Cities in Thrace and Dacia in Late Antiquity: Studies and Materials 902560790X, 9789025607906

Citation preview

! »

Velizai Velkov •

I. •. - •

I

-ITIES IN THRACE AND DACIA IN LATE ANTIQUITY (Studies and Materials)

AMSTERDAM ADOLF M. HAKKERT PUBLISHER

1977

I.S.B.N. 90.256.0723.3 I.S.B.N. 90.2S6.0790.X

J

Copyright 1976 by A.M. Hakkcrt, Amsterdam. Netherlands

All Rights resened. No part of this hook may he reproduced or translated in any form, hy print, photoprint, microfilm or any other means without written permission from the publisher

Printed in the Netherlands

T5F

Vi im

TO THE MEMORY OF

HENRI FRANKFORT

1897- 1954

■

r 0 N ST

INTRODUCTION

The close cooperation between the Institute of Thracology (Bulgarian Academy of Sciences) and the section Thracology of the extra-mural Henri

Frankfort Centre at Amsterdam has now resulted in republishing in our series this piece of important Bulgarian research work, which otherwise

through the language barrier would perhaps have remained inaccessible for

international study.

The transitional period from Antiquity to Middle Ages, both in the Western and Eastern part of the Roman Empire, confronts us with many

problems, which only can be solved by a combined study of archaeological and literary data. Following this method Velizar Velkov demonstrates

convincingly in the present work that in the cities of Thrace and Dacia during the crucial IV. • VI. centuries A.D. phenomena of continuity prevail

over those of discontinuity, which because of the frequent "barbarian" invasions is all too readily assumed for these regions.

This monograph by Velkov is an up-to-date standard-work, in which

not only city-life but also the conditions in the country have been scru­ tinized and in which is contained the combined knowledge on these topics of contemporary Bulgarian and, only in a slightly lesser degree,

Roumanian scholarship.

Amsterdam, April 1975

Jan G.P. Best

Henri Frankfort Centre Spuistraat 90 A

vii

PREFACE TO THE FIRST EDITION In 1954, to acquire the academic degree of Candidate of the Historical Sciences the author of the present monograph defended a dissertation, written on the idea and under the guidance of Professor Hristo Danov and

Professor Hristo Gandev and entitled “The Cities and Villages of Thrace and Dada in the Fourth and Fifth Centuries A.D.”. The reviewers Profes­

sor B, Cerov and corresponding member of the Bulgarian Academy of Sciences Professor V. BeSevliev made some important suggestions for some conections in the monograph, for additions to it and for the enlargement of some parts of it. Following their advice, the author

enlarged the volume of the work and included the sixth century. He made use of additional archaeological and historical material, went into the ethnical changes, etc. Through widening the scope and depth of the problems, it became necessary to make a more detailed study of the cities

and villages in Thrace and Dacia and it was decided to write two separate monographs - one on the cities and the other on the villages - in order to obtain a fuller picture of the development of the populated pbces in

Thrace and Dacia in Late Antiquity. This separation of the cities from the village might give rise to objec­

tions particuhrly in regard to such questions as b^ landed property (which Is of equal importance in the study of the cities and villages), the position

of the cobni, the mining industry, internal trade, the villages’ economic

dependency on the cities, etc. It is often difficult to study the economic Bfe of a city without connecting it with the villages in the area. A wider

and more detailed study of the villages in Thrace, however, requires some preliminary research which has not yet been carried out. The author

himself began such research (see

IstoriOeski

Pregled, XII, 1956, p.

93-109) but his work showed that there is very little material available for this purpose and the sources have stiH been insufficiently studied to allow

one to make any important generalizations: there have been almost no excavations of villages in in Late Antiquity and the juridical sources require additional elucidation, especially in connection with the develop­

ment of villages in other parts of the Eastern Roman Empire. Besides this

ix

we still know very little about the development of the Thracian village in

the pre-Roman period and in the first three centuries of the Roman epoch of which the fourth century is the natural successor. Therefore in the

present work we are considering only the cities and a separate study will be made of the villages. In spite of this in the present monograph, a study

has been made of questions that go beyond the limits of the cities because it is difficult to keep only to the towns or to the villages in dealing with

some questions: the list of inhabited places, ethnic changes, the class struggle, historic events, etc. In the present monograph such matters are touched upon in so far as they exerted an influence on the development of

the city we are dealing with and the facts we succeed in establishing here will form the basis on which a future study of the villages in Late

Antiquity will be built. Only then shall we get a full picture of the

socio-economic, political and ethnic development of the Eastern Balkan lands at the end of the period of Antiquity.

In the present monograph our claim is to systematize the archaeolo­ gical and historical data that are available about the cities in the Eastern

Balkan lands from the end of the third to the end of the sixth century A.D. In the present state of research into the history of the Bulgarian lands

in Late Antiquity it is impossible to give full answers to many questions that arise, but the author hopes the material that has been collected here wiU give a certain idea of the development of the cities from the fourth to the sixth century A.D. The present study will show that in these lands life went on unbroken and it will bridge the gap between the ancient and the

medieval city in this part of the European continent. The data here given refutes the views held by some that the cities in the Eastern Balkans were completely destroyed and the land laid waste at the time when the Slavs were settling here. It should not be forgotten that there are two sides to

this question: the continuity in the development of the cities from the fourth throu^ the sixth century, a fact which we consider as proved, and the continuity of the city of the sixth century in the Bulgarian city of the

ninth century, a question on which we are just beginning to work. In the

present study we are laying the foundations for this work. In our work, chiefly in the notes, we have used some material that belongs to the period before the fourth century AD. We deem this

necessary in order to show the link between Roman and Late Roman culture in Thrace and the continuity in this culture but our generalizations

X

are based only on the data, however scanty that may be, of the period from the fourth century to the sixth. Wherever possible, we tried to give

the archaeological material in exact chronological order. We have discussed the ethnic changes in a separate chapter in order to

emphasize their importance. This is one of the most important questions for those who are interested in the conditions under which the Slavs setded in our lands and created the new Bulgarian state. Besides this, it

would have been impossible to make a detailed study of the epigraphic

material bearing on the ethnic problems and to discuss its connection with the different cities and regions if it had been placed in the second chapter, where the political events are considered from a general point of view.

The author expresses his thanks to those who directed him to the study of the problems of the Late Antiquity and to those who took part in the discussions of the present work in the respective departments and the

Scientific Council of the Archaeological Institute. I am particularly grateful to Professor B. Gerov, Professor V. Besevliev, Professor Dr. G.

Mihailov, Iv. Venedikov, Professor D. Angelov and Str. LiSev,' who gave

me valuable advice in making corrections and in adding supplementary material.

1959

V. VELKOV

PREFACE TO THE SECOND EDITION This book was published under the same title “Cities in Thrace and Dacia in

Late Antiquity (IV-VI c). Studies and Materials”, in the

Bulgarian language in Sofia in 1959. It aroused considerable interest because of the fact that all the sources of information and studies on the cities of the south-eastern part of the Balkan Peninsula were mentioned in

it. The book was the fust generalized study dealing with these problems to be published and was quickly sold out. Since then in the years from 1959 to 1972. new material on this subject has accumulated, material resulting

chiefly from archaeological research work on these cities. The inscriptions of this period that have been published have also been systematized and

there has been some thorough research done on general questions related to the period of Late Antiquity. All this has made a new edition of the book necessary with more precise treatment of dilTerent questions and the

conection of some inaccurate points. In particular the scientific structure

has been revised: the whole of the newly published literature has been

included, new archaeological research and the results of it have been made

use of and the inscriptions have been indicated according to the last edition published. References in the Bul^rian language are given in an abbreviated form, transcribed and translated in the language of the respec­

tive summary. A map of the most important towns and villages mentioned

in the book is attached to the English edition. Autor of the map is P. Koledarov.

The author is especiaUy grateful to the A M. Hakkert Publishing House for undertaking to publish the second edition of this book in the English language. Sofia, 1973

V. VELKOV

xiii

CONTENTS

Introduction

vii

Preface to the first edition

ix

Preface to the second edition

xiii

Abbreviations

xvii

Chapter 1;

introductory notes - Significance. Problems. Scope.

1

Historiography. Sources Chapter 2:

1. A Survey of the historical events in the Eastern Balkan lands from the end of the third century through the sixth century A.D.

21

2, The administrative system of Thrace and Dacia

from the fourth through the sixth century (Provin­ ces. Cities. Urban Territory. Military Organisation) 1

61

3. Internal structure of the Late Roman city in

Thrace and Dacia (Municipal Government. City

Councils. Jurisdiction)

77

4. Cities in Thrace and Dacia from the fourth to

the sixth century

■

a)Littoral Dacia (Dacia Ripensis)

85 85

b) Inner Dacia (Dacia Mediterranea)

93

c) Lower Moesia (Moesia Inferior)

i

Chapter 3:

107

e) Hemimont

114

f) Europa

119

g) Rhodopa

124

h) Thrace

127

The economic development of Thracian and Dacian Cities

Chapter 4:

99

d) Scythia

135

a) Industry and craftmanship

137

b) Trade, Roads and communications

172

c) Agriculture and land relations

197

The material culture of the Late ancient Cities in Thrace and Dacia

201

XV

Chapter S;

Cbss and social relations in the Late Roman City in Thracia and Dacia

233

a) Slaves

233

b) Urban plebeians

237

c) Curiales

238

d) Senators

241

e) Administrative and other officials. Military Chapter 6:

Chapter?:

officers and clergy

243

The class struggle Ethnic changes in Thrace and Dacia from the

249

fourth through the sixth century

261

Conclusion

283

Index

287

xvi

ABBREVIATIONS AA AAHung AB Abh. Akad. Berlin, Ph. his). KJ.

Acta Am Hung. Acu SS Ades II

ALM

Agaih. AMB

Amm. Aful. Acad. Roum. Mem. sect. isl. Anal. Boll. Anon. Byz. Anon. p. Dion. Anz. d. phil. hist. KI. d. Osl. Akad.

AP ApoIl. Sid. Arch. Jug; Atcheolojpieski olkrilia Arie ant. c med. Bdevlicv, Ka-tlcllnamcn

BdwJiev. PersoncRnamun Befevlic*. Prinosi

BIB BJ Blumncr. rvchnologiu

Archiiologischer Anzcigei, Berlin Acta Aichaeologica Hungarica. Budapest Archaologisehcs Beiblatt. Wien Abhandlungcn der prcussischcn Akademic dcr Wissenschafien zu Berlin, Phdosophischhistonsche Klassc. Berlin Acta Antiqua Hungirica. Budapest Acta Sanctorum Actes du Premier congres international des eludes balkaniques cl Sud-Lsi curopeennes. t. II. Sofia. 1969 Arcliaologisch-epigraplnsclic Mittcilungen aus Oslerreicli-L'ngarn, Wien. A^thias. ed. HGM Antikc und .Mitlelalter aus Bulganen, herausgegeben von V. Beievliev und J. Irmscher Berlin. 1960 (Berliner Byzantinischc Arbciten, Bd. 21) Ammianus Marcellinus, ed. Clark Analele Academici Romane. Memoriilc sectiuni istoriec, BucaresI Analecta Bollandiana. Bruxelles Anonymus Byzantinus, ed. Kdehly Anonymuspost Dionem, cd. Miillef Anzciger der philosophisch-hisiorische Klassu der Osterrciehischcn Akademic der WLs.sei> sehal'ten. Wien Archcoloski pregled. Beograd Sidonius Apollinaris. ed. MGH Archaeologia Jugoslav ica. Beograd Archeologidcski otkriiia v Bulgaria. Sofia, I9$7 Arte antiqua e nKdioevale V. Besevliev. Zui Dculung dcr Kastellnamen in Procops Werk “De acdificiis", Amsterdam 1970. V. Besevliev, Die Personennamen bei den Tlirakern, Amsterdam, 1970. V. Besevliev, bpigrafski prinosi (Epigraphische Beilragel, Sotia. 1952. Bulgitska istoriceska bibliotcka, Sotia Bonner Jahrbiicher. Bonn H. Bliimner, Technologic und Terminologie der

BM BMImpRom BSb Bui. com. mon. bt.

Bull epigr. Bury. History^

BZ CA Chr. Pasch. Claud. Claude, Byzantinische Stadl

CIL Class. PhiL Cod. lust. Cod. Thcod. Condurachi, Monumenti

CRAI

Dacia Daremberg-Saglio

Demougeot, De I'uniU

Detschew, Sprachieste

Dimitrov, Plofiite

Ddiger, Stadt

Dremsizova-Neiiinova, ViUa

xviii

Gewerbe und Kunste bei Griechen und Rometn. Leipzig 1-IV, 1875. Balgarska misal. Softs Bulletino del museo dell'lmpero Romano, Roma Balgarska sbitka. Sofia Buleiinul combiurui monumentelor islorice, Bucarest. Bulletin 4pigrapbique. Paris. l.B. Bury, History of the Later Roman Empire from the Death of Theodosius 1. to the Death of Justinian, MI, New York, 1958. Byzantinische Zeitschrifi, Milnchen

Cahiers archtologiques, Paris Chronicon Paschale, ed. Bonnac Claudianus, cd. MCH D. Claude, Die byzantinische Stadt im 6. Jhdt. Milnchen, 1969. (Byzsntinisches Atchiv. Heft 11 Ik if Corpus in.scripiionum Latinarum. Berolini Classical Philology Codex lustinianus, ed. Krueger Codex Theodosianus, ed. Mommsen-Meyer E, Condurachi, Monumenti cristiani nell' lllyrico, Ephemeris Dacoromana 9, 1940. Comptes rendus de I'Acaddmie des inscriptions et Belles Lettres, Paris

Dacia, Revue d'atchiologie et d'histoire ary cienne. Bucarest Ch. Darembetg and E. Saglio, Dictionnaire des antiquit6s grecques et romaines d'apres les textes et les monuments. Paris, 1877-1919 E. Demougeot. De I'unite k la division de I'Empire remain (395-410). Paris 1951 D. Detschew. Die Thtakischen Sprachteste, Wien. 1957 (Schriften der Balkankommission. LinguLstische Abteilung XIV). D.P. Dimitrov, Nadgrobnite plodi ot rimsko vreme v Sevema Bulgaria (Die Gnibsiclen rdmischei Zeit aus Notdbulgatien). Sofia. 1941 Fr. DOlgcr, Die fitihbyzanlinische und byzantinisch beeinflu&te Stadl. Alli del 3. Congres.so intemazionale di studi suH'Allo Medioevo, Benevento, Monteverginu, Amalfi 1956, puU. Spolcto 1959 Cv. Dremsizova-Neldinova. La villa romaine en

Drinov, SoCinenia Duraont-Homollc, Melanges

EAZ

El balk. £( hist. Euagr. ^Eugipp. Eunap. Exc. Vai

FesL FF FHG Fontes graeci Fontes Jugoslaviac

Fontes latini

GanSanin. Nabsiita

Ucogr. Rav. Gerov. Prou^ania

Cetw. Pozvmleni

Gerov. Romanisam

Gerov. Sliwlta De£vv

Bulgarie, Actes II (see) Soiincnia na Marin Drinov I. Trudove po butgarska i sJavianska istotia. Sofia, 1909 A. Dumont. Melanges d'areheologie et d'epigraphic. reunis par Th. Homollc et L. Heuaey. Paris. 1892 EthnogiaphLsch-archiiologische Zeitsehrift Berlin Etudes baikaniquus. Sofia Etudes historiques. Sofia Euagrius. ed. Bidez Eugippius. cd. MGH Euniqjius. cd. Muller Excerpta Valesiana. cd. Motcau*Velkov

Festus, ed. Teubneriana Fixscliungcn und Fortschritte. Berlin Fragmcnta Historicorum Craceorum, cd. C et Th. Muller. 1-V, Paris. 1878-1885 Fontes Cracei historiac Bulgarieae. I-II, Sofu. 1954-1958. Vizantiski izvori za isloriju naroda Jugoslavijc (Fontes byzantini hbtoriam populorum Jugosbviae spevtantes). 1, Beograd. 1955 Fontes Latini historiac Bulgancac. 1. Sofia. 1958

Dr.- M. Gaiasanin. Arbcoloska naiasUta u Srbii. Beograd, 1951 Ravennatis Anonymi Cosmographia. cd. Sehnetz B. Gerov, Proudvania varchu zapadnotrakijskite zemi prez rimsko vreme (Untcrsuchungen uber die wcstthrakischcn Lander in rbmisclier Zeit). I-IV GSUFF (sec), 54, 1961: 61. I967;62. 1968:63. 1969 B. Gerov. Prouevania varchu pozemicnitc otnoKnia v bulgarskitc zcmi prez rimsko vreme (Untersuchungen iiber die Agrarverhiillnissc in den bulgarisehen Landern in rbmischer Zeit). GSUFF (see). 50. 1955 B. Gerov. Romanizmal mezdu Dunava i BaF kana (La romanisation cnire Ic Danube c( les Balkans). I-II. GSUIFF (see). 41. 1948/1949: GSUFF (see). 47, 1952 B. Gerov, Zur Deutung ciner StcUe der bekannten Pizosinschrifi und des Cod. lust. X, 1.

xix

Gerov, VzaimootnoSenia

Gias SAN

GMPO

GNM

GPINM

GPM

GrofSe, Militaigeschichtc

GSUFF

GSUIFF

HGM Hiw. Hilar. Himer. Hist. Aug. Hoffmann, Bewegungsheer

Honigmann

lA )A1

XX

4, StudiaDedev, (see) B. Geiov, Latino-giacki leksikalni vzaimootn^enia v nadpisite ot balkanskite zemi (Lateinisch-griechische lexikalische gegenseitige Beziehungen in den inschiiften aus den Balkanlandern), GSUIFF, (see), 42, 1945/1946; 43, 1946/1947. Gias Srbske akademije nauk (Serbian Akademy of sciences). Beograd GodSnik na muzeite v Plovdivski okrag (Annuaire des musees dans le departement de Plovdiv), Plovdiv Godisnik na narodnia archeologiceski muzei (Annuaiie , Et Hist (see), II, Sofia, 1965 V. Velkov, Novi danni u ikonomikata i istoriata na antidnia grad pri Malko Tatnovo in; Izvestia Muzei Burgas (see), II, Sofia, 1965 V, Velkov, Montana (Mihailovgrad), inSbornik “Ciprovtzi”, Sofia, 1971 V. Velkov, Das Scliicksai einer t'rlilibyzanlinischen Stadlxut Zeil der Vdlkerwandcniiig lOdcssosVarna). Aklen des XI. Iniurnaiionalen Byzant inis ten-Kongresses 1958, MijnclH-11.1961 V. Velkov, Ratiaria, eine rdmischc Stadt in Bulgarien, Eirene V, Praha. 1966 V. Velkov, Robovladcnicio vSetdicavsvetlinala na Kunstantinovuto zakonodatelstvu, Sburnik Marin Drinov, Sofia. 1961 V. Velkov. Robstvolo v Trakia i Misia prcz antiinosla, Sofia 1967 (The Slavery in Thracia and Moesia in the Antiquity) V. Velkov, Kam voprosa za ezika i bita na trakite prcz IV vek ol n.e. (Uber die Spiache und Lebensweise der ThrakM im 4. Jahrhundeit u.Z.I, Studia Dedev (see). 1958

Vdkov, Themistius Velkov, Theodosius

Velkov, Zusammcnsetzung

Velkov-Hosek, Eunomia

VDI Veiters

ViSb Viz Sbornik Wr

Waltzing, Corporations

WKlPh nd. nar. muzca Zb. ladova SAN Zcillvr, Origines

Zft. Sw. Stf. R. A. Zonar. Zoa.

