middle and the Late Bronze Age, Studia Antiqua et Archaeologica, VII, Editura Universită)ii „Alexandru Ioan Cuza, Iasi, 2000, 307-316.
• La Peninsula Balcanica e le regioni vicine nella media e tarda eta del Bronzo. Breve considerazioni, Studia Antiqua et Archaeologica, VIII, Editura Universită)ii „Alexandru Ioan Cuza”, Iasi, 2002, 51-59.
• The Early-Middle Bronze Age settlement of Silistea in Central Moldavia, IXth Congress of Thracology. Thracians and Circumpontic World, Chisinău-Vadul lui Vodă, 6-11 September 2004, 55-77.
• The Danube, Balkans and Northern Aegean. Trade Routes, Influences and Buffer Zones in Late Bronze Age, Aegaeum 25, EMPORIA, Aegeans in the Central and Eastern Mediterranean Proceedings of the 10th International Aegean Conference/10e rencontre égéenne internationale, Athens, Italian School of Archaeology, 14-18 Aprilie 2004, R. Laffineur, E. Greco (eds.), Université de Liege/University of Texas at Austin, 161-180.
• New Stories about Buffer Territories in the Balkans, Aegaeum 27, Between the Aegean and Baltic Seas. Prehistory Across Borders, Proceedings of the 11th International Aegean Conference, Zagreb, 2005, eds., Universite de Liege/University of Texas at Austin, 2007, 307-313, Pl. LXXVII-LXXX.
• “All in One”. Issues of Methodology, Paradigms and Radiocarbon Datings Concerning the Outer Eastern Carpathian Area, Ediderunt Neculai Bolohan, Florica Mă)ău et Felix Adrian Tencariu, SIGNA PRAEHISTORICA. Studia in honorem magistri Attila László septuagesimo anno, Editura Universității „Alexandru Ioan Cuza”, Iasi, 2010, 229-245.
• Trying to define and deal with “Buffer Territories” in the West Pontic Late Bronze Age, Pontica, XLIV, 2011, 71-81.