"...Monografia de față, publicată recent la prestigioasa editură Brill având numărul 53 în seria îngrijită de Florin Curta și Dušan Zupka, East Central and Eastern Europe in the Middle Ages, 450-1450, reprezintă expresia profunzimii și consecvenței profesionale a cercetătorului Iurie Stamati [...] În cartea sa, accentul este pus pe originea celor două tipuri de discurs istoriografic, fiind inspirat din abordările unor sociologi (Pierre Bourdieu) sau arheologi (Lev Klejn, Bruce Trigger, Marc-Antoine Kaeser). [..] Lucrarea este deosebit de utilă pentru o mai bună cunoaștere și înțelegere a caracteristicilor cercetării arheologiei slavilor în spațiul est-european, a contextului social-politic și cultural în care s-a constituit și a evoluat arheologia slavilor pe teritoriul R.S.S. Moldovenești...", Ludmila Bacumenco-Pîrnău in Arheologia Moldovei, XLII, 2019

ENG: «The monograph recently published at the prestigious BRILL publishing house [...] is an expression of professional depth and consistency of the researcher Iurie Stamati, who introduces in the scientific circuit the results of a true historiographic insight into the problem of Slavic archeology [...] The use of a rigorous research methodology, innovative, yet little used, inspired from the works of some sociologists, but also archaeologists (Bourdieu, Klein, Trigger, Kaeser), has allowed identification of so far completely unknown aspects in the history of research of early medieval vestiges from Republic of Moldova [...] The paper is very useful for getting a deeper knowledge and understanding of characteristics of the Slavic archeology research in East-European area, of the social-political and cultural context in which the archeology of the Slavs in the territory of SSR Moldova was established and evolved..."

“Именно поэтому можно только приветствовать появление книги, целью которой является аналитически отрефлексировать и вы явить истоки и мотивы идеологической борьбы, возникшей в процессе развития региональной археологической науки, разобраться в парадоксальной историографической ситуации, сложившейся в средневековой археоло-гии Советской Молдавии (One can only welcome the appearance of a book whose purpose is to analytically reflect and identify the origins and motives of the ideological battle that arose during the development of regional archaeological science, to understand the paradoxical historiographic situation that unfolded within the medieval archeology of Soviet Moldova.)"
"...что книга Юрия Стамати не имеет шансов остаться незамеченной. И потому, что она затрагивает некоторые болезненные вопросы, которые еще разделяют молдавских археологов и историков. И потому, что используемая методология может служить примером в изучении других национальных археологических школ постсоветскогопространства, да и не только (Iurie Stamati’s book will not go unnoticed. The book addresses a number of painful issues that are still dividing Moldavian archaeologists and historians; also the methodology used can serve as an example in the study of other national archaeological schools of the post-Soviet area, and not only.)"
Roman Rabinovich, High Anthropological School University, Chisinau in Stratum plus, issue number 5, 2019, 401-408

"Demersul lui Iurie Stamati poate servi drept un exemplu de abordare echilibrată și echidistantă a celor două concepte istoriografice aflate în antagonism. [...] Lucrarea lui Iurie Stamati, fătă îndoială, este un studiu foarte bine documentat, care ne permite o mai bună înțelegere atât a discursurilor istoriografice privind arheologia slavă în spațiul pruto-nistrean din perioada sovietică, cât și a profilului academic al celor angajați în aceste discuții.". Sergiu MUSTEAȚĂ, in Plural, 8 (2), 2020.

ENG: Iurie Stamati’s approach may serve as an example of a balanced and prudent approach to those two historiographic concepts [the Slavic “dossier” and the archaeology of the early Middle Ages in the Republic of Moldova] that are still in opposition to each other. […] Iurie Stamati’s work is without any doubt a very well researched study, which allows a better understanding of the historiographic discourses regarding the Slavic archaeology in the lands between the Prut and the Dniester rivers during the Soviet period, as well as the academic profile of those engaging in those discussions. I therefore recommend this book to all those interested in the history of the archaeology and history-writing in the Soviet Union. Iurie Stamati’s book is an excellent example of critical analysis of the post-war academic discourses in Eastern Europe.