V. Velkov, Svedeniala na Themistius za Trakia, Serta Kazaroviana (.see), 19SS V. Velkov, Ein Beitrag zum Aufenthalt des Kaisers Theodosius I. in der Provinz Skythien im Jahte 386 im Lichle neuer Erkcnntnisse, Eunomia (LF), Praha, 1961. n. 2) V. Velkov, Zur Frage det etnisehen Zusammensetzung der Bevdlkerung in den Stiidten Thrakicns in der SpMtantike, Neue Beitragc zur Geschichte der aniiken Welt, 11, Berlin, 1965 V. Velkov-R. HoJek, New antique finds in Raliaria (Moesia Inferior), Eunomia, II, pars 1, Praha 1958 (= Listy Filologicke VI (LXXXI) Veslnik dtevnej istorii, Moskva H. Vetters, Dacia Ripcnsis, Wien, 1950 ISchriften der Balkankommission. AntP quarische Abtcilung, XI/1) Voenno istoriceski abotnik, Sofia Vizantijski zhomik, Leningrad Vizantijski Vremennik, Moskva J.P. Waltzing, Eludeshisturiqiiessurlescorporations professionneUes chcz les Romains depuis les origines jusqu'a la chute de I'Empire d'Oxident, Fli, Louvain, 1895 Wochenschrift fur klassische Philologie Zbornik radova narodnog muzea. Beograd Zbomik radova Srpske akademie nauk, Beograd J. Zeller, Les ori^nes dtretioines dans les pro­ vinces danubiennes de I'Empire romain, Paris, 1918 Zeitschrift fur Savigny Stiftung, Romanistsche Abtcilung Zonaras, ud. Teubneriana Zosimus, ed. M^delssohn

■k

k

xxvii

: It

INTRODUCTORY NOTES

Significance. Problems. Scope. Historio^phy. Sources. Research into the link between the culture of Antiquity and that of the Middle Ages in the Eastern Balkan lands is of particular importance to Bulgarian science. It is necessary that a thorough study should be made of

the social relatioits, the agrarian problems, the material culture and the ethnic changes that took pbce in the transititm period from the slave

system to the establishment of feudalism in Thrace. Such research would

reveal the economic base on which the Bulgarian state has been built up

and the Bulgarian nation has been formed. Only then will it be possible to ascertain what disappeared in the storms of the great incursions of the tribes which attacked the Balkans from the North from the fourth through

the seventh century and to ascertain what remained and became an integral part of the Bulgarian state in the Middle Ages.

Of great importance in this research is the study of the cities in this

region in Late Antiquity. It is known that a number of the ancient cities were not destroyed in the period from the fourth to the sixth centuries

but remained and developed as medieval cities. Such towns ate Serdica (Siedets), Philippopolis, Odessos (Vama), Durostorum (Druster), Mesem-

biia, Apollonia (Sozopol). Adrianopolis, Augusta Trajana (Beroe) and Bmonia (Bdin). These facts raise the question of the fate of these cities in

the period of Late Antiquity and of the continuity in the development of ^ cities in Thrace and Dacia in the period between Antiquity and the

Middle Ages.*. Such a question cannot be exhausted in one or two studies made in a

Aort period of time. Because of the complexity of the problems with

uduch scholars are faced in studying the epoch of Late Antiquity, because

of the insufficiency of historical data on some periods (for example on the fifth century) and especially because of the fact that we know very little ibout the material culture of the cities in this region in Late Antiquity,

;

I. O.K «zmfn»>',peared just at the same time as Christianity was spreading, is the

so-called agiographic literature. In the epoch we are considering it con­ sisted chiefly of the lives of martyrs who were connected in some way

with Thrace. The utilization of these sources is rendered difficult because of their peculiar nature. Here we find too many things that have been

fabricated, and an abundance of loci communes, that is, descriptions of a general character which are found in almost all such documents. This is

especially characteristic of the early lives, which in this case are of most

interest to us. Nevertheless the lives contain realities which reflect the material life of the respective epoch. However fantastic are the things which are described, they are always given in a form congenial to the

hearers,

familiar and near to his consciousness. Therefore the utilization

of the lives must be preceded by a preliminary study in order to lift the

veil of fantasy in which they are enveloped and to establish the time vriien they were written and what they reflect. Thus it has been established that the life describing the martyrdom of Alexander of Rome can be used as an 34. Belkov. Surta Kazaroviaiu, 2, 1955, 254 sq.

15

important source for the topography of Thrace of the fourth century?* Important data about the city of Adrianople and its environs and about

Heraclea can be taken from the life of Saint Philip, who was bishop of the

city of Heraclea in 304?* In the life of Hypatius some details are given about the devastations caused by the Huns in Thrace?'' e) Inscriptions. The inscriptions of Late Antiquity are not of such a rich and varied nature as those of earlier centuries, but in spite of this they

do contain important data which supplement and enlarge the other sources. Most of them are old Christian gravestone inscriptions. Although

the texts are stereotypic they are of interest because the occupations of the deceased or their birthplaces are often mentioned. The names, al­ though in many cases stereotypic Christian names, allow us to gain some

insist into the ethnic composition of the cities in Thrace and Dacia.

Another group are the inscriptions on buildings which are valuable, in

some cases the only existing evidence of building activity from the fourth to the sixth century. Other evidence of building activity are the stamps on

bricks, which are also an important source of information about the location of the workshops and the movement of army detachments when the bricks came from military workshops. Another small group is formed by inscriptions in honour of different personalities, inscriptions on the

boundary columns between the estates or on milestones. However, the number of such inscriptions decreases considerably in the epoch of Late

Antiquity.

The use of epigraphic material of the period of Late Antiquity from the fourth to the sixth century is difficult because of the fact that many of

the texts which are written in cursive writing and are difficult to read have 35. Dimitrov. IBAI, 8, 1934, 1 l(rl6l. 36. Velkov, Studia D. DeCev. 731 sq.; Velkov, Gestistyrum - ein angeblieh thrakisches Wort, LB. 15/2, 1971, 37-39; yeOcov. Pawio SS Maximi. Theodoti ct Asclepiodolac, IIBI. 14/15, 1964, 381-389. 37. In order to interpret this agiographieal material eompare it with what is contained in A. Koiuiakov's interesting iMok Oeerki vizantijskeq kulluri po dannim gredeskoj agiogratii truss), Moskva, 1917, 8 sq. The most important agiographieal sources of information about Thrace have been collected tn; H. Dtlehay, Saints de Thrace cl de Mesie, Anal. Boll 31. 1912. 136-176; the agiographieal data available on Durostorum have been dealt with in detail by R. Constantinescu. Les marly res de Durostorum. RESEE, 5. 1967, 5-20 (Cf. BZ, 61. 1968, 170), His highly critical opinion of their value as sources of information is not well grounded and is unacceptable. Compare what he has written with the critical notes of Bamea. Dacia, n..s. 12, 1968,417-420.

16

still not been deciphered or have not been published in a good form. Some have been published without comments.”

Finally we shall mention some other sources which we have used in

our work. The principal source of data on the administrative division of the Balkan Peninsula is the work by Hierocles, called "Fellow-Traveller” ("Synecdemus”), in which all the more important cities are enumerated. It is supposed that Hierocles made use of older sources dating back to the

time of Theodosius 11, and this is the reason that some authors dated the writing of the "Fellow-Traveller” or at least the source used by Hierocles

to that time. However, the latest research has shown that "FellowTraveller”, in the state that we know it, was written between August 1,

527 and the autumn of 528. Therefore, the source reflects the administra­ tive division of the eastern Roman provinces during the fifth century and at the beginning of the sixth.’’

In the lists of bishoprics issued in the so-called "Notitiae episcopatuum” are to be found the names of many cities in which we are

interested and which in the list are shown as the ecclesiastical centres of

episcopal dioceses. These lists were compiled at different times, but in any case after the fourth century and their chronology is rather uncertain. They cannot be considered as fully reliable evidence of the existence of

some cities. In respect to reliability the lists conuined in the protocols of the synods and signed by the bishops are much more important. These lists

are trustworthy evidence of the existence of the respective cities in the year of the synod.**

In this work those lists which were issued under the name of Georgius of Cyprus (they are a part of "Notitiae episcopatuum”) have also been used. It is assumed that the first notitia (that of Basilius) was compiled at

the beginning of the ninth century. "Descriptio” of Georgius - between 38. The in.wfiptions of the period from the fourth to the sixth century, discovered m Bulgaria, have been sysicmatued, published and commented upon by K Beievim -Spatgriechische und spatlateinische Imchnflen aus Bulgarien, Berlin, 1964. For the inscriptions of Scythia cf. k'. Popescu. Die spairbmischen Inschriften aus KleinScythicn, Dacia II, 1967, 163-176 with bibliography. He is preparing to publish a scientific edition of all the tarly Christian inscriptions found in the Dobrudja. 39. Fontes graeei, 2, 87-94, £ Hoiugmam. Le synccdemos d’Hierocles el fopuscule gcographique de George deChypre, Bruxelles, 1939. ^0. £, Popescu, Contributions k la geographic historique de la pc'ninsule ndkaniquc aux Vo-Vllle sieclex de n. ere, Dacia, 13. 1969 403-415 with Bibliography.

17

591 and 606. The chief source was probably Hierocles, but Georgius of

Cyprus himself noted some administrative changes which were introduced because of barbarian incursions (for instance in the text about the pro­

vince Scythia).**

Very important sources of information about the cities in Lower Moesia, Dacia Ripensis, Scythia and in parts of Thrace are the so-called ’’Notitia Dignitatum”,*’ together with the so-called "Laterculus Veronensis”*’ and ’’Laterculus Polemii Sitvii” giving the camps where the

military detachment in these regions were stationed, some ethnic changes,

the productions of arms and, generally speaking, the administrative struc­ ture of the Roman Empire and, as a part of this Empire, of the Balkan lands. The question of how this source came into being is rather compli­

cated, because the diflerent parts were written at different times, but it is

generally assumed that the text dealing with the East Roman Empire was

written in the twenties of the fifth century and therefore reflects the

conditions in Thrace and Dacia in the fourth century. We used the so-called ’’Description of the Whole World and the Nations’' (’’Descriptio totius mundi et gentium”) as a source of data on

the most important economic centres of the East Roman Empire. This

wOTk was written about 451 probably by a Syrian, who was apparently a merchant. In this description there are some short items of information

about the economy of Dacia, Thrace and Moesia and also about different cities (Naissos, Heraclea). But it is evident that the author did not know

the interior of these lands.** Among the numerous references to the cities in these regions in the lexicons of Stephan of Byzantium and Suidas there arc also data on some

of those in Late Antiquity. The principal and most important source of information about the

Roman roads and the cities situated along them are the ’’Roman Itiner­

aries” {’’Itineraria Romana”). The text we know was finally completed in the fourth century but it is based on older maps. The ’’Roman Itineraries”

41. Honigmann, 49. 42. Fonics latini, 1, 224; D. Hoffmann. Das spatromischu Buwu^ingsheef. 1.11. Dusseldorf, 1969-1970. 43. A.H.M. Jones, The date and value of the Verona list, JRS, 44, 1954, 21. 44. Fontes latini. I, 78 and Expositio totius mundi et gentium, introd.,texte critique, traductions, notes et commcntairc par Jean Rouge, Paris, 1966 (Sources chretienncs 124, S e'rie annexe de textes, non chrcticns).

18

t

is the foundation on which the historic geography of these lands in the

Late Antiquity can be reconstructed.*’

45.

Fontes tat ini. 1,9-45, 390400.

19

11

1. A SURVEY OF THE HISTORICAL EVENTS IN THE EASTERN BALKAN LANDS FROM THE END OF THE THIRD CENTURY THROUGH THE SIXTH CENTURY A.D. The middle of (he third century A.D. saw an important turning point in the development of the lands along the Lower Danube and in the

eastern part of the Balkan Peninsula. In the fifties of this century largei

scale invasions by Gothic tribes marked the beginning of important eth-

;

nical changes in these regions. In 269 the Emperor Claudius smashed the

Gothic forces at the battle of Naissos. stopping their advance south of the Danube for a hundred years and thus creating the preconditions for the

'

consolidation of the Lower Danubian limes. Because of the continuous

pressure exerted by many tribes - such as the Goths. Sarmatians. Carpi.

Custobocae and others, it became impossible to retain the Roman lands on the other side of the Danube, in spite of the attempts made by Gordian 111

(238-244), Philip the Arabian (M. Julius Rulippus) (244-249), Decius

>

(249-251) and Trebonius Gallus (251-253). The successor of Claudius . Aurelian took a decisive step to get the situation on the other side of the

Danube under control, as the position of the Romans there was becoming

untenable. He withdrew the Roman gamisons and the Roman population

K out of Dacia and created a new Dacia on the right bank of the Danube out I of lands which formerly belonged to the provinces of Thrace and Upper

B and Lower Moesia. It seems that from the very beginning Dacia was K divided into two parts - Inner and Littoral Dacia, as an inscription of 282' B mentions both provinces.** This fact underlay a number of important

B administrative changes, which led to the regions we are dealing with being B. broken up into a number of provinces. Little is known about the activity of Aurelian and Probus in Lower

B

B Moesia and Thrace. A few inscriptions and letters have survived and we can

K 46. Per/«m. 6 «}. Six also fl. Fttok, Wk), 12, 1912, 239 = RA 1912, II 46? n. ■' 200.

K

11

conclude from them that Aurelian undertook a certain amount of recon­

struction work along the limes and also inland.*^ In 271 a rather large group of Goths attacked the northern Balkan provinces of Thrace and lUyricum. They were in all probability joined by the Alans. In the autumn

of the same year AureUan went down to the region of the Lower Danube, drove the Goths to the other side of the river, followed them there and

defeated them. He was honoured by a triumph in Rome for this victory and received the title of Gothicus Maximus.** In 272 AureUan was again in Lower Moesia, namely in Scythia. At a place between Carsium and Sucidava he defeated invading Carpi and Roxolani. After that the defeated

Carpi were settled in Thrace and also in die surrounding border regions. We have evidence of this in the work of Ammianus

Marcellinus who

writes of the existence of "a village of the Carpi” in close proximity to the

fort near Carsium, the present Hursovo. At the same time AureUan probably went to Callatis and stayed there for a short time.** In 273, on his way to Palmyra he visited the provinces of Rhodopa and Thrace. In 275 the Emperor was killed by one of his own military commanders

Mukaporus, a Thracian by birth, on the Via Egnatia, near the settlement of Caenophrurion.” The activity of Probus in the Balkan lands is connected with restora­ tion work in Illyricum but this work cannot be foUowed up in detail.’* His name is also connected with some measures taken for restoring viticulture in tipper Moesia.” About 280, on his return journey from Asia Minor to Rome, Probus crossed through the Balkan lands and settled a large number

of Bastamae in Thrace. They themselves had asked to be given refuge

there.”

On November 17, 284, Diocletian was proclaimed Emperor in Nicomedia (Bithynia). After a battle on the river Morava in the spring of 285, where his rivals were defeated, Diocletian became the sole ruler of the

Empire. The changes in the poUtical and economic situation which took place 47. 48. 49. 50. 51. 52. 53.

22

ViU Aoieliani 35, 4; 41. 8. Croag, RE, 5, 1905, coL 1377-1378 sv. L. Domitius Aureliuiu. Gneg, op.cit.. col. 1388. Groag, op.cit., col. 1390. fkiae, RE, 2, 1896, coL 2521 s.v. M. Aur. Probus. fl. Gerov, Serta Kazaroviana, 2, 187-193. Zos. 71,1; ViU Probi 18.1-2.

IK

/hrCLce,

in the Eastern Balkan lands in the time of Diocletian and the trans­ formation of these distant Roman provinces into the hinterland of the new

capital of Constantinople turned the attention of the State from the fourth through the sixth century to these regions. Building activity was

stepped up along the roads because the main lines of communication between the eastern and western regions of the Empire passed through the Balkans. Besides this it was necessary to take special measures for the

fortification of the limes along the course of the Lower Danube because ths river had become the frontier between the barbarian world and the

Empire. In considering the activity of the predecessors of Diocletian and

of Diocletian himself in the Balkan lands two things stand out: their endeavour to stabilize the Balkan Peninsula and the Empire in general and

to create a new administrative organisation. This organisation was created

and after some changes were made in it in the fourth century it remained in force until the time of Emperor Heraclius.

During the first years of the sole rule of Diocletian up to 286. when Maximian Herculius was appointed as the second Augustus, Thrace was

not mentioned in any narrative or other sources. In the period between

286 and 293 when the Tetrarchy had finally been formed. Diocletian made frequent journeys to Thrace, chiefly for the purpose of strength­

ening the fortifications and defence of the frontiers. In 286 he was in Perinthos, which was renamed Heraclea soon after this.^ in 287-289

Diocletian was eng^d in battles with the Goths and Sarmatians along the Lower Danube. In 290 he advanced along the Central Road, halted in

Adrianople on February 27 and on April 3 he was again in Byzantion. He went against the Saracens, who were attacking the eastern provinces and defeated them and on his way back he settled part of them in Thrace.’’ He

spent the winter of 290 - 291 chiefly in Sirmium, from where he had control over the Middle Danube frontiers, which were being almost un­ ceasingly attacked by the Sarmatians. On December 4 he was in Oescus.” The clashes with the Sarmatians in Pannonia which occurred the next year

did not affect Thrace.

On March 1, 293 each of the two Augusti chose his respective Caesar (heir presumptive). The choise of Diocletian, who at that time was 54. RE 7 A, 1948, col. 2428. 55. Panes, lat. VIIX(V) 21.1. 56. Cod. Just.. 8. 47 (48),5.

23

Augustus of the eastern part of the Empire, fell on Galerius whom he

made governor of Illyricum and Thrace, that is the lands south of the

Danube • between the Black Sea, the Adriatic Sea and the river Inn - with his seat of residence in Sirmium.”

In the regions which we are dealing with, the period of the Tctrarchy (293-305) was characterized by great building activity, the frequent

journeys of Diocletian and clashes between Galerius and the barbarian

tribes beyond the Danube. In 293 Diocletian visited Melantiasa / April 15/, Heraclea /April 17/, Tzirallum /May 1/, Adrianople /May 10-13/, Beroe /May 17-19/, Philippopolis /May 25-June 17/, Serdica /June 24-28/,

again Philippopolis /July 2-15/, and from here via Viminacium he went to Sirmium, where he stayed until the end of the year.’® At the beginning of September 294 Diocletian was again on his way from Sirmium to the East. Now, however, he chose the route along the

Danube for the obvious purpose of seeing for himself the state of the limes

in that part of the Thracian diocese. Naturally this tour had a favourable effect on its consolidation. [hocletian started from Singidunum not earlier than September 8 and

arrived in Ratiaria not later than October 8 where he stayed until October

10. From here via Cebrus /October 11/, Variana /October 13/, Appiaria

/October 17/, Transmarisca /October 18/, Durostorum /October 21-22/ he went to Marcianopolis on October 25. Diocletian was also in this city on October 26. From here via Anchialus /October 28/, Deultum /October 30/,

Adrianople /October 30-31/, Burtudizum /November 1-3/, Heraclea /November S-8/,

Melantias

/October 9/ and Byzantium he went to

Nicomedia.” In 295-296 Galerius was engaged in heavy fighting in the region of the Lower Danube with invading tribes, among which it is supposed there were

Carpi and Goths. Our sources are silent about these events, but K. Patsch

succeeded in piecing together some details of these events by combining the information obtained from epigraphic monuments and other short

57. This Gaterius was a peasant and was bom in Romulianum, the present day village of Yassen, in the Vidin district of Bulgaria, Thu village was named after his mother who was called Romula. After his death, Galerius was buried there. SeeAur. Victor, Epitome 40,15;Patsdi, Beitrage III/1,12, Arun, 2. 58. Enfilin, RE 7 A, 1948, coL 2438, 59. op.cit.,coL 2439-2440.

24

literary data;“ The city of Transinarisca was ravaged and the city of

Tropaeum Trajani was destroyed as is known from inscriptions on build­ ing which were erected soon after this date. A breach was made in the limes somewhere between Durostorum and Transmarisca and parts of the present-day Dobrudja were also invaded. However, the tribes were soon

driven back, the limes was strengthened and settlers were brought to a part of the frontier region on the right bank of the Danube.^* As early as the next year (297), during the war with the Persians, in which Galerius took

part, there were Goths fighting in his army. Only one decree issued by Diocletian in 295 is known and that one was issued on February 23 in trimontium (probably Philippopolis). As we do not possess any other data

about this journey, we suppose that there may have been a mistake in the dating of it and that the decree will probably have to be ascribed to another year.“

The lands which we are now considering, were mentioned only in 303,

when a tribe, whose ethnical origin has not been completely explained, were driven out of their land by the Goths and gave themselves up to Galerius, who settled them on this side of the Oanube.^^ At the same time

Diocletian who was on his way from Nicomedia to Rome in connection with his vicinalia and who took the route along the Danube stopped on June 8 in Durostorum.^ In the spring of the next year (304) although he was already in bad health he made the return journey to Nicomedia.®’ He probably had to make this journey because of the necessity of inspecting the building operations for strengthenmg the fortifications of the cities in the region of the Lower Danube • especially Tropaeum Trajani, Trans­

marisca, Durostorum and other places - some of which had been recently damaged. 60. Patsch. Bviiragv III/l, 7-12. See also Z Kolendo. Les guerres contre les Ciupva pendant les durnieis annccs de la tetrarchic, Honunagc Marcel Renard 2 (coll. Latomus 102). Bruxelles, 1969, 378-386. 61. J. KoleiKlo. (Jne inscriplion ineonnue de Sexaginbi (*rista et la fortirication du Bas-Duiwbe sous la Utrarchie, Lirene, S. Praha, 1966, 139-154. 62. Cod. JusL 6, 20, 14; TK Mommxa, ties. Sehrirten, 2, 1905, 288. 63. Loci. De mort. pers. 38, 6: Pattch. Beitiage 111/1,11. 64. The law can also be dated Io 294. The Emperor Diocletian visiieil Durostorum in 291. This wa.s his first journey to this part of the Lower Danubian lime!,. At the utd of the same year he was in Oescus for a short time - Cod. JusL 6, 20, 14. n. Mommsen, (tcs. Schriften, 2. 1905. 290. 63. Loct. De morL pers. 17. 4: per eircuitum ripae Istiicae.

2.S

In 311 Galerius was in Serdica where he issued his well known edict on faith and tolerance, which was published soon after he went to Nicomedia, where he remained until his death. Until 314-315 no violations of the Danubian frontier in Moesia and Scythia are known. On May 1 Diocletian

and Maximian retired and Galerius and Constantius 1 Chlorus were chosen to take their places as Augusti. The Balkan lands remained under the power of Galerius until 311, when he died. At this news Maximian Daja hastened to secure Asia Minor for himself and left the Balkan Peninsula to Licinius who was of Balkan origin. Licinius was employed in the govern­

ment of Galerius as early as November 11, 308. This also met with the

approval of Constantine. In the complicated situation arising out of the struggle between Maxentius, Licinius and Maximian in 313, Constantine

and Licinius agreed to support each other, became relations by marriage and soon after the famous "Edict of Milan" was issued. Constantine gave Licinius a free hand to deal with Maximian who refused to acknowledge

the Edict and remained faithful to the old religion. The end of the struggle

between the two of them came in a decisive battle in Thrace. Maximinian Daja captured Byzantion and Heiaclea and advanced on Adrianople.

Licinius reached Adrianople via the Central Road, collected as many

soldiers as he could from the neighbouring garrisons and confronted the troops of Maximian Daja near Tziralum in the unfertile and barren plain of

Serenum. A battle took place cm April 30,313 and ended in the complete victory of Licinius. He and Constantine were now the co-rulers of die Empire.**

But the relations between the two grew strained and socm they were on bad terms. On October 8, 314 they fought a fierce battle against each

other at Cibale, the present-day Vinkovci in Slovenia, but the result of the

battle was indecisive. The struggle continued along the Central Road, Licinius gathered more troops and then sent envoys to negotiate with Constantine, who had stopped at Phllippopolis. No agreement was reach­

ed, however, and the battle between them took place on the campus Ardiensis near Adrianople.*^ The coming of the night made it possible for

66. Lact. op. cit.,4S-49. 67. Exceipta Vaksiana (ed. Moreau-Velkov) S, 17. Thu old leading CAMPUS MARDIENSIS (as in Mommsen's work) and Seuck's assumption (hat it should be larbienas must bu dropped now that its real name has been found to bv ARDIF.NSIS. This name has been accepted in a new edition of Excerpta Valusiana.

26

Licinius to withdraw his troops to the right along the road to Beroe.

Constantine dit not grasp the manoeuvre of his opponent and continued to move along the Central Road and tn this way exposed his flank to attack

and found himself in great danger. Thus he was forced to come to an agreement with Licinius and make peace with him. Now the western part of the peninsula, lUyricum, came under the rule of Constantine I. Licinius

kept only Thrace (the diocese), where he ruled until 324. In two inscriptions, one of 315 and the other of 319, both found in Africa, Constantine is called Gothicus maximus and Carpicus maximus and

K. Patsch concluded quite rightly, that these titles were given to him because of victories over Goths and Carps in the lands along the Lower

Danube. There has been discovered an inscription of this time on a

building erected to commemorate the complete restoration of the city of Tropaeum Trajani. The inscription is dated between October 18,315 and July 26, 317. At the same time there were probably erected some fortifica­

tions in the Dobrudja and the whole of the limes along the lower reaches bf the Danube was strengthened.^ The next few peaceful years in Thrace were disturbed for a short time

fai the spring of 323 by a sudden incursion of Goths. In our chief source it is pointed out, that the Goths took advantage of the neglected state of the

fortifications of the limes and crossed the Danube. Under their leader Rausimod they ravaged some parts of Moesia Inferior. Some strata of the local population took an active part in aiding and abetting the Goths. Constantine who in his later years often stayed in Serdica and Naissos. was, however at that time in Thessalonka. He personally went against the

Goths, defeated them, drove them out of Lower Moesia to the other

side of the Danube.** At the same time on April 28th he issued a strict decree, ordering that those who helped the barbarians should be taken and burned alive.”

It is thought that the incursion of these Goths in Lower Moesia took place at the beginning of 323 /after February 15/ and that they were

68. Paach, bcilraijc lll/l, 13 «j. €9. Ext. VaL S. 21: Item cum ConsUntinus Thessalonkae cssct, Gothi per wglectos limites eruperunt ut vaslata Thtacia et Moesia ptaedas ageie coeperunl. PUKh, Buitrage lll/l, ]6-18;£eeck. RE. 13, 1927, toL 229 s.v. Licinius. 70. Cod. Theod. 7, 1, I. Seeck. ZfL f. Sav. Stf. Rj\. 10.1899, ]94;&Amidr. Die Ostgurmancn^. 225.

27

driven out about the end of April, when Constantine was already in Byzantion.

The armistice between Constantine and Licinius did not last long. Both were getting ready feverishly for the final issue which was not long in

coming. An excuse for this arose out of the fact that while engaged in

driving Rausimod out of Lower Moesta Constantine and his troops had trespassed upon the territory of Licinius. Both had prepared great forces.

Licinius had managed to gather a fleet of 3S0 ships, infantry numbering 150.000 and cavalry 15.000 strong. Constantine was able to muster only

120.000 foot soldiers and 10.000 cavalry men and 200 battle ships against the forces of Licinius (we consider these numbers are grossly exaggerated).

The great battle took place on July 3. 324 near the river Hebros not far from Adrianople. In this battle Licinius suffered a crushing defeat. With

the remnants of his forces he succeeded in escaping to Asia Minor. Licinius

was defeated completely and finally on September 18,324 at Chrysopolis where he was captured and in the following year he was killed. Licinius ruled Thrace for several years. He strove to preserve pagan

cults and religions and persecuted Christians. Licinius laid great store on miliury discipline, protected the peasants from oppression, tried to make

the cities prosper and bring a period of flourishing urbanisation. At the same time his greed for wealth caused him to confiscate the property of

rich citizens. He had no liking for people who were occupied with the law, the sciences and the arts.”

An interesting fact connected with the reign of Licinius in Moesia and Littoral Dacia has come to light recently through a remarkable find of silver vessels near Ccrven-Bryag. They were made on the occasion of his

decennaUa (decennary celebrations) in 318 and bear a medallion of him. It has been noted quite rightly that this find proves that Licinius had followers in the province of Littoral Dacia where he was bom.”

The last period of the reign of Constantine in the East Balkan lands 71. Seeck. RL 13, 1927, col. 228 sq. Aur. k'/rtor 41. 8-9;/.»6. Or. 30, 6. A pagan inscription ot 323 was found in Sahovia, scv K Mrvan. Salsovia, Bucuru-jti, 1906, 27 (sctf n. 215). Condurachi. Monumenti. 36. 72. Ognenofa, Scrta Kazaroviana 2, 233 sq. Other llnds of silver treasure, directly linked with the decades of the reign of the limperor Licinius have been discovered in "Ihiace fin the urea of the town of Haskovo, that is in the former territory of the city of Adrianopleksee D. Aladiov, Archeologia (Sotia), HI, 1961.1, 47-50.

28

was marked by the increased attention that was paid to strenghtening the

fortifications of the Lower Danube limes and to strenghtening the

cornmercial and political relations between the Empire and the Goths

beyond the Danube.’^ On July 5, probably in the presence of Constantine a stone bridge over the Danube was inaugurated at Oescus - an event of

great strategical and economic importance. Inscriptions found on road

columns in many places in Thrace indicate that the roads were kept in

good repair troughout the country. In 322 the Goths attacked a part of the Sarmatians in present day Banat. The Sarmatians turned to the Emperor for assistance. Constantine the Great sent his son Constantine 11, who in March or April inflicted a

crushing defeat upon the Goths in Sarmatia. At the same time the Taifali

rose in arms against the Roman forces but,on the whole, unsuccessfully.” The tense situation in the regions beyond the Danube forced the Emperor

himself to move towards the Danube and on April 12 he arrived in Marcianopolis.” This town was connected directly with the road that ran alongside the Danube and with Transmarisca, where there was a ford for

crossing the Danube.

There were, however, developments in Banat and Pannonia. The Sarmatians-Liinigants rose against the Sarmatians-Agragants who held the

foimer in subjection. In 334 some groups of the Sarmatians were forced to

seek refuge with the Emperor. Most of these (300.000?) were settled in Macedonia, Scythia and Thrace, perhaps as coloni. As Patsch notes Constantine himself probably took part in dividing them up and settling

them in these parts.”

The reign of Constantine was marked by an event of paramount importance for the economical and political development of the Balkan Peninsula. An event which we have already mentioned: the removal of the capital from Rome to Constantinople (the former ByzantionJ and the transformation of the latter city into the most important centre of the

eastern provinces of the Empire. The festive inauguration of the city as the

’ 7X flarcA, Bvilrjgc Ill/l, 19-33.

74. MCH.AA.IX, 234: Zos. 2, 31, 3. 75. C% if

■ .del

*

304. AEM 11, 1887, 32, n. 31.

84

A'.a .Jin

4. CITIES IN THRACE AND DACIA FROM THE FOURTH TO THE SIXTH CENTURY ' Before considering the economics, material culture and the social relations of the cities in the East Balkan Lands it is necessary to ascertain what cities existed in these regions in Late Antiquity. In other words, to see of which cities there is reliable information to prove that the continued to exist until the end of the sixth century in spite of the incursions of the barbarians. It is also necessary to point out the forts and roadposts(jWfiozies) in the territory of the cities as these were closely connected economically and administratively with their respective towns. The development of the cities in the fourth century can be traced the best in 'Ttineraria Romana”, the conclusion of which, as we have already said, deals with the beginning of the fourth century. The state of the cities from the end of the fourth to the beginning of the fifth century is described the best in ‘Notitia Dignitatum”, which was written at the beginning of the fifth centuiy. Here first of all are shown the cities in the three Lower Danubian frontier provinces Littoral Dacia, Lower Moesia and Scythia. The fullest description of the cities in the first half of the sixth century is in Procopius and Hierocles and the last fairly full description of them is in Theophylactus Simocatta. Therefore in studying the individual cities in Late Antiquity we can get our bearings from several sure points: the be^nning of the fourth century, the end of the fourth and the beginning of the fifth, the beginning and the end of the sixth century. These points form a good chronologicai base for following up the individual cities and their fate from the fourth through the sixth century A.D. a. Littoral Dacia < Dacia

Ripensis)

This province covered the north-west regions of the present-day Bul­ garia and parts of the eastern regions of Yugoslavia.lts boundaries lay east of the city of Taliata as far as the mouth of the river Vit; from here they went east, running parallel to the course of the Vit, then following the ridge of the Balkan Range, along the divide between the rivers Timok and Morava as far as the city of Honea Margi and from there in a northern

85

direction to the Danube.’*' The principal city of the province was Raliaria, the present village of ArCar. near Vidin. In the fourth century the legion XIII Gemina and a part of the Danubian fleet were stationed here. Here there was also an imperia] workshop turning out weapons. In the fourth and the first half of the fifth century Ratiaria was rich and prosperous and Prlscus called it "a big and well-populated city”. In 442, however, it suffered from a number of Hunnish raids. In the sixth century it was fortified by Justinian. In 586 it was attacked and taken by the Avars. Ratiaria was the headquarters of an episcopal see and we know the names of several bishops of the fourth and the fifth century. An Early Christian inscription attests to there having been a presbyster Paulus in the city. At the end of the fourth century Palladius, the outstanding theoretician of Arianism, lived and worked in Ratiaria. The city was situated at the point of an important crossroad. The road that followed the Danube passed through it and it was the starting point for another road which went through NaissosandUlpianato Alessio in the present day Albania. This was the shortest route from the Adriatic Sea to the Lower Danube.** The second most important town in the province was Oescus, situated near the mouth of the river lakar not far from the village of Gigen, reg of Kcven. This town was an important commercial and military centre and at the point of the crossroad for the route to Philippopolis over the Trajan pass and the road that led to Serdica over Comakovci. In the fourth century the town was in a flourishing state. In 328 a bridge was built over the Danube and this no doubt raised the commercial and military impor­ tance of the town as a means of communications with the Goths at the other side of the Danube. The town suffered a certain amount of damage through the incursions of Huns and is mentioned among the cities in which restoration and repair work was carried out in the time of Justinian. Jordanes recored that in the middle of the fifth century Huns and other tribes were settled near the town. The excavations made in recent years by A. Frova and T. Ivanov have shown how rich was the material culture of the city: big public buildings, streets and shops have been unearthed. The Fifth Macedonian Legion was garrisoned here. It was also the centre of an 305. Kerren, 6 sq. 306. VeAot. Ratiaria. 155-178; B^etlirv, KasteDnamen 118.

86

episcopal see. Theophylactus Simocatta does not mention Oescusat the end of the sixth century but speaks of PaJatiolon, a city that was situated not far fromOescus. A coin hoard of the fourth century was found in Oescus.^”’ The other cities that Hierocles mentions in this provinces are Bononia. the present town of Vidin, Castra Manis near Kula and Aquae near Negotin.™ Aquae had an important strategic position at the crossroads on the route along the Danube between Viminacium and Boncmia. The city was fortified by Justinian. Aquae is mentioned in a novel issued by Justinian making anangements for the bishopric.”* The city possessed important territory - xupa Axueiiotoc in which, according to Procopius, there were 35 foru. They were repaired and fortified by Justinian.^*** These forts were: Tvrodoxu^, Il/rpec, SKmXxdffoupyo, Bu^uxibXa, B/xuoXa, 'ATOvdKiXi, KaoreXAoMS^, •PXcapet'riava, 'P(xwX

:

B^evliev. Kastdlnamen. 120.

Culei, Ducia n..s. 14, 1970, 251-295; A Tiidor, (Btenia Romaiu, Bucuresti, 1958. 69 sq- MCA 9. 1970, 281-2%. Columns which date to the time of Constantine the Great and which were found along the Sucidava-Romula road indicate that Roman rule hdd away in this region fw a short period of time- See A. Tudor, Ein koastantinischcr Meilenstcin in Dackn, Serta HofTileriana, Zagreb, 1940, 241-247. For MatiolonsceBeiev/ie)’, Kastellnamcn, 121. 341. For Almus Proc, aedif. 4,6. 342. Fu/ic'. RE,1 A. 1920, coL 587 (Remetodia).

91

Mokatiana, Trikesa, Putedin (pertiaps this was Pomodiana mentioned in TP) and Cumodina (only in Geogr. Rav.), Bigrane, Okos and Aedava.^’ in the city of Utus (Utum), which lay at the mouth of the river Vit, there was a military garrison. In the middle of the fifth century some barbarian tribes were settled in the surroundings. The walls of the town were repaired by Justinian.’** Here were the forts of Lapidaria and Lupemarioburgu.’*’ Transalba, Translucus, Siosta, Sostica, Burgonovo and Burgozono art mentioned in Notitia Dignitatum but not by Procopius. There were military detachments in these cities until the beginning of the fifth century. It is very probable that they were destroyed by the Huns.’** And finally we have data on two settlements in the valley of the river Timok; Timacum Maius (today Knyazevac), which had a military garrison, and Timacum minus (the present-day Ravna), which also had a military garrison. There is evidence that the former city was repaired by Justinian. Coins and arche­ ological finds have been unearthed here.®*’ The ruins of a Late Roman city of unknown name were excavawd near Gamagrad in the district of Zaicar (Yugoslavia). It was also part of Littoral Dacia.’** It can be seen from this review that the number of fortified cities and forts in Littoral Dacia was very great. The number of military detachments stationed there was also great. This is easy to explain when one in mind the fact that the development of the whole province depended on the military organization in this part of the Danubian limes.*” There are only sparse data at hand on the cities in the interior.

343. Aedava {Proc, awlif. 4, 6) was sur«ly situated between Augusta and Variana. htypivri is. perhaps, the 'PcTuiiav tneniioned in Ptoietny and the 'PtTtoi'at spoken by Procopius, aedif. 6, 2^ See Btievlitii, KasteUnomcn, 119 sq. 344. Not Dign. Or. 42, 21; lord. Gel. 267; Proc, aedii. 4, 6, Be'ievliev, Kastellnamen, 121 sq. 345. Plufi. RE, 12, 1925, e(M. 774; 13, 1927, coL 161^ BaevUev, Ka.steUnaincn, 122. 346. Polaschek, RE, 6 A, 1937, col. 2147; RE 6 A, 1937, eoL 2170; Not. Dign. Or. 42, 40; 41; 42, 28; 36, 347. Plufi, RE, 6 A, 1937, coL 1060 5,v, Timacum maius, eoL 1060-1061 s.», Timacum minus; Veners, 13; Premmtein-yulic. AB, 3, 1900, 137, Garanin, Nalasista, 204'205. 348. Df. Mono Zisi. Le castrum de Gamzigrad et ses mosaiques. Arch Jug. 2, 1956, 67-84; See also n. 310; Gemianin, Nalasi5ta,140-l41. 349. D. Tudor, SCiV 11, 1960, 335-363.

92

b.

Inner Dacia

/DaciaMediterranai)

According to Hierocies the province of Inner Dacia comprised the ^territories of the following towns: Serdka (the present-day Sofia), j^autalia (Kyustendil), Germania (Separeva Banya), Naissos (Nis) and i^femesiana (Byala Palanka)?*®

3. It is difficult to define the southern and the western frontiers of the province. It is not sure exactly where the borderlines ran. The frontier ^xwdering on Littoral Dacia went along the ridge of the Balkan Range as as the source of the river Vit. From here it ran south, crossed the aPub-Balkan valley and then, perhaps, along the ridge of Sredna Gora to the Pass (Trajans’ Gate). The Suki Pass was surely on the frontier {because Ammianus Marcellinus says that here was the frontier between i.Jhrace and lUyricum,^' From here the frontier surely followed the irBhodopes - but it is not known where • and crossed the river Struma where encircled the territories of Germania and Pautalia. It is not clear whether Ahe regions around the upper reaches of the river Mesta, the present ;dtstnct of Razlog. were incuded in this province. The southern and ‘.western frontiers embraced, for some time, the district of Slip, the iterritory of the ancient town of Bargala, then went according to the prographic peculiarities of this region to the north, leaving on its left side (the province of Dardania and the cities of Scupi and Ulpiana.^^’ Some^here south of Horrea Margi the frontier went in a north-east direction to i^e Balkan Range. South of Horrea Margi the Central Road was crossed by the frontier eight miles from the city and twelve miles from the static fiarmatae, which was in Inner Dacia.’®’ ^7 The principal city of the province wi^Serdica. The town flourished during the whole of the whole of the fourth century until the first years of the

3Sa HItr. Synecd. 654, 2-7. 351. Amm. 21, 10, 3-4; Vales. adSocr. 2, 22. The history of the Suki Pass is given In^ Muiafiiev, SpBAN, 56, 1937, 22-29. 352. Perters, 8. An attempt has been made here to determine the frontiers of this province in the time of the Lmperor Aurelian. In the fourth century the division of the administrative units of lllyricum was changed. We have already mentioned the province of Inner Dacia in the fourth century. Then the town of Ulpiana and Scupi I were already in the province of Dardania. 353. IB 565, 7: rrtansio Oromago mil VIll / fines Mysiiae et Asiac (sdl. Daciae) / nutalioSarmaiorum mil. XII.

93

fifth. It had a large mint and was for some time the residence of Constantine 1 the Great, as is attested by several decrees issued from there. It is said thatl Constantineintendedto move thecapitalofthe Empire to Serdica. He liked the city so much that he often said: ’’Serdica is my Rome”.’®* I Excavations made recently in the centre of Sofia have brou^t to ligh^ the remains of large stately buildings, a big amphitheatre and bro^ streets."’ Ammianus Marcellinus who knew Serdica from a personal visifl spoke of it and PhilippopUs as ”big and well-known cities”."’ A magn« ficent plaque on which are depicted the circus games dates to that time aia is evidence of the cultural life of the city. Serdica was an imported Christian centre. Here in 343 a peat synod took place, known as tl4| Serdica Synod. The names of many presbyters and bishops of Serdica aiH known. Many burials, ornamented tombs and several churches dating to| the late ancient period have been discovered. Of these, the Church ofStl

Sofia is of exceptional interest. It was destroyed and rebuilt in the fourth! and fifth century. The city was damagedin the Hunnish incursions of 4411 but, according to Apollinarisand Theophanes the damage was not greatj and Serdica was soon restored, in the sixth century intensive buildinn work was in progress here. Procopius writes about the rebuilding of tbH walk of the fortresses by Justinian and a newly discovered inscriptRsl dating to the time of Tiberius 11 Constantine (578-582) attests to thM restoration of damages of buildings and the city’s aqueduct. There are ow written data about the city being taken by Avars and Slavs. Krum tocik| Serdica in the ninth century. During die Middle Ages it continued to develop as an important city under the name of Sredets."’ In the area of Serdica the following forts were restored by Justinian:* ^Kofmiov,

£twc,

MopKurerpo,

Bpintyw,

'fwfUiviavA,

ZTpwK,

npijnava, MaxKOVMOiti, ZKOnevr^ava.

354. Anon, post Own. 15 1 (FHG 4, 199). 355. A considerable part of the excavations has been published in Serdica, I, Sofa, 1963. See also M Stanceva, IBID, 25, 1967, 213 sq: IBID, 27, 1970, 255 sq. 1

356. Amm. 2i, 10, Sicivitalesamplaset rwbflcs, 35T. For Serdica: flu^, RE, 2 A, 1923, col 2669-2671 s.v. Hefele, ConcUie» leschichte 1’, 1876, 533 sq.jZrffer, Crimes, WMhrfmy, Hoehbulgarien. II. Sofia, Wandlungen einer GroBstadl zwEchen Orient und Okzident, Kid, 193^ Vdkov. Serdica, 53-60; Gerov, Proudvania, 11-111 (A complete systematization of lie

data on ancient Serdica). Inscription!!: SGLI, an. 1-26.

358. Proc, aedif. 4, 4 (p. 121,1 sq.Haury).

P’fei In a late ancient inscription the name of a fort Brizana is mentioned Pihnt its site has not yet been located.’’* | The second most important city in the province was Naistos, the t tpesent Nis, This city is mentioned very often in different sources. The > decrees issued by the Emperors Constantine the Great. Constantius, Julian md Valentinian from this city attest the fact that these emperors were I "Often there and stayed in it for longish periods of time. The city was well i- fortified. Ammianus Marcellinus called it a ’’rich town” and Priscus ”a 1 town with many inhabitants”. Naissos was sacked in the Hunnish inL ((iutsions and depopulated acccording to Priscus. However, the city revived, I m fortified by Justinian and played an important part in the Middle ElAges. Because it was at the crossroad of the Central Road and the route ft^tiaria • Alessio. Naissos was of considerable commercial importance. I^ttila himself wanted to move the market where the Huns and the pt,Romans traded with each other from the bank of the Danube to Naissos. F'^e city was also the centre of an episcopal see.’“ In the territory of this city the following forts were repaired w i; jebuilt:*** Ka^evrta, ^afi&vope^, Srpavlidora, 'AXSavec, BapaxreoTec, r Idpjxarec. 'Apaeva, BpdfixeSov, ’Epapia, Bepxddiov, hTtfr4u>a, KduSiXop, ''Apoa^a, ButouXeo, Kuor^XXioii rpd0d*t> rdpxec, F Iliarec, AotKrpatvc, Bpdr^urra, OydSopix:, Kaouta, Ppopfieroi', Otipfipiava,

iv'NwTero, AaurSovec, AouXtdpec, MeSiaw, Tioi/yxwpa, j KooreXXuM', "EpKooXa, Mourtuu^KdoreXXoi^, BoupSune^, KdXic, I- MiXXdpota, &ei0epa,^Xeadoimapa.

1 We have supplementary data about some some of them. Writing of Medians ! If b F

3J9. SGLI n. 7: in casiuUo Briaancnse. 360. RE. 16. 1935, cot 1598-1599; AwtOTrtirt.t'ufic, AB, 3, 1900, 128;

I ZtOltr. Origincs, 159. Goraimin. NalasdU D/. Jovanovic. Stariiui, S/6, I 1954/1955, 365-373; L, Miriovic, La ncocropole paltediieticnne de Nii, Arch. lug.

B 2, 1956, 85-100; M Vatic, Starinar, n. 12, 1965, 155. P. Peirovic, Starinar n.s. 18, 1 1967, 55-61; f. ^ersAov, Rimski put Nai$M»-Soipi i stanica Vidano, Gias. Zem. mus L Kos. i Mctohie 6, 1961, 123-130; 4 ZProidc; N. Peirovie, AP 2, 1960. 130-133; 9. I .1967, 115-116. K 361. Aoc. de acdif. 4, 4 (p. 122, 27 sq. Hauiy). For the names see Baevlitv, g, KastcUitamcn, passim. P 361 ftOcA, RE.S, 1905, coL 237 s.v. Dcrbeta. See Kacaiov's conections (RE,3 ^Suppl. 1918, cot 333 S.V. Dedbera) made on the basis of the new edition of

, Procopius.

95

Ammianus Marcellinus says that the place was about three kilometres east of the town. In the fourth century the Emperor had a villa there. seems that near Sarmatae, which we have already mentioned as a station there were settlements of Sarmatians. It is probable that there were sont# kind of mines near Aeraria. The third city that Hierocles mentions is Pautalia, the medievi Velbuzd and the present-day Kyustendil. The city existed in pre-RomSj times and was situated on the important road Serdica • Pautalia • Stobi. M the third century the city was in a flourishing state. There are only span! data about the fourth and fifth century Pautalia. It was already fortifiedfl the time of Julian. It is not known whether it was sacked or not. PautaUf was mentioned in 479 in connection with negotiations between Zeno artj the Ostrogothic king Theodoric. Zeno proposed to let Theodoric have tM| area round Pautalia for a settlement for the Ostrogoths and stressed itt fertility. It seems that at that time the region was only thinly popubtel Pautalia was the centre of an episcopal see and in the sixth century n ecclesiastical notables took part in the religious quarrels in the Empiri The city was fortified in the middle of the sixth century.’** The naia Pautalia is mentioned for the last time in SS3. I In the sixth century the following fortified places are mentioned:^ Tdpfruipop, Soud^aorac, XepSouoKepa, BXe^oic, Zeatroupiec. '4 The next city mentioned by Hierocles is Reme.siana, today Bja Palanka: it is known that it was the centre of an episcopal see of fl bishops, Nikita, he is famous for having converted the Bessi to ChriM anity. Apart from evidence of the town being fortified in the sixth centun there is no other datum about it.’** The size of its territory was consideratdl 363. Flufi. RE, 15, J 931, coL 68 (a. IRAIK, 10,1905, 261 sq. 445 MiUev Sl. Damianov, lAI, 33, 1972, 273 sq. ' 626^ Bricks sUmped.UcgioniM XI CUaudiae) ffiglina), Trankariscae). Not. Dim. Or. 40, 34; 35; CIL 3. 12527: leg. XI Cl. Clandidianae). 627, D Dttschew, GPM 1937/1939, 242:Not Dign. 42 5:15-32.

157

were nude by the soldiers as part of their duty. Some bricks have been found that still bear the signatures of soldiers. Some of the stamped bricks that have been found were made in private brickyards. Such bricks have been found in different places and this indicates that there was a trade in them and throu^ trade they were spread abroad in the country, a fact borne out by the discovery of them in the masonry of ancient buildings. The artisans engaged in brickmaking were united in their collegia (guilds) and in legal documents they were called flguli which means the same as the Greek In the above-mentioned decree, they came under the general regulations for artisans throughout the Empire. In North-Eastern Bulgaria bricks bearing the stamp Dules are very wide-spread. There are ten in Madara, twenty-one in Pliska and several others from unknown places in the Sumen Museum.^” Excavation in the settlement near the village of Voivoda brought to light a great number of bricks, bearing the stamp Dules. This proves the exact location of the brickyard premises. The time when this brickyard operated was ascer­ tained a few years ago. The building in which there had been used had been burned and the bricks were damaged in die Are and were found stuck to one to another by coins of the time of Lidnius and Constantius Chlor. The coins show that the Dules brickyard did indeed exist and was turning out bricks as early as the two or three decades of the fourth century.*” In Russe a brick was found bearing a negative stamp in relief with the name Rumorid[us] - [i], the proprietor of the brickyard. Another brick with a negative stamp in relief was also found in Russe. The stamp reads something like Varinia, which of course means the figlina (the brickyard) of Varinius. Two other bricks of this kind have also been discovered.*’* Some bricks carrying the engraved stamp Dionisis were discovered in Madara. The same stamp was found on eleven bricks found in Pliska, Voivoda and on six others which came from some unknown place.*® A

brick with a very interesting negative stamp in the form of a cross 628. Btiimner. Technoiogie II, 5 sq. 629. D. D«tschew, Sb. Madan. 2, 1936.16; K Ivenora, RP 31. 1949. 19. 630. T. Gerasimov, IBAl, 17. 19S2, 3161^. MOcev-Sl. Demianoe, lAI, 33, 1972, 273. 631. Detsehew, GPM 1937/1939, 316. 632. Detsdtew. Sb. Mactaia 2. 1936. 17. n. 10; S«. Mihaibv, lAI 20.1953, IO4;Z) Morfova, Atchcologiii iSoria}, 13.1971, n. 3, 25-33.

158

- consequently made in the period from the fourth to the sixth century • came from the village of Stan, near Novipazar. It reads "by the brickmaker Trophimos", i.e. made by Trophim. Bricks carrying the same stamp were also found in Odessos in a late ancient building. Tiles and bricks bearing the stamp of Trophim were unearthed in the township Galata near Odessos. These facts seem to attest the existence of a brickyard, under the management of a certain Trophim, which did a busy trade in bricks in the present lands of North-Eastern Bulgaria. Where this workshop was is stiU unknown but there are certain facts which have led us to suppose that it was in Odessus.^ In the Sofia Museum there is a brick on which the name of someone called Harmonius is stamped horizontally and vertically in the fonn of a cross. Private brickyards of this kind are also known to have existed in other towns. During the excavation work in Hisarluk near Kyustendil twelve fragments of concave tiles were dug up. They are sUmped with the name of the brickmaker (? ) + Q £2 M A. The stamps are a little different from each other and this leads to the conclusion that difTerent stamp matrices were used. This in turn attests the considerable production activity of this brickyard.*’® Some details of the production of bricks in the towns in this region were elucidated by the stamped markings on some late ancient bricks found in Sofia. The bricks are almost all the same size and are all from the same brickyard and carry the following inscriptions:*®* Nr. 47 • ”On the 10th day before the calendae of July {June 22nd) 302 bricks’’; Nr. 48 • "On the 7th day before the calendae of August (July 26th) 302 bricks”; Nr. 49 • "On the 14th day before the calendae of July (June 18th) 302 bricks"; Nr. 50 • "On the 6th day before the ides of July (July 10th) 302 bricks"; Nr. 51 • "On ... before the ides of July (between July Sth and 13th)302 bricks”. It is evident that the season for making the bricks was the summer, in 633. 634. 635. 636.

SCLI n. 76;M4f»»e«-. IVAD, 8,1951,121:9, 153, 27. SGLl n. 235. J. Ivanov. IBAD7, 1919/1920, 95. Beievtiev. Prino^i, 31 sq., n. 47-54; n. 103,104.

159

the hot months. The date when the bricks would be ready baked was stamped on them in order to keep a check on the production and this leads us to suppose that the output tn the Serdica brickyards was con­ siderable. Great interest has been evoked by the continual repetition of the same number • 302. The explanation of this was a law which was valid for the whole Empire and which forbade, under threat of severe punishment and the confiscation of property, the building of brickyards with a greater capacity than 300 bricks per day.^ Probably this norm was established to ensure that the bricks were well-baked or perhaps there were some hy­ gienic considerations. On another brick - also from Serdica - the inscription was ’’tiles 120'*. This probably was in reference to some other norm because the appearance of this brick is different. Some interesting conclusions can be drawn from the edict of EHocletian about the way in which the bricks [nXivda.) were made and in which the brickmaken were to be paid: The brickmaker, who kneaded the clay himself and casted four bricks of double weight was to be paid two denarii. This means that the work consisted of kneading the clay, filling i mould divided into four parts and casting the raw bricks so formed on a platform to dry. This was hard work and one is struck by the fact that the regulations Axed such a low pay rate.^ Trade was done in bricks but their sale was limited to the territory of the town where they were produced because bricks were made everywhere where suitable earth could be found. For instance, in Kubratovo (the former Koumanica), near Sofia, two bricks were found bearing the numbers 49 and 50 from the brickyard mentioned above and also another brick on which is inscribed ’’made by Zosim”, surely the name of the brickmaker instead of the stamp of the brickyard. About the way bricks were sold in the surroundings of the town in which they were made we have already mentioned the example of the bricks bearing the stamp of Trophim and made in Odessos. It is an interesting fact to note that in Thrace proper no bricks with 637. Liebenam. ROmischc Stiidteverwaliung, Leipzig, 1900, 407. Prof. IL Geiw drew my attention to this fact, 638. Beievliev. Prinosi, n. S3; Katarov. etc. PTedstoriCcdii i staroehrisliandLi panictnici, SoHa, 1921. SO. n. 17: this brick found in Sofia is inscribed MAXIMO CCC (i.c. 300). The explanation of this figure can be found now in the abovementioned norm. 639. at 111 SuppL p. I9SS. 7. IS.

160

military stamps have so far been found. To a certain extent this can be explained by the fact that very few military units were stationed in this region. It could be expected that more private brickyards would be attested but this is not so.*”* Several bricks have been found in Mesembria • Nesebar • on which is the stamp +I0YCT1NIAN0Y TOY d>lAOKTlCTOY. attesting the building operations undertaken by Justinian I in Mcssembria although there are some points about the origin of these and other bricks (bearing a cross followed by a name) which have not yet been fully clarified. An inscription in which the same epithet is given to Justinian was found on a marble comice in Mangalia, the ancient CaUatis.*** From the above-mentioned facts it can be seen that in many cities of Thrace and Dacia there was a comparatively regular production of bricks which was bound up with the ever-increasing building activity in these regions.*** Many brickyards were set up and these put their stamps on their bricks to distinguish them. We have no chronological data on the bricks found so far, because in the most cases they were casual finds. It is, therefore, still difficult to give a clear picture of the development of biickmaking in late ancient Thrace and Dacia. Pottery was another very important branch of earthenware production • the making of vessels for everyday use. This craft was widespread but the lack of systematic research into late ancient ceramics makes it impossible to treat this subject in detail, going into the chronology and the develop­ ment of dilTerent types and forms of ceramics.*** 639a, SGU n. 230. 640. SGLI n. 153 a.L Brick stamps (found in Dinogetia, Istros) bear witness Io the

construction work in the Dobrudja in the time of the Emperor Anaslashis 1 see / Bmtt, Dacia n.s. 11, 1967, 355-356. 641. Questions related to the production of building ceramics in the period from P , I® “* "*“* ■" treated in detail in i Angetoxa. Archeologia (Sofia). 13,1971, a 3, 3-5. 642. Detailed research on the ceramic vessels found in the fort of latrus, especially , which they received was of great importance to them.™’

It is known that wine, cereals, butter, salt, all kinds of weapons, raw

iron and processed iron were exported from the Empire.”® Later, some of these articles ceased to be exported, above all weapons and gold. These

had been banned from the export list by the State. Some kind of a garment was also exported. These garments, preferably in several colours (TrowiXij were always demanded by barbarian tribes when they concluded peace treaties and the Empire accepted the condition to hand

708. Ttitmil. Or. X, 136b. 709. nemist. Or. X, l3Sb:/4mm. 27, 5, 7. 710. . /a STK.A, 22. 1969. 275-294. lor ii.fornuhon about tarlicr research work on basilicas sec: Ivanova. Carkvi, 429-582: K hanove. IBAI 10. 1935, 211-215: and for information about the more recently discovered basilicas seeJ. Barnea. Dacia. 11/12, 1945/1947, 221-241:7 Bamea. Dacia n.s 2. 1958 331-349: Z XeiUer. Strena Bulicuna. 1924, 413-416: CondunuW, Monumenii. 104-110; K. jMadfewv, Areheologia (Sofia), 13, 1971, n. 3, 34-38 (Hissat): T. banm. Klio, 47. 1966, 153-192 (latrusi; H. Reusch. Akten 7, Intern. Kongrcssucschristl. Archiiologie (Trier 5.-I I. Sept. 1965), Siudi antichila crisi. 27. Citta del VatieanoBcrlin, 1969, 677-682. 888. Iv. Venedikov drew my attention to this matter.

229

that when these building were erected in the fourth century, the areas

inside the towns were already well populated and fortified walls had

already been built round many of them in order that they could repulse sudden barbarian attacks. Finally a few words about late ancient private houses. Dwellings that

used to be lived in ordinary people belonging to the broad masses have been found in Serdica and Istros. The utensils recovered from the dwell­

ings in Serdica show that many of the people were engaged in farm-work,

gardening and weaving. In Istros the remains of groups of dwellings were excavated. There were streets and a square between them. Each group

consisted of several dwellings, each one rectangular in form and divided into two parts. The coins found in these dwellings date to the end of the

fifth century.”® We have already noted that in a burnt-down dwelling in Dinogetia a number of farm tools were found showing that agriculture was

the chief occupation of the population of the town.*®® There are more data available about the dwellings of the big land­

owners. Such a dwelling was excavated near Abrittus and a thorough study

was made of it. It is assumed that it was erected in the third century and destroyed at the end of the sixth century. It follows, therefore, that not one generation, but several generations lived here, may be of the same family, representatives of the local ruling class. The building stood on a site

covering 3200 square metres and was built of rough cut stones cemented with white mortar. It was situated on two streets and had a length of 80

metres and a width of 41 metres. The thickness of the walls was 0.95 riKtres. The building comprised 27 rooms situated around a yard with a

Ionic colonnade (25 x 12.5 metres). There were two entrances - one on the north side and the other on the south side. On both sides of the southern

entrance there were six large shops. The courtyard of the building was covered with large, smooth, rectangular flags. The building, like all Roman dwellings, faced inward to the courtyard. The external walls had no openings and were rou^ in appearance. The

dwelling of the owner was in the northern part of the building, the hipest 889. SaV5, 1954,69-122. 890. Other important private and public buildings of the period from the fourth to the sixth century were found in Dinogetia - see Z. Bvnea. Les thermes de Dinogetia, Dacian.s. 11,1967,225-252; Bvnta. SQV 20, 1969, 245-266. The public buildings excavated in Callalis ate imposing in their size, see A ntodomeu. Dacia n.s. 7, 1963. 257-300.

230

part of it. The inside walls were covered with fine plaster but nothing has

remained of it. The rooms were lighted with bronze and clay lamps. In one of the rooms, as we have already said, farm tools were found- The building

was linked up both 'with the water and the sewage system.®” A similar large private building was excavated in Istros. Many finds

were unearthed here - objects which throw light on the way of life of the ruling class in the town up to the end of the sixth century when the building was burned down in the Avars' invasion of the Dobrudja.®” A large private building, covering an area of 3280 square metres, was

excavated near the village of Madara, in the Souiiien district. Forty-seven rooms, probably living rooms and store-rooms, were revealed around a

peristyle courtyard with a fountain and a basin in the middle. The dwelling had had its own heating installations and sewage system. In the excava­

tions many objects, revealing the everyday life of those who dwelt here, were recovered. According to t’v Dremsizova, several different building

periods are discernible - from the second to the end of the fourth century,

when the building was burned down, probably by the Goths.

This short survey of the material culture of the late ancient town,

although based on not very

abundant data conveys some idea of the

general appearance of the towns. The town of the first centuries A.D. underwent some essential changes in Late Antiquity. In this period the

towns were turned into well-built fortresses with thick walls and strong towers. The old heathen sanctuaries and their statues disappeared and were

replaced by the edifices of the new religion - the basilicas. In the late ancient epoch, the regubr planned form of many of the towns was no longer observed. Sometimes the straight lines of the streets were spoilt by buildings erected crosswise on them, mostly those raised hastily after the towns had been sacked or damaged in raids. The streets no

longer followed a regular pattern. The neglect of the old principles of

town-planning (through lack of space, the necessity of restoring the 891. T. Imhov. IPr 12. 1956. n.1,88-91. 892. Hisirid 1, 538; SCIV 1953, 99-103; £ Condurachi. Charbterion cis A.K. Orlandou, Alhcn 1967/1968 161-168. 893. Seen. 770.

231

dwellings as quickly as possible, impoverishment of the population, ethnical changes, etc.) was typical of the development of the towns in the

fifth and sixth centuries. Characteristic too of this epoch were the lack of the ancient art in designing the buildings, the ne^ect of regular forms and

lines and new construction technics.

Doing away with the autonomy of the towns and the consequent disappearance of the old municipal institutions also changed the outward appearance of the public places (the forum, etc.) where during the fifth

and sixth century the statues of private persons and the emperors were no longer erected as they had so frequently been in the first three centuries

A.D. However the statue of Basilisk in Philippopolis attests to the fact that the tradition continued in a more restricted form. The only public works and building that were carried out were those of maintaining the

fortifications, the water-supply and the pubUc edifices. There is evidence that building and repair work was still being carried on in the fourth

century, in the time of Julian, in the centres of the towns, in the marketplaces and in other public places, but after this, until the time of

Justinian, the literary sources do not attest to such work and the archaeological finds of this period are scarce and not very enlightening on

this point. In the fourth century some rich mosaics were laid in some buildings as in Marcianopolis but in the fifth century there is no evidence of them being put into any buildings. The data given by Procopius about

the building schemes undertaken and carried out by Justinian are true but the rather extravagant words he uses in saying that Justinian had brought the towns back to their former brilliance seem exaggerated and are in

accordance with the panegyric nature of his writings. In so far as the churches and basilicas were concerned, the high ecclesiastical authorities

had charge of their building and ornamentation and they spared no cost in trying to make them look magnificent and powerful to impress the

exploited strata of the State.

232

V

CLASS AND SOCIAL RELATIONS IN THE LATE ROMAN CITY IN THRACE AND DACIA

a. Slaves Data about slavery in the first three centuries of Roman rule are scarce, but in the fourth century they become more numerous. There are two opinions about the nature of slave-holding in Thrace in the Roman

epoch: some believe that slavery was wide-spread but others consider that, in comparison with the other provinces, it was on a minor scale in our lands in the first three centuries A.D. As support for the second ascertain­

ment they point out the nature of the economic life in Thrace (small landed property and no latifundia), the late incorporation of Thrace in the

Roman slave-holding State, the insufficiently developed state of the industry, etc.®** In the fourth century, the number of slaves increased, a fact which was in all probability connected with the events taking place along the Lower

Danubian limes. As a result of these events prisoners-of-war of Gothic origin became numerous and they were sold in the Balkan lands. There was a similar increase in the number of slaves in other provinces, eq>ecial]y in

Pannonia, where the same things were happening as in Thrace. In the

literary sources of the fourth century, many slaves of Gothic origin are mentioned in Egypt, Africa and Asia Minor.®’® We have already mentioned the data given by Ammianus Marcellinus

about the slave-traders of Galatia and by Themistius about the trade in

Gothk slaves in the Lower Danubian limes. Ammianus Marcellinus in

894. K Velkov. EL bale. 1. 1964.125 W). 895. Exposilio lolias mundi § 50 (GGM II. p, 525): Pannoniae fcgio ,,, dives ... maiHipiis; Syites. Or.de regno 15 (Pair. Gr. 66, p. 1093). See Levcenko, Viz. Zbomik. 20-22; Kurhaiov, tiorod, 131 m|. for the slaves in the By/.antine Stale. See yelkiiv. Robstvoto. 1 14 sq. for the slaves in the dioeese Thraeia.

23.^

describing the movements of the Goths in 376-378 says; ’’The barbarians

who had been brought here were suffering from hunger and therefore these odious commanders invented a shameful trade • they collected as

many dogs as they could and in their insatiable greed for wealth sold one dog for one slave". According to Eunapius these slaves were doomed to

orw of these hard lots; they were used to satisfy the depravity of the

aristocracy, or were sold as slaves either to work in the towns or to toil on the land. Zosimus records similar facts.®**

In the military campaigns of the Emperors beyond the Danube at the

end of the third century the prisoners-of-war were sold as slaves or sent to different regions as coloni. Sometimes this is attested but in many cases it

is not known what happened to the prisoners. Beginning from the cloring years of the fourth century all prisoners-of-war became coloni. Thus the Emperor Carus (281 -283) captured about 20.000 Sarmatians

in battles along the Lower Danube. In the spring of 323 Constantine the

Great defeated a big group of Goths, who had penetrated into North Bulgaria. He captured many prisoners and "after distributing them among the towns” came back to Thessalonica. Probably they were sold as slaves

in the different towns of the provinces.*”

After crushing the uprising of Procopius in 366, Valens captured the

greater part of the Goths, who had come to the help of Procopius - they numbered several thousands • and "forcing them to lay down their arms, he divided them up and sent them to the Danubian towns, giving orders that they should be held as hostages without being put in chains." At the time of the uprising itself, Procopius and his followers, without any second thoughts, armed a great many slaves from the sunoundings of Constanti­ nople.*’®

After the battle of Adrianople in 378, Theodosius 1 waged a stubborn struggle against the Goths until 382. In 383 his military commander

Modares attacked a large group of Goths in Thrace. He defeated them, killed the men, took all the women and children prisoners and seized 4000 carts on which he had the prisoners moved.***

896. Amn 31, 7. 8; nemisi Or. 10, 136b;/4mm. 31,4, I l.Zos. 4 20-.£ttw ft 42(FHG4,p. 381. ’ 897. Vita Csri (SHA) 9. 4;Zoj 2,22. 898 Zos. 4, 10; 4, 5. 899, Zot 4. 25.

234

Literary sources show that small landed proprietors in Thrace owned slaves in the period from the fourth to the sixth century. They used them to do their farmwork. We have already discussed this fact without being

able to explain it fully.*”

From these facts it can be seen that the number of slaves in Thrace and

Dacia was increasing in the fourth century, especially in the third quarter of the fourth century. The slaves in these lands threw in their lot with the

Visigoths who had been settled in Thrace when the latter rose in 346. The increase in the slave population was reflected in the legislation of that time. In the seventies and eighties of the fourth century, when it

became necessary to fill the vacant posts in the curia of the towns of

Lower Moesia - Marcianopolis, Odessos, Durostorum, Novae, Nicopolis ad Istrum and Appiana - an order was given for those plebeians who owned many slaves to be enlisted to take part in the municipal administration, regardless of their low descent, as it was explicitly said in the decree.”' In the imperial legislation of the fourth century there is no evidence that the

property which qualified a curial to take part in the town councils was

calculated according to the number of slaves he owned. And, of course,

there was good reason for this. The Imperial Chancellery had com­ paratively exact information about the state of affairs in the provinces and, of course, in Moesia and about the distribution of slave labour in

production activities and thought it realistic to estimate the economic possibilities only of the top crust of the plebeians according to the number

of slaves they owned. If we take into consideration the fact that this upper layer of the plebeians consisted of artisans, tradesmen and small landowners, it becomes clear that in the fourth century slave labour was used above all in artisan production and in the tilling of the land. We have already tried to

connect these data vnlh other material evidence of the economic life in Odessos, which was in Lower Moesia, and to show that this large town on

the Black Sea coast was one of the first with a weU developed artisan

production based also on the exploitation of slave labour.

900. keflkov, Robsl»oto,l23; k'eHcor. IPr 12, 1956, n. 5, 98 sq. 901. Cod. Theod. 12. I, 96: Concessum curialibus provinciae Mysiae, ul. si quoxi pivbc idoneox habunt, ad decurionalus munera dwotenl, ne personae famulantium faeultatv loeuplctes onera, pro quibus patrimonia requinintur. obscuritate nomini'

vilioris evadani... 23.S

The life of the slaves was hard and they often fled from the farms and workshops where they worked. Therefore in 377. VaJentinian I decreed that severe measures should be taken against anyone tn lUyricum and the

neighbouring regions who gave asylum to fugitive slaves.’® In 401 fugitive slaves and deserters from the Roman army rose in revolt in Thrace Zosimus tells us that they pretended to be Huns and went raiding and

plundering in Thrace until the revolt was crushed by the Roman army,’“ Slaves were often set free even in the fourth century but we have only sparse data about such cases in the lands and the epoch which we are

considenng. When they fled from the place where they were working they were treated not as slaves but as free coloni. This is attested by a decree pertaining to the provinces in lUyricum.’®* In another decree of 316 issued

in Serdka and addressed to the Bishop Protogen of Serdica, Constantine

the Great gave him a mandate to liberate the local slaves (famuli) on

condition that the act of liberation was performed in public, in the presence of civU and ecclesiastical personalities. This surely concerned the slaves who worked as servants in the houses or on the farms of the

slave-holders of Serdica.*®® Although the number of slaves increased in the fourth century it did not lead to the predominance of slave labour in production in Late Antiquity.

The appearance in these places of the colonate, which gained strength in the fifth century, shaped the new way of production. Besides this it is known that the slave system was remodelled at this

time in the Balkan lands. The legal status of the slaves was made almost like that of the coloni. This was done to make the slaves more interested in their work. Thus Constantine gave orders to the comes of Macedonia (327)

to inscribe the slaves in the registers of the census of the province in future and prohibited the selling of slaves ouuide the boundaries of the province.

The slaves could be sold only with the land to which they belonged.*®*

902. Cod. lust, fl, 53, J. 903. Zoi. 5. 22. 904. Cod. lust. 11.53, I. ^5. Cod. fust I, 13, I. Zft Sav. Stt, R.A. 10, 1889. 230 altered the dak irom 316 Io 323 when ( onslantine was also in Serdica. See for this decree KeMov Robovladenic v Serdica. 345-355. See also E La nianum.ssionc i„ ceclesu.; Univ, di Roitu. PuW. dell Istitulo di dir. rom. 40 1965 906. Cod. lust. 11. 3. 2.

236

Later on this sutute became valid in the other provinces too, but it is

attested first in the Balkan lands. Slave-holding lost its importance as the basis of production relations

because ”it became economically impossible” and ’’ceased to be profit­ able” (Engels), which is clearly seen in the account of the fate of the Skyri captured in 409. In that year they attacked the province of Littoral Dacia,

but were defeated and taken prisoners. Soon after, an imperial order was issued to settle them as coloni in Asia Minor and it was expressly for­ bidden to settle them in Thrace or Moesia in order to prevent them from

coming into contact with other tribes being invading these places in the

future. Sozomen, in describing the same event, adds that some of them were sold at low prices, but the greater part were given away as slaves gratis.’®’ This is evidence of the fact that farmers had not such a great wish

to buy slaves and exploit their labour as they had had before. Sozomen writes that he had seen Skyri working as coloni in Bithynia, but does not

say where the others were sold. However, although there was an express order not to settle the Skyri in Thrace and Moesia, the fact that they were

captured in Littoral Dacia does not exclude the possibility of some of them remaining to live in the Danubian lands, a possibility borne out by

data given by Jordanes about Skyri being settled there.** So far we have no knowledge of the fate of the slaves after the sixth

century when the Slavs established themselves in North Bulgaria and put

an end to Roman rule in those parts of the Balkan Peninsula.

b. Urban plebeians In Late Antiquity the free population in Thrace and Dacia, as in the other provinces, was divided up into two estates - plebeians and curiales. Of the other lower strata of the urban population, the so-called plebs

infima, plebs ima, we know very little, but there are more data about those of the other provinces of the Eastern Roman Empire. Some plebeian

movements in Adrianople and Tomi are known to us. Thus in Adrianople

"numerous plebeians" were sent by the governor of the town to fight the Goths and in Tomi they took an active part in a rebellion in that town

907. Cod. Theod 5, 6, r.Soiom. Hist. eccL 9, 5, Vetkov. Robstvoto. 126 sq. 908. Jord. Gel. 265; Sianoievic, Vizanlija i Srba, 1, 73.

237

agninst the Arianism of Valens, and in his presence at that.*” The small

fanners, artisans and merchants belonged to the lower layer of the free ur­

ban population. In the fourth century they had their own collegia and at flrst they did not take part in the town councils, which were entirely in

the hands of the curiales. In considering the distribution of the crafts

(chapter ill), we discussed the obligations and the privileges of the artisans

and the merchants and we also pointed out that many of the artisans and merchants had come from Asia Minor.

In the course of time, there came to be a continuous differentation among the people belonging to the plebs. Some came to financial ruin,

while others became rich and prominent, and were drawn into taking part in the town councils. In the fourth century it was usual for plebeians to

better their positions because this period was more peaceful. A decree of 383 relating to Lower Moesia reveals the process of enrichment of a part

of the artisans and merchants.The State attached great importance to

the participation of this part of the population in the town councils.

According to their social standing at that time, the plebeians were defined as people of "low descent". Their rights and obligations were the same in

all the provinces and there ate no data to show that Thrace was any different in this respect. Thus the plebeians, and later the curiales, were

charged with the so-called munera sordida et extraordinaria: maintaining

the roads, construction work, supplying building stones, building parts of fortress walls, billeting soldiers and so on.’* * c. Curialei

The so-called curiales, who took part in the local town councils formed the upper strata of the free urban population. According to the property

census they belonged to the middle landowners.

The curiales paid the tax aurum coronarium at first as a kind of customary gift of gold crowns paid to honour the Emperor but later as an

obligatory tax which was collected from the curials in amounts that fell to their lot in accordance with the size of their property. The sum collected

909. Amm. 31.6, l-2;Soiom. Hist. eccl. 6. 21. 910. Sec n. 901; Utlkov. Bemcrkungcn, 55. 60. 911. Seyferth. Bcdculung dor Plebs, 7-18.

238

was sent directly to Constantinople.’*^ As landowners the curiales paid the capitatio iugatio, a tax calculated on pieces of land which could bring in certain incomes according to the kinds of crops with which they were

sown and the fertility of the soil. The amount paid depended also on the

labour used in cultivating the land. The most recent research has shown that in reality this tax was the one called capitatio in its two variations: the tax on land calculated in the units iuga and the tax on people and animals calculated in the units capita. At the end of the fourth century the tax capita was abolished and only the iugatio terrena was retained. This

legislative act is attested first in Thrace in a decree which in a secondary clause brou^t in a law binding the colon! to the land as serfs.’” The short juridical data about the conditions under which the curiales

lived in the towns of Thrace reveal the same picture as we know it from the other parts of the Empire: their impaired financial state and often ruin,

their flight from the town councils, the obligations that weighed heavily upon them as curiales, and the endeavours of the state to stop them

leaving the town councils. A decree of 386 ordered all the curiales, who had acted as procurators

in the mines of Inland Dacia and Moesia and who had left their posts, to return immediately to their town councils. ’*** We have already mentioned a decree which reveals that the places in Ute town councils could not be filled in the third quarter of the fourth

century and which prescribed how the vacant places were to be filled: in the first place those curiales who had taken administrative posts in other

provinces but who had been bom in Moesia had to return at once to Lower Moesia. The law was made retroactive for a period of 20 years and

this meant that those curiales who had left Moesia in the 20 years before the passing of the decree, that is in the time of Julian, had to go back to Moesia.’** The second way which was prescribed for filling the vacant

places in the town councils has already been mentioned. It marked an

important step to the depression of the status of old urban aristocracy. 912. Cod. Theod. 12, 13, 2; TK Oauter. Aurum coronsrium, Rom. Mitt. 59, 1944/1948. 129-153. 913. Cod. lust. 11, 52. I; Velkov, Campagnes. 45 sq. 9131 Cod. Theod. 1,32.5. 914. Suu n. 901. and Cod. Theod. 12, I, 96, § 2: In quotum desidcrioctiam istud adicelum esl, ul originales, qui ad diversa provineiaruin ofTicia confugenint, ex divi luliani tempore ad curiales funttiones sublata omni ambiguilate retrahantur.

239

Now the artisans whose workshops had remained intact inside the town walls, were climbing to a higher position after the possessions of the

curiales had been ruined in Gothic raids. Later the artisans themselves

bought land and became landowners.”®

It appears that the above measures did not bring any considerable results, and it was probably the same in the other provinces of the diocese

of Thrace. Therefore, in 392 a last attempt (as far as we know) was made

to fill the empty places in the town councils throughout the diocese. A law was passed obliging those who were married to the daughters of curiales to accept curial obligations under specific conditions: he was forced to do so

even when his wife was dead and had left no children, but had willed her property to him. and he was not entitled to privileges which released him

from these obligations. He became a member of the curia in the town

where the property of his wife had been bequeathed to him before her death.’*® These decrees reveal a great deal. They show the decline of the

old urban aristocracy - of a social layer which was closely connected with

the institutions of the ancient polls. The laws set forth in them are also indicative of the ways in which a citizen of Thrace at the end of the fourth

century could change his social status by becoming a member of the curia.

In lUyricum the curiales are also mentioned in the fifth century. A decree of 413 sets forth their obligations in detail.”’According to the law a citizen automatically became a member of the curia if, for some reason,

he took upon himself an obligation of the kind the curiales had to fulfill • a new device for filling the vacant places in the curia. Because of the barbarians’ devastation of lllyricum and the limited material resources of

the urban population, the Emperors Honorius and Theodosius 11 issued a

915. There is a'idenee that in the fourth century similar measures were also taken in other provinces Io attract the plebs into taking part in the curia (city councils), especially merchanis who owned land (Cod. Theod. 12, 1, 77). The plebs of Aniiochia had the right to take part in the curia (Cod. Theod. 12,1.53).Those plebs of Tripolitania who had cither money or land had this right too (Cod. Theod. 12 I 133). ■ ’ 916.Cod- Theod. 12, 1, 124: Philoxeno vicario Thraciaruin. Si quK filiam do curionis vel principalis suo tunclain consortio nullis exstanlibus libcris fatal! sorte perdiderit alque eius ultimo heredilatem fuerit adeptus arbilrio, si ab omnibus alienus otficiis esl Ct nullis merilo excusari possit, privilegiis adiuvalui, eius mox civitatis curiae mancipctur, in qua antea uxore vivenie, sine return dominio cl proprietale liber, curiae obrroxias lacullates hcrcs voeperit uxoris possidere, 917. Cod. Theod. 12. 1, 177.

240

decree in 413 which was valid only for the towns in this prefecture.

Anyone, who wanted to fulfill some obligation (munus) either by giving money or carrying out some work, had first of all to give proof that he was

not a member of the curia. This usually took place on the recommen­ dation of the local curiales in the presence of the duumviri or the local

defensor civitatis. After ascertaining that he was in a position to carry out the projected undertaking thanks to his property or the property of his

heirs he was allowed to undertake the task he had shouldered, but he was forbidden to leave it unfinished. After fulfilling the obligation he received

the thanks and honours due to each curial who performed the same muhus. Those curials, who thought that by fulfilling some task they had

freed themselves from their obligations to the curia were mistaken and sanctions would be taken against them.

These details are interesting in that they reveal the manner of municipal life in Illyricum in the fifth century. The law predisposed the

richer citizens to accept obligations without resorting to force. At the same time the State endeavoured to keep the regular curiales in their posts and it was only in exceptional cases that they were excluded from

participation in the public life of their respective towns.

d. Senators The only privileged estate • that of the big landowners (the so-called

senatores) stood high above all others. The most characteristic feature of the status of a senator was his right to take part in the sessions of the senate. The senators often declined to

take over this oUigation and spent their time on their estates. In a decree of 357, Constantius 11 gave orders to research out all the senators of Macedonia and the provinces of Illyricum who had fled and were shirking their social obligations. They were not to be allowed to leave Rome or

Italy.”®

It is known that the rank of senator was hereditary but the empty places in the senate were fdled with high-ranking state or court officials.

The rich curiales made unceasing attempts to enter the estate of the senators and there is evidence of their struggles with the emperors, who

918. Cod. Thcod. 6.4. 11.

241

time and again issued laws to put a brake on this process.’*’The senators

were free from municipal obligations and services, although their land was on the territory of the towns.

In Thrace there were also senators. The earliest mention of them dates

to 384. In that year Theodosius I passed a law, which freed the senators of

Macedonia from paying a special land tax, as this had already been done for the senators of Thrace.The aim of this law was to attract senators from the neighbouring regions to take part in the newly created senate in Constantinople. At this time rich landowners from Syria, Asia Minor,

Egypt and also from Macedonia and Thrace were being drawn into the senate. They had to enter it but in return were given certain privileges

exempting them from other obligations.”* There is no evidence to show from which regions of Thrace the senators were chosen.

As we have seen, at the end of the fourth century and the beginning of the fifth there was an increase in great landed property and the landed magnates became more influential. At this time the colonate system was

introduced binding the coloni to the land as serfs • a legislative act imposed

upon the coloni as a service to the great landowners. In Thrace, the first decades of the fifth century were marked by the spread of patronage.

Whole villages and individual peasants sought the protection of the landed magnates and in return gave them their land and other possessions. This

handing over the property to the landed magnates was juridically legalized

by giving it the form of a grant, a scale or a leasehold of the land or

possessions. In the decree legalizing this the great landowners are called nobiliores.”^ We find such nobiliores (potentiores) in Odessosin the sixth

century engaged in a struggle with the city's ecclesiastical council about the redistribution of the landed property in the surroundings - property

over which they wished to gain control. 919. Jones, The Greek City, 193 sq. 920. Cod. Theod. 6, 2, 14 (= 91: ad Thracum similitudincm senatonim glebali iubemus praestationc rcddi immunes. See Seeck, RE 4, 1901, col. 365-367 s.v. collatio glebaiis for this decree. 921. See Oi. Lecrivain. Lc senat romain depuis Diocictien a Rome ct a Constantinople. Paris, 1888, 219; E Oiristopkilopulu. 'H avyKkriTot: «e to Bi’favro’di'(cpdroe, Athtnes, 1949. 922. Cod. lust. 10. 54, 1. See Belkov. Campagncs, 56 sq. 923. Nw. lust. 65, Pracf; Sed etiam hoc in nostraro venit memoriaiti quod Martino Vito sanctissimo cpiscopo Odissitanae civitatis fotmam et ante legem nosttam dedimus prohibentem eum eeelcsiasticas res vcndcre, ne quls ex potentioribus ei necessitaiem imponant secundum suum propositum res ecclesiasticas alienare.

242

:

J i '

;

J

There were also rich families, probably owners of large estates in Ratiaria. In 422, when Attila captured ’’this large and populous city” the

wife and the children of a certain Sula were taken prisoners. Little is known of him, but his position must have been very important and

influential, because the delegation, in which Priscus took part, insisted that Attila should release them reminding him of ’’their former prosperity”.

The wife was freed on payment of a ransom of 500 gold coins. We have some indirect evidence of the size of the large estates. The

boundaries of the estates were marked with columnlike posts (terminatio) and several of these have been recovered. On two small columns, found at a distance of several kilometres from each other - in Sarkyoi and in Eregli

near the Sea of Marmara - one and the same inscription is written: ’ Boundary of the land of Zimocart”. Here we must draw attention to the

Thracian name of this big landowner, which throws some light on the ethnic origin of a part of the top social crust of late ancient Thrace.’’^ A column of the fifth or sixth century was recovered from a place near

Selymbria. On it there is an inscription, repeated three times, speaking of

the boundaries of K^rrot Ao/iaordpeoc, that is the boundaries of ’’the

gardens of Damastor”.”®

e/

Administrative and other officials. Military officers and clergy

An indivisible part of the urban population in Late Antiquity were the representatives of the expanded State administration - various financial

and administrative officials, military commanders, the numerous clergy. We have already spoken of the disposition of the military units in the

provinces and noted all the towns, where, according to reliable data, there were military garrisons. Because of the character of the three provinces Littoral Dacia, Lower Moesia and Scythia - many military units of the kind

called limitanei (soldier-farmers) were concentrated in the cities situated along the Danube and the State aimed at turning a part of them into settled farmers who had the obligation of fighting in defence of the limes

and whose families would have hereditary military obligations. Inland there were the so-called comitatenses. Only sparse data are available about

924. Prise, fr. 8 (FHG 4, p. 93), 925. SeeSeure, BCH 36, 1912, 574, n. 29-30;SeJevfiev,IlBI, 1-2 1951 231 926. SecSeure, RA 1912, II, 330.

243

them but nevertheless from what is known it can be seen that almost all

larger towns had military garrisons in this period.

The unanimous opinion of all authors of this period was that the majority of the military commanders in the limes were selfish and avari­

cious, and not only the military commanders of Thrace but also those of the other provinces. We have already mentioned the fact that Themistius writes that they had become merchants selling and buying slaves. Notori­

ous are the deeds of Lupicinus and Maximus that brought the dissatis­

faction of the Goths settled in Thrace to a head in 376. From a Novel of

Theodosius II, aimed at getting the situation on the frontiers of the Empire under control, it can be understood that the limes of Thrace and

lUyricum are considered to be the worst of all. In it attention is drawn to

the extortion and the poiation perpetrated by the local military com­ manders, who stole and sold part of the food which was sent for the

federati, sold the land of the soldiers and committed other unlawful acts

against the population and the soldiers. They were threatened with capital punishment and confiscation of their property if caught committing such crimes.’’’ In the weD-known decree issued by Valentinian in 364 and sent

to Tautomed the latter is told that he will have to build the towers in the provinces out of his own money if their construction is not finished in the

given time limit. It has been rightly noted that the only explanation of one of the military amassing such a large fortune was plunder.”®

corruption

and

In chapter II we dealt with the administrative organization of the

provinces and towns and noted the names of those governors which are

known. They lived in the capital towns of the respective provinces. Here, of course, were also the other officials engaged in their chancelleries and

the financial organs. There were a great many of them because the bureaucratic apparatus in Late Antiquity had been greatly expanded. Many officials lived in Serdica, Marcianopolis, Durostorum, Ratiaria,

Philippopolis, Adrianople, Aenos and Selymbria. In the sixth century

Odessos became the capital town of the newly created Quaestura exercltus. On some of the epitaphs of the sixth century which have been preserved are the names of several magistrates of this quaestura;’2!^u>pj?ixA.D. Dintnv, VW 1950, n. 4. 68-70; Kurbalov, Wr. 14.1958, 23 sq.

251

Writing about the crushing of the uprising and the cruel terror which

followed Ammianus Marceilinus says; "Now began a cruel persecution of many people, much more severe than their errore and deeds deserved. Exceptionally cruel was the punishment meted out to the defenders of Philippopolis, who sunendered the city and themselves only after pro­ longed fighting and after they had seen the head of Procopius which was

being carried away to Gaul? After speaking about the fate of the leaders

of the uprising Ammianus continues:

"There were also otlier con­

sequences, harder to bear than the war itself. The hangman instruments of torture, bloody interrogation were at large without making any difference

in age or rank. Under the pretext of maintaining order, a savage court tried

rich and poor, people of all classes, and all cursed the fateful victoiy, worse than any terrible war... The irreconcilable spirit in the actions (of

Valens) which in themselves were right, delivered many innocent people to the hangman. They were racked and tom on instruments of torture or

battered to death under the blows of savage executioners. If nature had

allowed, they would have preferred to die ten times in battle instead of

perishing innocent, with tom limbs and amid cries of horror at having to die as though they were being punished for insulting the personage of the Emperor. Before their death they were subjected to bodily tortures more

dreadful than death itself... there was no end to this anguish until the

Emperor and his friends had been satiated with money and blood’'.*"

The cruel treatment of those who had taken part in the uprising of Procopius*" paved the way for the big-scale participation of the local

population in the uprising of the Visigoths, which took place ten years later and had important consequences for the socio-economic development

of the eastern Balkan lands.

•

«

•

A special form of social movement was the struggle of the Orthodox Church against the counter-currents which were springing up. Of these Arianism was the first to spread. Very often those in opposition to different things in the established order used this struggle as a cloak for 965. Amm 26, 10,6:9-14. 966. Slit J. Hahn. Acta Ant. Hung 6. 1958, 199-211; C.L Kurbatov. Vizantijskie occfki, .Moskva 1961.64-92.

2S2

their actions and in the disguise of a struggle against the Orthodox Church, they struggled against the oppression and violence of the State.

From the thirties to the seventies of the fourth century Arianism was rather wide-spread. The number of Arians increased with the coming of

the Goths of Wulfila to the region of Nicopolis ad Istrum. These Goths had

accepted Christianity in its Arian form, before coming to this land. In 343 the famous Serdica Synod took place to settle the Arian

controversy and to condemn the ideas of Arianism. Among the bishops who were against the Arians were Protogen of Serdica and Pistus of Marcianopolis. At the same time, a counter-synod was sitting in Philippo-

polis. Here had gathered the opponente of the Orthodox Church, among whom were 76 bishops. Eutychius, the bishop of Philippopolis was himself

an Arian. An inscription found in Kyustendil, attests to the fact that there were Arians in Pautalia.**’

The spread of Arianism in Thrace and Dacia was regarded with anxiety by the leaders of the Church who considered that this would weaken the

frontiers of the Empire as the Arians, among whom were the Goths who

had settled in Moesia, would not fight the barbarians who came from the north. In his work ”On the Faith”

Ambrosius of Mediolanum wrote the

following: ’’Have we not heard that the whole of the limes, which begins from the boundaries of Thrace and passes through Littoral Dacia and

Moesia and the whole of Pannonian Valeria, is in an uproar caused by wicked voices and barbarian movements?

What misfortune may this

calamitous neighbourhood bring upon us? How can the Roman State be defended with such forces? ” In a letter from Pope Innocent to Rufus the

bishop of Thessaly there is a recommendation to persecute the Arians living in the regions Thessaly, Achaea, Dacia and Moesia.**® However, such

persecution became possible only after the death of the Arian emperor, Valens. We have evidence of events connected with Arianism taking place in Tomi and Adrianople. Sozomen notes the unanimity of the Church in

Scythia, where the central ecclesiastical authorities knew how to safeguard the region from religious struggles and records the following occurrence in 967. SGLI n. 35, ZaUer, Origines, 195. 968. Ambr. Med. De fide 3, 16 § 140 (Pair. Lal. 16, col. 613); Pair, Jal. 20, col.

253

connection with those who remained faithful to the Nicene Creed.

While on his tour of Marcianopolis and the provinces of the lower Danube, the Emperor Valens visited the town of Tomi in 369. Here he

tried, as an Arian, to persuade the local bishop Vetranion, a man of great authority and influence, to renounce the Orthodox Church. In the church, where the conversation took place, the bishop bravely defended the

teaching of the Council of Nicaea and then left the Church and went to perform the service in another church. The congregation of people fol­

lowed him and the Emperor was left alone with his suite. "Almost the whole town assembled to see the Emperor as everybody expected that

some riot would break out.” The angry Valens ordered the bishop to be exiled, but soon after he was forced to have him recalled. ”I suppose,”

says Sozomen, ’’that he saw the resentment of the people of Scythia at his

sending the bishop into exile and was frightened that they might rise up.

He knew that they were courageous and, because of the position of their land, necessary for the defence of the Roman Empire, as they stemmed

the pressure of the barbarians in this region!’ *** Here the roles are changed • an orthodox population (Xodc) is opposed to the Emperor, who is an Arian, unlike other places where the Arians

were opposed to the State and the orthodox ruler.

If we consider the conditions in the province of Scythia in these years we shall see that the local population had good reason to be discontented.

We

know the general situation very weH from the tenth speech of

Themistius who accompanied Valens on his tour of Scythia. The local people were forced to do heavy unpaid work, to cart stones, bricks and

other building material from distant places, to build the fortress near

Hursovo (whose construction is described by Themistius) and other fortifications. Themistius accused the soldiers stationed along the limes of having become "not soldiers but robbers who plundered the local people!’ Our

rhetor praises Valens for having succeeded in doing away with the cause of this pievance but the praise was only the usual rhetorical trick of glori­ fying the Emperor. Besides this the war with the Goths was bound up with

other obligations fliat fell heavily both on the urban and rural population •

to debver quoUs of supplies to the State. Some classes of the population (the artisans of Marcianopolis) were said to have profited from these

969. Sozom. Hisl. cccL 6. 21 (Pair. Gf. 67. coL 1344 C-1345 Bl.

254

events and accumulated some wealth, but most people suflTered in these years. All this nourished the discontent and only the pretext was missing

to spark off a revolt.*® Again under the pretext of a struggle between Arians and Orthodox Christians we hear of unrest in Adrianople- At the time of the Serdica

Synod (343) some groups of people in Adrianople were said to sympathize

with the Arians. Their religious opponents slandered them to the Emperor and ten people were slaugthered. They were workers in the Imperial weapon factory (fabricenses). Athanasius himself saw their graves and the gravestones on both sides of the road outside Adrianople.*” We do not know any more details about this event but it is known that the working

conditions in these fabricae were extremely hard. The discontent and unrest of the population of Thrace were the most

clearly expressed in the uprising of the Visigoths in 376-382. The principal events in this uprising have been discussed many times in scientific litera­

ture and we have also mentioned it in chapter I. Treated extremely badly by the local administration the Goths rebelled. In a short time they were

joined by peasants, coloni, slaves and many of the local population and this broadened the character of their movement. "They were joined”, says

Ammianus

Marcellinus, "by not a few gold-diggers who could not bear

the burden of the taxes. They were welcomed joyfully by everyone and were very useful to the Goths when passing through unknown places

because they showed them concealed stores of food, the hide-outs of the people and other secret places of refuge.”*®

In all the literary sources, the statements are unanimous in asserting that the Goths did not capture a single town because siege technics was unknown to them. However Ammianus Marcellinus tells us that people

fled continually from the towns and told the Goths everything they knew. Thus after the battle near Adrianople the Goths decided to attack Hera-

clea. "They obtained information from the fugitives and knew everything,

even the interiors of the houses, let alone the interior of the towns?’ When

besieging Adrianople "they got to know from traitors and fugitives” that in this strong fortress there were high-ranking state officials, the insignia of

970. kettop, Themvitius, 258. 971. Athan. Hist, arianorum 18(Patr. Gr. 25, col. 713). 972. Amm. 31, 6, 7-8. Sec Jung, Romer und Ronianen^. 46-47.

255

the imperial power and the treasures of Valens.”

We have not detailed

information about the social standing of these '’traitors and fugitives” but it is probable that they came from the exploited, underprivileged lower strata. Here it was probably a case of that collaboration which existed

between the tribes coming from the north and the exploited urban rural people of lower social standing, many examples of which are attested in Thrace, and not only in Thrace.*^ But these tribes should not be regarded

as liberators, steadfastly fighting to free the provinces. In their incursions

they were pursuing their own aims • plunder, places to settle in and land for cultivation. They promoted the growth of unrest and discontent among the local people who for different reasons and different aims,

became their natural allies against Roman rule.

But, of course, not all classes in the towns were on the side of the Goths. Ammianus Marcellinus writes that the governor of the town, wrathful at the plundering of his villa;’ armed the plebeians and the workers in the imperial weapon factory, of whom there was a large

number, and led them out to punish the Goths...” But the Goths suc­

ceeded in putting the attackers to flight.’” How can this behaviour of the plebeians and the workers of the weapon factory be explained?

We have data on other towns in the Eastern Roman Empire showing

that the aristocracy very often succeeded in winning over the lowest strata of the exploited masses and in using them for their own ends. These

people were interested in preserving some of the institutions of the towns,

such as the free distribution of bread, etc. Therefore in some cases they willingly defended the old institutions and order.

The people in many of the towns, especially the artisans, the pro­ prietors of ergasteria and the urban landowners fought vigorously against

the barbarians in defence of the conditions for the continuation of the stock production which ensured their existence. They defended their own

economic intereste against the invaders, who threatened private ownership, markets, trade and so on.*”

973. Amn 31, 16, 1; 15, 2. 974. G. Cankova, IPr 8, 1951/1952, n. 2, 143-165; Slano/evic^ Vixanlija iSrba, 1, 31. K Tapkova-Zaimova. Byzantinobulgariui 1, 1962, 67 sq. 975- Amm. 31, 6. 1. 976. E.M. ^laermann, VDI 1953, n. 2, S3;A.P. Kadan. VDl 1953. n. 3, 89 »q.

256

Ammianus Marcellinus tells us that there were many cases of units of

the fighting force going over to the Goths. However, once three hundred people went en masse to the Goths, but, for some unknown reason, the

Goths killed them on the spot. Afterwards no man thought of giving himself up, even if he was in the most desperate position.”’

The well-known

battle that was fought out near Adrianople on

August 9, 378 had important consequences for the socio-economic deve­

lopment of the Empire.

Ammianus

compares it with the battle of

Cannae, but it did not bring peace to the dioceses of Thrace and Dacia. As late as 390 there was a "small war” in Thrace, when different groups of

Goths, aided by the local population, fought the imperial forces. Espe­ cially well-known is the story told by Zosimus about the situation in

Macedonia and Thessaly. The people there were ruined with heavy taxa­

tion and willingly helped the Goths: "At that time (during taxcoDection by the people of Theodosius I • V.) one could see how even what had been

left out of the humane feelings of the barbarians was taken away, not only

money but the women's jewellery and all clothing, even the garments that covered, so to say, what was indecent to show - all were given in payment of thetaxesthat had been imposed on the people. And all the towns and

villages were filled with weeping and wailing and they all appealed to the barbarians and sought help from them" ** The situation in Thrace must

have been similar because taxation was the same in all provinces and the

taxes were collected everywhere in the same way.

At the beginning of the fifth century, corruption among the governing upper crust of the State increased considerably. Eunapius tells us that in the time of Empress Pulcheria(414416) the provinces were sold to anyone

who wanted to buy them. "And he who wanted to plunder the Hellespont, bou^t the Hellespont, another • Macedonia or Thrace, each according to his passion for injustice...” After noting that the laws were powerless

against the vicars and proconsuls, who gave bribes to buy provinces,

Eunapius relates how the taxes were collected: "And by means of his

soundless heralds the man in power whispered into the ear of everyone that he had bou^this subjects for such-and-such a sum of gold and that it was urgent that this sum should be given to the treasury, otherwise he

would have troubles and might be punished with death and confiscation of

977. Amn 31, 15, 2-5; 7-9. 978. Zos. 4, 32.

257

his property. And so those who could, paid with whatever they had

weeping the while. And those who had no means to pay were publicly lashed?

Regardless of the extremely subjective tone of the work of Eunapius,

who was an adherent of the old faith and hated contemporary rule as being bound up with the new Christian religion, this author had a proper

understanding of some essential features of the actual conditions of his

own time. We have already mentioned a short passage in Zosimus in which he

speaks of slaves and deserters from the Roman army rising up in arms in Thrace in 401 but being defeated by the regular army.

We have almost no data of the fifth century on the social movements in the towns of Thrace and Dacia: it was only at the end of the fifth

century and at the beginning of the sixth that a large-scale movement, connected with the uprising of Vitalian, spread throughout the north­

eastern regions of the diocese of Thrace. The reason for the uprising was a reduction in the foodstuffs and other provisions which were given to the

federates who settled in this region. At the head of the uprising was Vitalian who had been bom in Zaldapa and who was comes of the federates. In taking the lead in this revolt, VitaUan was pursuing his own personal goal:

he wished to depose Anastasius and take the throne for himself. He

pretended, however, to be the defender of the Orthodox religion against the heresy of Monophysitism. The hard conditions under which the peas­ antry lived, burdened as they were with taxation, made more than

”50.000 soldiers and peasants' join him and, according to Theophanes, Vitalian succeeded in conquering the whole of Moesia, Thrace and Scythia. He managed to capture Odessos after his followers inside the city had

secretly opened its gates to him. one night. Here he provided himself with a fleet and, manning it with his own crew, he sailed off against Anastasius.

His army was joined by many Goths, Huns and Bulgars. But in spite of Vitalian's initial successes, after a (wo year's struggle, Anastasius succeeded

in crushing the rebellion. Of interest to us is the attitude of part of the

inhabitants of Odessos and of Andiialos,where Vitalian also had followers,

towards Anastasius and the central government. 979. Eunap. tr. 87 (FHC 4, p 52). 980. Theoph. A.M. 6006; Malala XVI, p. 405, 6 cd, Bonnac Kulakovskif Istoria 1, 438; Sfein. Histoiru, II. 178-181.

258

in the sixth century, especially in the second half, some of the people

Kving in Thrace, predominantly peasants, took part in the socaflcd move­ ment of the Scamari, which was directed against the exploitation of the State authorities.’®*

These data, although short and fragmentary, reveal that at din^erent times in Late Antiquity the unrest and discontent of some classes in the towns in Thrace and Dacia mounted and broke out with great violence.

There were many causes for this, but they were rooted in the system of harsh exploitation practised by the Late Roman Empire and its burden­

some administrative apparatus. As the process of liquidating the old socio-economic relations was very slow the crises in the slave labour way or production lay heavily on the shoulders of the producer who practised

it. We will conclude this chapter with words of Diocletian’s remarquable

contemporary Lactantius, who had a clear understanding of the basic features of the realities of Late Antiquity and the trends of their develop­

ment Describing the rule of Diocletian, he writes:*”'Through his avarice

and vacillation Diocletian threw the whole Empire into disorder. He took three co-rulers and divided the State into four parts. The armies were

increased and each one of the rulers tried to have a greater number of soldiers than former emperors had when they ruled the Stale alone.

To such a degree was the number of those who received from the State increased in comparison with those who gave, that because of the ex­ tremely high taxes, the strenght of the coloni was exhausted, the pasture­

land became desolate and the arable land turned into forests. And to instill fear in the people everywhere, the provinces were divided up into parts. In

almost every region and in almost every town the people had to shoulder

the burden of providing for the many praesides and still more numerous

officials, the numerous rationales, magisters and vicars of the prefects, who

rarely bothered about the affairs of the citizens, but busied themselves almost exclusively with condemnations and proscriptions: the confis­ cations were, 1 should say, not frequent, but constant, and countless things

were taken in an unbearably unjust way. What was demanded for the maintenance of the soldiery wias also more than the people could bear.

981. Svv/t.D. Dmilrev, Wt. S. 1952,1 sq. 982, Laci. de mon. perxcc. 7, 2-5.

259

Because of his insatiable greed for wealth, this same Diocletian never

wished to see his treasures and wealth reduced in the least and was always collecting extra taxes and gifts to keep what he had amassed untouched!'

The final blow at the old ways of production, which were already badly shaken by the unrest and discontent of the exploited lower strata,

was struck by the invasion of the Slavs, or rather by the after-effects of their settlement in Thrace, which was the starting point of a new period in the development of the Balkan lands in Antiquity.

260

VII

ETHNIC CHANCES IN THRACE AND DACIA FROM THE

FOURTH THROUGH THE SIXTH CENTURY The rich and varied epigraphic finds of the first three centuries A.D. in the Bulgarian lands have made it possible to follow up, and in some regions rather fully, the ethnic structure of the population in Moesia.’“ But late

ancient monuments of this kind are not so frequent and their contents is different from that of the epigraphs of the earlier period- The Christian

names are rather stereotyped and do not help to give a picture of the ethnic structure of the urban and rural population, whereas those of the

first three centuries are varied and instructive.

The great ethnic changes in the poiulation of the eastern Balkan lands began in the mid-third century when different tribes penetrated into Moesia and Thrace. These incursions have been treated in detail in scientific literature on this subject. Our literary sources show that many tribes • the Goths, Carpi, Sarmatians, Taifali. Vandals, Asdings, Pevki. Zorani, Burgundians, Tervingi, Greutungi, Heruli, Gepids and Bastamae -

passed through these regions in the period from the fifties to the eighties of the third century.’®* These invasions of foreign tribes caused some changes in the ethnic pattern of the eastern Balkan lands and B. Gerov

notes that these changes proceeded in two ways: one on the hand the old

population diminished and on the other, settlers of barbarian origin came into the land either peacefully or by force. After Trajan’s Dacia was abandoned, the Romanized population were also moved into the two new Dacias created by Aurelian.*®®

983- a Gerov. L'aspcvl ethniquc et lingutstique dans la region cntrc le Danube el Ic-s Balkans d I'epoque romaine (ler - 111 s.), Sludi Urbinati. n.s,a, 1959, n. 1-2, p. 173-1911 irerov. FrouCvania, MV, passim. 984. See SHA - Vila GaB. 5, 6; Vita Claud. 6. 2; 9.4: Vita AureL 6, 3; 10, 2; 17, 3; Vita Ptobi 16. 3; 18, 1-2; Vita Bonosi 15. 6; VitaCari 9,4. 985. Vita AureL 39, 7: Eutnp. 9, 15; Ruf. best. Brev. 8, 2; Gemv Romanisam U 1,33 sq.

261

In the second half of the third century many tribes had already settled

in Thrace: Goths, Carpi (about 272 by Aurelian), Sarmatians, Goths, Gepids, Vandals and Burgundians (about 278 by

Probus in all the

Danubian provinces). In 280, 100.000 Bastamae, driven out of their homes on the other side of the Danube settled in Thrace. They were peaceful people, but the Gepids, Greutungi and Vandals vdio had been

settled in the same region revolted.”*

In 282 Cams defeated and captured 20.000 Sarmatians in Illyricum but in 295 the Danubian provinces were invaded by groups of Bastamae and Carpi. They were defeated and captured by Diocletian, who settled

them in the eastern Balkan lands, not only in the frontier regions but also in the interior.”’ In 290 considerably large groups of Saracens appeared in the Syrian-

Arabian desert and started plundering the Roman territories in this area. Diocletian went there immediately, defeated them and settled the pris­ oners in Thrace. The unknown author of "Panegyric upon Constantius”,

who mentions this fact, adds that the prisoners were settled in the "uncultivated lands of Thrace”.”* In the fourth and the fifth centuries, barbarian penetration into Thrace and Dacia was in several forms:”* some of the prisoners were sold as slaves or were settled as colon! and federati. The latter were given land,

they lived in their villages and received remuneration from the State. In

exchange they were obliged to cultivate their pieces of land and to defend

the Empire from other barbarian tribes.*” The settlement of federati wu 986. Vila Claud. 9, 4; Vita Auiel. 31, 3; Cerov. Romanisam II, 1, 34 sq.,Viu Probi 18, l-2;Zos. 1, 71,1. Schmidt, Die Ostgermanen’, 95 sq. 987. Eutrop. 9, 25; Oros. 7, 25; Cons Const, a. 295 (MGH AA, 9, 230). 988. Antm. 14, 4, 1-6; Mamert. Geneathl. Maxim. 5, 7; Pane^ Constant. 5, 21. See flefr,RE6A, 1937, col. 464. 989. There is a great amount of literature on the barbarian incursions into the Balkan Peninsula. For this work we have chosen to use chiefly written sources of information on barbarian migrations into Thrace and Dacia and on their settlements there and we shall point out some of the more important works containing additional bibliographical dau, see Schmidt. Die Ostgermanen’, passimtM K Levitnico. Via. Zbomik, 35 sq.;P. Lemertc, Invasions et migrations dans les Balkans depuis la fin de I’epoque romain jusqu’a VIII s., RH 78, ann. CCXI, avril/mai 1954,265-308; TapkoM/jiimova, Nasestvia, Psq.^Fettov, ttnideskiproblem!, 375 sq. 990. Benfemhi, RE 6, 1909, coL 2817 sq. s.v. foederati:/ Maspero, B2 21.1912, 97 sq.; Gnfie. Militdrgeschkhte, 80-88; Hoffmann, Bew^ngsheer, 11, p. 249 s.v. I'ocderaten.

262

stepped up during the fifth and sixth centuries for different reasons:

depopulation of frontier regions, a decrease in the armed forces, a falling off in agricultural production, etc. The number of the federati in Thrace and Dacia was considerable. There is evidence that they were not well treated in the sixth century and that is why they took an active part in

insurrections and rebellions against the Emperor and the central govern­ ment, as they did in the uprising of Vitalian.

In 303 a tribe of unknown origin crossed the Danube and gave themselves up to Galerius, who settled them in Thrace. Some suppose that they were Carpi.”* In 334 Constantine the Great gave homes to JazygesSarmatians, Gothsand others in Thrace, Scythia and Macedonia, According to Eusebius’” they numbered more than 300.000. Some years later, in 343 at the time of the Persian war, Constantins II invaded the Persian

region of Adiabene (on the other side of the river Tigris), captured a town

and moved all its inhabitants to Thrace. Libanius. in recording this fact, adds that these people received land for cultivation. It is supposed that

they were settled as colon!.”’ In the fourth century, as we have already noted, a great number of

Goths came to Thrace, penetrating into this land in different ways. Because of a religious struggle in their homeland a large group of Goths,

led by their bishop Wulfila. sought shelter in 348 in the Empire. Con­ stantins 11 allowed them to stay and settled them near Nicopolis ad Istrum, where they are attested until the middle of the sixth century.

They are mentioned by many authors of literary works. Isidor of Sevilla gives a piece of interesting information about them,

noting that the

Visigoths who came to these places in 346-378 found them in a moun­ tainous country.”* There is not much evidence of Gothic penetration into the towns of

991. t.Bct. de mon. persvc. 38, 6: Schmidt. Die Osl^rmancn’. 224. Ch. Bichir. Davti II, 1967, 177-224: C. Scorpan. Carpi in Scythia Minor, Pontice 1, 1968, 342-364: Ch. Bich^. Carpi in islorioftralia Romana si stnina, SCIV 22/2. 1971 179-197. 992. Etaeb Vila Conilanlini 38, 6 = Xnwi Fater. 6, 32: Quos (SarmaUs) pulsos Constantinus libenler aceepit el amplius irecenta milia hominum mixlae aetalis el sexus per Thraciam, Scythiam. Maeedoniam, llaliainque divisit. See J. Die Dobrudja itn Alterium, Sarajevo. 1911,37. 993. Uban. 18, 206 »q.,59, 77-86 SceSlein. Geschichtv I, 263, Anm. 2. 994. hid HUloria Goth, 10.

263

Thrace and Dacia. Zosimus tells us that in 323 Constantine the Great, after

he had defeated Rauamod’s group of Goths, sent them as prisoners to

different towns and returned to Thessalonka. And from Zosimus we also

learn that the Goths who were on the side of Procopius were held as hostages in the Danubian towns.**’ Most of the Goths who settled in Thrace came during the events of 376-382. At that time, there were incursions of Ostrogoths, Alans, Sar

matians and other tribes. A part of them withdrew later but the rest

remained in Thrace after the conclusion of a peace treaty in 382, which guaranteed them lands for cultivation and settlements. They received the rights of federates and it is supposed that they were settled in the present

North Bulgaria and the Dobrudja. However, the greater part of the Goths did not remain here. After being there for several years they left the devastated Balkan Peninsula and led by their chieftain Alaric, they went to

Italy. At the beginning of the fifth century (408) many Huns attacked the present north-eastern Bulgaria and sacked the town of Castra Martis and its sunoundings. The following year the commander of the armies in Thrace

succeeded in defeating the invading tribes and in capturing many of them. There were so many prisoners, that as early as April 12,409, a decree was issued ordering that the Skyri (a tribe of German origin) who had been

captured here should be settled as coloni in Asia Minor. We have already

said there are reasons to assume that some of them remained here.**®

The break-up of the Hunnic State brought considerable changes in the regions of the Lower Danube: the provinces of Littoral Dacia, Lower

Moesia and Scythia.Jordanes tells us that the sons of Attila settled in these regions and brought with them other tribes belonging to Attila's State. ’’The Sauromats, whom we call Sarmatians, the Kemandri and some of the Huns settled in the lands which had been ceded to them in lllyricum, near the town of Castra Martis... And the Rugii and other tribes wanted to be allowed to settle in Bizye and Arcadiopolis. Even Hemac, the younger son

of Attila, choose for himself the most distant part of Scythia Minor and settled there with his group of followers. His kinsmen Emnetzur and

Ulcindur occupied Utus, Iscus and Almus in Littoral Dacia and a great number of Huns made inroads into Roumania and settled there. The now 995. Zoi 2, 22; 4, 1 i. 996. Cod. Theod, 5, 6. 3; Ojium. Hist. ccel. 9, 5; Vetten. 39.

264

so-called Sacromontisi and Fossatisii are descended from them!'

This

means that Huns and Sarmatians were settled in the middle of the fifth

century near the mouths of the rivers Vit and Iscar in north-west Bulgaria and in the Dobnidja, near the delta of the Danube. Jordanes notes that until his time (the mid-fifth century) the tribes we have mentioned lived

near the town of Castra Martis as peaceful settlers.

In 466 and 467 Huns again made inroads into Thrace and in 474 ’’Hunnic" tribes crossed the Danube and some of them remained to live in

Thrace. Such crossings of the Danube by separate small groups were a frequent occunence and they are not always mentioned in the literary sources. They also occurred in the time of Marcian (451 ).***

Jordanes also says that Skyri, Sadagari and a group of Alans settled in Lower Moesia and Scythia.*”

The Ostrogoths of Theodoric lived for about 15 years as federates in Littoral Dacia and Lower Moesia, near the towns of Novae and Mar-

cianopolis. Then they moved south ravaging Thrace on their way.At one time the Emperor 2^no wanted to cede the region of Pautalia to them and

to allow them to settle there,"“%ut they made their way to Italy and only a part of them, headed by their leader Besas, remained in Lower Moesia.

They lived as federati there and in the sixth century they were serving in

the Byzantine army. Procopius notes that a part of the Theodoric’s Goths remained in Moesia.*®®'

The reigns of Anastasius and Justinian were marked by incursions of

Slavs, Bulgars and other tribes that are sometimes spoken of in the literary sources as Scythi or Getae and it is not always easy to identify their

nationality.*®” At first these tribes came on forays and remained only for a short time but in the middle of the sixth century they made their first 997. Jord. Get. 265-267. 998. Euep. Hist. eccl. 3, 2;Enfilin, RE 14, 1930, coL 1516 s-v. Marcianus. 999. Jord. Get- 266: Scyri vero el Sadagari et certi Alanoium eum date suo nomine Candae Seylhiam muiorcm inTerioreinque Moesiam aeeeperunt. 1000. Sec Schmidl. Die Ostgermanen’, 278 sq. The sources; Anon. Valet. 9. 42: Eugipp Vila Severini 44.1; MarveO. Com. ad a. 483, 487;Match, fr. II, 16. 1001- Proc. De bcllo Golh. I, 16, 1-2; lerdoe nfv n** lew': rdv tu tiakaiav ii' BjxiKQ dwwei'utt’ Heoirpixv re ovk ftnamiievutv rtvixa ti’deide tic TtoAmu' mv lordiov Xtwv, Proc. De hello Peis- 1, 8: Terdoi SvSoec rweodK efoSrpixw W/mKns Suno/evic, Viantija i Srba 1. 127, n. 21; Jung, ROmer urul Romanen*, 1971002- Iv. Dujitv. Belomorski pregled, 1.1942, 230-235-

265

attempts to establish themselves for longer periods of time in North Bulgaria and the Dobrudja. There is a passage in Procopius describing a

fortress Adina somewhere in the region of Durostorum and MarcianopoUs. The fortress was repaired because the barbarian Slavs always had there and waylaid travellersand made the nearby places impassable.*^

In the time of Anastasius, Isaurians from Asia Minor were settled in Thrace. And Procopius attests to their being Langobardi in the town of

Apri in Thrace. He adds that in the time of Anastasius HeruU were settled in Upper Moesia.'“* We have spoken of the great invasions of the Slavs and Avars in chapter 1. Except for the short notes of Procopius we have no reliable data about the Slavs who settled in these lands for long periods.***® It seems, however, that from the mid-sixth century onward separate groups of Avars and Slavs

did remain for longer periods of time on the Balkan Peninsula. Future detailed study of the end of the sixth century and the first half of the

seventh will probaUy give a more exact picture of the basic stages of their

settlement in Moesia, Scythia and Thrace.

There are concrete data that throw light on the population in the cities in

the Late ancient period. A part of the Romanized and Hellenized population perished during the invasions of the third century, but a very great number of

them came through this period unscathed and probably formed the principal

part of the urban population during the whole of the fourth century. The steady penetration of barbarian tribes probably began in the fifth century. Unfortunately the conversion to Christianity equalized to a great extent to names of the people and they cannot be used to determine the ethnic origin of individual persons unless it is given explicitly. Yet a number of

inscriptions of this time reveal that they pertain to barbarians, Thracians, or people from Asia Minor because in most cases these people had retained

1003. Pmc. aedif. 4,7, 13. 1004. Proc, aedif, 4, 7, XZ.Theoph. A.M. 5988;/’roc. aedif, 4,27, 8;Be«, RE 6 A, 1937, eoL 1183; MarceO. Com. ad a,SI 2: Gens Henilonim in terras atque eivitates Romanorum iussu AnasUsii Caesaris introducta; Proc. De bcllo Goth, 2, 43; 2, 93, 1005. An important but not eompletcly sure source of information about the early settlements of Slavs on the Balkan Peninsula are some of the place names mentioned by Procopius in his “De aedificiis”. This was pointed by M. Diinov, l_ Niederle and others. See Iv. Belomorski pregled, I, 1942, 270, n. 1. Recently V. Georgitv. Vaprosi na buli^rskata ciimologia, Sofia 1958, 67-88 increased their number to Sa Some of these names may be Slav.

266

their characteristic names or mentioned them along with their Christian

names. Thus from the inscriptions in Serdica are known: Julius Dafnidius and his parents Lauientius et Maximilla, a presbyter Maxentius, Florentia

Virgo, Mopih rapdeixK. a military commander’louXtoiMic, another lulianus candidatus. the deacon Demetrius, a citizen Decius, then Nocentianus.

loannes, the son of a certain distinguished Georgius inlustris, a bishop

Theuprepius, a presbyter Leonianus, and someone called Constantianus. On bricks found in Serdica there are the names of Maximus, Zosimus,

From Naissos comes Petrus, filius Thomae.’ Especially rich is the epigraphic documentation of the town Odessos.

The city achieved international significance in the sixth century and the names on gravestones point to the different ethnic origin of the people. Of these names we will mention Mapia, redpiTj? (ApKdfoc.

ApKoStou), wife

of

MepKoupr?c, ’tXopu'OC,

(sic),

STpariyut

(d, ’AMof®'®,

Sa^0aflK, MopKiXwc.'®” In Pliska there were also found some dd Christian inscriptions on several of which we read the names AeuP, Mopia" Of the names in inscriptions from Mesembria we will mention only Koorcu'Tto (sic);“”°from Tomi(here as in Odessos.many inscriptions have

been preserved) -b^pruwrjX (w), 'AX^ru^poc, MapaeXXoc, his father

Op/pn>c and his mother MopxeXXa, HpoxXijSrK, AomKu«, lt«xHVjjc,the son of 4»wKac, his wife Kwarcun^ia (sk) and his daughter Pwgawi,

Tercntius, the son of Gaione (?), lunia Dometia, lunia Nica, rew-dTjioc and his wife 4>XdPi>«i, Theodula, Victor et Alexandria, Auifelia) lanuaria. 1006. Serdica: SGLl n.n. 17. 10. 15. 16, 4. 3, 13. 14, 19. 5, 9, 11, 18; BrfeF/fev.

Prinosi, n. 103;X«tf/itfl, 339, n. 448. 1007. Spomcnik (Beograd) 77, p. 47, n. 38. 1008. Odcwos: SGLl lun. 124, 116, 119. 93. 95. 128. 110. 98.97, 107,87, 88, 118, 134, 113. 106. 90. 82, lOi'.BdtvIiet', Klio 52, 1970, p. 25-26; 1VAD5 (XXi, 1969. p. 232-233. 1009. SGLl n. 58. 1010. SGLl n. 162. 267

Fl(avius) Marliniis, Auifclia) P-uinna. PefiotTux;, military conimaiidcr:*®*’ from Callatis ■ MapKtd; from Bizone - deacon Stefanus (sic); from Ulmetum

the son of’Ajrjrac ^me barbarian name or a name

of Asia Minor/ and Aopvr),

the daughter of’AoKXrfjruifit?? and

of Aft(ua (also a barbarian or name of Asia Minor).*®’’

Something can be added to what has been said about Ulmetum. After its decline and depopulation at the beginning of the sixth century, the

town was restored and fortified and after this it led a fuU and normal city life until about the year 600. To this place military contingents from

Constantinople ■ lanciarii iuniores - were sent and they took part in the building of the fortress. On completing the buildings they wrote an

inscription on it in Latin. While the piaster of one of the walls of the tower

was still wet, two of them wrote a few words on it, also in Latin; Domino

fratri and Vivam. Here were recovered a number of everyday household

utensils which had evidently belonged to the people of Ulmetum (to soldiers or civilians) and on many of them there were inscriptions in Creek: Ku'pte /Sorj^r? (two inscriptions) and nie,

koXoc. facts which

reveal the mixed character of the population of Ulmetum at the end of the

sixth century, a population speaking both Latin and Greek.'®” Numerous names and inscriptions have come from the towns situated on the coast of the Sea of Marmara:*®'*from Perinthos - Mukuii^, son of

npoBoXux; from Ly^achia • Zwrtxoc and his wife E^^gia; from

Maronca • Atwrrooux; and a particularly large number from Panion • ,XoopCteoc (sic) and his brother Kupttwoe, KuptXXa, the wife of Acwceoe,

O£iXjr«i. OboXepm and llpibxa, flcrpoc, Euoe^ia, llpibxoc, fl^poe, the son of npioKoe, Mopiiw, Aoreptc, Mapia, the daughter of reopyioe (sic),

Moplroe from Panion, but died in

Callipolis. From Heraclea AdppXih

lloXupwa and her husband. Oi^jbipo?, Aup. Axdxioc, d>X. Povpavoc, 1011. In the prewnt work wv are giving the data according to the earlier publicanons, see n. 38 and fopesev. Die spatgriechischen Inschril'Ien aus Kleinskylhien, Dacia 11, 1967, 163-176; Netihammer. Christliche Alteriiimer p, 92sq.,n.n. 1 2 7 9, 10, 11, 13,15, 18, 20;Zos. 4,40, I. ’ ’ ’ 1012. ^etihammer. Christliche Allertiimer, p. 167, p, 150 (= Afrvan, Anal Acad. Roum. 34, 1912, 535); A'alinibr, p. 196. n. 238, 1013. Mnan. Anal. Acad. Roum. Mem. sect. ist. 36. 1913/1914 352 so. 379-384 n. 23.27; 1914/1915, 275, n. 91014. The material dealing with the cities along the coast of the Propontis is not complete because there has been no thorough scienlilic study of the laic ancient inscriptions from these cities. There is no collection of cTilic-ally selected inscriplions.

268

Lp;«?Kpdnj9, Aiip. Ao'pyo(;,the son of ZwroccK and his wife, AukXrjnoSorr?,

TdXu>ra('X. Zt^pic occurs, and also the names of his numerous family.’®*’

The following names are knoum to us from inscriptions found in South Bulgaria and Thrace: Aurelia Zania Antipatra (293), AdXr^ of Heraclea 1033. CZ Kaurov, IBAD 3, 1912/1913, 195 (« Det^, IBAD 4, 1912/1913, 276).Sue also C.Z Kaunv. lAI 17,1950, 23^ Passio S, Philippi 1, 7; BCH 36,1912, 632, n. 86: Cod, Ttieod. 16. 8, 12 (397 ai; 16,8, 21 (412 a.). See But com. mon. isL 7,1914,189,0.17. 1034. Beievliav. Personennamen, 69-124; kettov, Studia Dedev. 731 sq. 1035. Dimitrov. PloCite, n. Si.Daaoff, AB 31, 1938, IO8,n. 13. TheopA. Sim. 2. 16,1. 1036. Kettov, Studia Deeev, 738-739; Cod. lust 4, 5, 8; 8, 41. 6; 4, 5. 7; 4, 23. 2: 4,44, 7: 8. 50, 15:9, 20.10; 4, 7, 3; 4, 21,7. 1037. Mih^iov, Izvestia muzei Buqps, 2. 1965, ISO sq.

273

(294), Mucapor, hangman of Adrianople in 303. Flavius Moco, a domestic of Beroe (V.-VLc.), Buraides, a presbyter of Serdica, and another person with the same name as the hangman of Adrianople.'®” We have already mentioned the fact that the author of the first part of the life of Saint

Philip, an unknown citizen of Heraclea, was probably a Thracian by origin. We also noted that in the same work there is an important passage io the IX speech of Himerius. In this passage he praises a young woman of

Phihppopolis, the future wife of Severus, a high-ranking administrative

official of Greece; she was of Thracian origin and her ancestors were

descended from the royal line of the Odrysi. Besides this, the Hermogenae

and the Maedi families were descended from the same ancestors as her mother and father and they occupied a dominant position in Thrace in her time (the mid-fourth century). These facts are important because they

show that even in a town like Philippopolis many of the city aristocrats of the fourth century were proud to be of Thracian origin, althou^ they did

not bear Thracian names. *®”

The abundant evidence of Thracian soldiers in the Early Byzantine army pertains mostly to people from the rural areas of Thrace where the hard conditions made them look farther afield and to seek occupation in

the army. It would have been useless for them to migrate to the towns, because the inland towns of the fourth century could offer them few

opportunities of a better life.*®*’

The barbarian tribes, whose migration from their homes to Thrace and Dacia

have already discussed, settled at first near the towns, as is noted

in the literary sources, because in most cases they became federates occupied in cultivating the land.*®** Thus Jordanes writes that Sarmatians, Kemandri and Huns settled near the town of Castra Martis, where they lived until the middle of the sixth century.'®*’The Goths of Wulfila lived

in the region of Nicopolis ad lstrum.*®*®The Ostrogoths of Theodoric Uved

1038. Cod. lust. 4, 49, 9; 7, 35, 6: Passio S. PhUippi 1, 5; SCLI n. 192. n. 12; Detschev, Sprachreste, 80 s.v. Buraklcs. 1039. Himer. Or. 9.13. p. 83.150-157, ed, Colonna; Velkov, Sludia DeCev. 737 s^. 1040. IV. Tommchek, Uber Brumalia and Rosalia, SB Akad. Wien. Phil-hul. J Kt 60, 1868. 351 sq.,393 sq.; K BeieWfev, StCl 3, 1961, 251 Pefsonennamcn, 80 sq. 1041. £. Leotard, Essai sur la condition des barbares elaUis tbns rEmpirc Romain au Vie s.,Paris,1873. 1042. Jord. Get. 265: ad Castram Martenam urbem sedes sibi datas coluerunt. 1043. Jord. Gel. 267: in regione Nicopolitana. 274

ten years near Novae and for some time near Marcianopolis. There were also Gothic federates near Tomi at the end of the fourth century?****

Traces of the barbarian settlements can also be found in some of the names of places mentioned by Procopius. He notes a fortress called

Otwop in an area where, according to Jordanes, there really were Huns?**** He writes of Baarepw, S/tuiXac in Scythia and Mocsla. The

Bastamae received land here in the time of Diocletian. In 391 they

attacked and killed the Roman military commander Promotus. who was passing through North Bulgaria?**** We noted above that the Carpi, after being defeated in the Dobrudja

by Aurelian, were settled somewhere in the same neighbourhood, as can be seen from the vicus Carporum, near Hursovo?***’ Settlements of Sarmatians were scattered over the whole diocese of

Thrace and also in Dacia. The fortress

in Hemimont is already

known. A settlement and a static with the same name was marked at a distance of twelve miles from the town of Horrea Margi on the road Singidunum-Serdica. In Procopius the place is mentioned as Zopparec,

and in the itineraries as • mut. Sarmatorum. The fact that is was mentioned in the itineraries proves that this post existed in the fourth century and the fact that it was repaired by Justinian shows that it did not disappear during the barbarian invasions of the fourth and fifth centuries.***** Only one fortress of Inner Dacia is known - Bop^optec.*****

The relations between the barbarian settlers and the local population

were in most cases friendly. It is known that there was a clash between the garrison of Tomi and the fedeiati who had settled nearby, but the battle ended in favour of the former.****** There are also other cases when the

army and the other authorities, unlike the local people, were not on good

terms with the barbarian settlers. Very interesting data about the relations

between the Avars and the people living in the Balkan lands are to be

1044. Awn i'ales. 42: ad civilatem Novam, ubi erat TheodonL-um-,£u^ipp. Vita Severini 44, 4: ad Thcodcricumregem. qui tunc apud Novas cwitatcm ... morabatup yttitn. 44;MeM. fr. 18; Zoi. 4,40,1. See £ Mauarino, Aspetti social!, 251 sq. 1045. Proc, aedif. 4, 6, 34-3$;Jord. Get, 266. 1046. Proc aedif. 4,11 ;Zos. 4, 51; Oaud. StUkh. I, 96. 1047. A mm. 27. 5. 5: AizscA. Beilnge III/1,48. 1048. IB 565. 8; Proc, aedif. 4. 11 (p. 147, 18. Haury); 4.4 (p. 122, )31. 1049. Proc aedif. 4, 4 (p. 121,41 Hauryi. 1050. Zox 4,40, I.

275

found in

Michel

of Syria. These data are not very reliable but still

deserving of our attention. He says that when they were besieging the towns and fortresses, they invited the citizens to come out of the town in

peace and go and look after their work on the land ("go and sow and harvest” it is said in the text) and promised them that they would collect

only half the taxes they had been paying before, in another place Michel of Syria says that after capturing Sirmium the Avars gave bread and wine

to the hungry inhabitants of the city.'®®' Most of the literary sources emphasize the continuity of the barbarian

settlements throughout Late Antiquity. Characteristic in this respect is

Jordanes, account of WuUila's Goths and three definite dates connected with them attesting this continuity: 348 when they came as settlers, then

376, at the time of the Gothic incursions, when according to Isidor of Sevilla, they refused to throw in their lot with their fellow-countrymen

and fight mi their side, and finally the mid-sixth century when their life

was described by Jordanes: ’’And now they are living in the region of Nicopolis, at the foot of the Haemus Mountains. They are a numerous

tribe but poor and non-militant, and they have nothing except herds of

different kinds of livestock, pasture-lands and forests in which to cut wood. Their land is not very fertile but produces wheat and other cereals. Most of

them live on milk and some of them do not know where vineyards are to be found although a few of them buy wine from the neighbourhood.” ”” Their cattle-breeding way of life is also attested by Auxentius, the bishop of Durostorum and the author of several works. “*®^We have the same kind of data about the tribes settled near the town of Castra Martis. Their life can be traced for more than one hundred years. We have already spoken of

other groups of Goths and other tribes who made Thrace or Dacia their home for long periods of time. Very interesting are the ideas of the Late Roman social circles, which

mirrored the opinions of the Emperor and the ruling class, about the

results of the barbarian penetration into the Empire. Much could be said on this point, but we will dwell only on one example refiecting these opinions, an example bearing directly on .Thrace. The most pronounced

1051. Chronique de Michel le Syrien, ed. J.B. Chabot. Paris. 1901. X. 21 (II). p. 361;X, 18(11),p. 347. 1052. JonL Get 265-267. 1053. Auxtnt. 75. 29.

276

rhetor of the second half of the fourth century Themistius said in one of

his speeches in 383 (that is one year after the conclusion of a treaty

between Theodosius and the Goths, who had remained to live in Thrace), that he hoped the development of the Gothic settlements would proceed on the same lines as those of the Galatae in Asia Minor. The latter were no

longer considered to be barbarians ■ they were Roman citizens. Regardless of their name, they lived according to Roman laws, had the same obliga­ tions, served in the Roman army etc.‘®“

Part of the Goths did, indeed, still remain for a long time in Thrace. But from this time on the social processes were different and Themistius'

judgement was superficial and his conclusions were erroneous. The

economic conditions had changed and the cultural influence and the power of Romanization had also changed. Now was the beginning of a

reverse process • the ’barbarization’ of Roman culture and the complete liquidation of the old socio-economic relations as the result of an inner

crisis and of external causes one of which, the barbarian incursions, was playing no small part in the process.

It is not certain how the barbarian element penetrated into the towns of Thrace. It is an undoubted fact that it did but data about the stages of

the penetration are missing, it seems clear from the account given by

Jordanes that the Huns captured a number of Danubian towns, but it is

evident that in reality they settled not in the towns, but in the surround­ ings or at the mouth of the rivers.'®®® Barbarian penetration into the towns proceeded peacefully and most

often through marriage. Probably these marriages became very frequent because the Late Roman State in its endeavour to keep the population of

the province "pure" issued a strict order in 368 against mixed marriages.

They were deemed dangerous because they could lead to collaboration

with other barbarian tribes coming from the North. We have seen that forty-two years before this Constantine threatened any citizen of the

Balkan

lands who collaborated with the barbarians with the must

1054. nemisl. Or. 16. 21 Id. ScuM Geber. Hisl. Zlt. 35, 1927.182. loss. Jord Gel. 266: Kmnelzur el Ultzindur coiuanguinui eius in Dacia Ripensc Ulo el Hiseo Almoaue potili sum. 277

cruel death. The order of 368 ran as follows:'®** "No citizen of the

provinces, no matter to which estate of the people he belongs or in what town or village he lives, is allowed to many a barbarian. In cases of such

relationships arising between citizens of the province and barbarians through marriages (since in such marriages there is something suspicious

and harmful) the people who have contracted a mixed marriage must be punished with death? In spite of this interdiction such marriages did take place as is attested by reliable epigraphic data on North Bulgaria. Thus in

an inscription found in Montana and in another recovered from Nicopolis ad Istrum the word brutus • daughter-in-law, a word of Gothic origin, is used.'®*’This is evidence that family relations were developing between

the citizens of the provinces and the barbarians. In the inscription from

Montana it is said that Aurelius Crescentio and his wife Vincentia erect

this gravestone to the memory of their daughter-in4aw who died at the age of twenty-four. The gravestone is dated to the fourth century.*®** In the inscription from Nicopolis ad Istrum M(arcus) Aur. Maximus pays his

reverence to the memory of his daughter-in-law Arnica. The gravestone is also dated to the fourth century (maybe to the first half).*®*®

In another epigraphic inscription, which came from an unknown place a certain Bizantia, the daughter of Alziola, a numerarius, is mentioned.*®*®

Very interesting data are contained in an inscription from Tomi (Vl.c.) • on the gravestone of AroXa, the son of Tfetowc. It is assumed that it

ertains to Bulgars and in this case it is the earliest epigraphic monument of Bulgar settlers (Kutriguri) in the towns of Thrace and Dacia.*®** We have

already given some short accounts of Gothic settlers who came here in different ways as slaves, hostages and so on, and spoken of the products of their craftmanship. 1056. Cod. Thcod. 3, 14, 1: NuUi provincialium, cuiuscumque otdinis aut loci fuerit, cum barbara sit uxore coniugium, nec uMj gentilium provincialis femina copuletur. Quod si quae inter provinciates atque gentilis afOnitates ex huiusmodi nubtiis exstiterint, quod in his suspoctum vel noxium detegitur, capitaliter exptetur (a. 370? , a. 373? ); Seeck, Regesten, ad 1. - a. 368; PiganuA, L'Empirc duetien,173: Maziarino, Aspetti sociali, 338. 1057. Brutus " nurus. See Thesaurus Linguae Latinae, II, col. 2212, s.v. bruta; Keffers, 5, Anm. 18, 1058. at 3, 12377= ILS 8558-Ketfnih), p. 312,n. 398. 1059. Kalinkn. p. 323, n. 412. 1060. SCU n. 246. 1061. K. SeievZiev. GNM 7.1942. 231

278

1

The gravestones found in the village of Makret near Vidin provide evidence of the most typical examples of mixed marriages between mem­ bers of the Romanized population of the Balkan lands and people of

non-Romanic origin. Thus in one of the inscriptions there is mention of Aur. Mundo [dat], Aur. Augusta, Aur. Myrcianus. but also Aurfelia] Sura;

in another ■ Aur. Titicus, Aur. Severa, Aur. Apronianus, but also Aur(eliusJ Bill, Ronele; in a third • Aur. Faustinus. lusta. Aur. Romula, Aurelia Pa[u]Iina, but also Aur[elio) Faori eg[uiti] n[umeri] Dfalmatarum]; and finally - Atadis Doriani (7) filius qui militait n|umero] Dialmaurum]

Dfivitensium], Romus, qui militait in numerum Dalmat(a]rum Divit[ensium]."*^lt is evident that, as set forth in the inscriptions.these are

cases of soldiers and veterans of the cunei equitum Dalmatarum Diviten-

sium (Bononia,

Dorticum. Drobeta. Augusta, Valeriana), who were

stationed in this region and who remained here on the conclusion of their military service and entered kinship with the local people.*^

Let us mention another important source of information on the ethnic changes in Thrace and lUyricum in the fourth century • "The List of

Officials' Ranks"(NotitiaDignitatum).

Throu^ the reorganisation of the

military set-up in the Balkan lands in the time of Diocletian and Con­

stantine there came new military contingents which in some cases bore the name of the provinces, regions or nationalities from which the soldiers had been recruited. We mentioned the fact that among the soldiers of Dalmatae Divitenses there were some with typical non-Romanic names, men

who quite obviously did not belong to the local population. It cannot be said with certainty whether the military contingents which we are

enumerating below were filled up. after their arrival in Thrace with

additional men from the local population, or were recruited entirely from the regions of their origin. It seems that the former practice predominated. According to Notitia Dignitatum the following contingents Mre under

the supreme military commander of Thrace: Equites catafractarii albigen-

ses (from Gaul), Solenses seniores, Solenses Gallicani (also from Gaul), Divitenses Gallicani (also from Gaul). Lanciarii Stobenses (from Stobi, Macedonia), Pannonkiani juniores (from Pannonia). Taanni Tzannio (from a Caucasian tribe), and the Menapii (from a tribe living in the nurth-

1063. Dimilrov, Ploiite. n.iL 40. 4t. 43. 1063. Not. Dign. Ur. 42. 13-18. 279

western parts of Gaul). "** All these contingents were part of the so-called "Internal” troops (comitatenses). The towns in which these contingents were stationed are not given in Notitia D^itatum.

And so the existing data although sparse, do give us a certain idea about the ethnic composition of the population and the changes taking place in late ancient Dacia and Thrace. The old Romanic population of the provinces can be traced until the end of the fourth century almost everywhere. In some large marine centres such as Odessos and Tomi and in some large inland towns such as Serdica, Philippopolis. Adrianople and Augusta Trajana they can be traced until the fifth and sixth centuries. In the Danubian towns the traces of them disappear almost completely or at least no evidence of them has come to light so far. In North Bulgaria there are still some inconsiderable traces of them in the fifth century. Grave­ stone inscriptions of this period become sparser or disappear completely and from the Danubian towns, for instance, we have almost none of the fifth and sixth centuries. Traces of barbarian elements in Late Antiquity have been found in almost all the provinces, but they are distributed unevenly. There are fewer traces of barbarians south of the Balkan Range than in the regions between the Danube, the Balkan Range and the Black Sea. The literary sources and the epigraphic data provide evidence of this. The barbarians have left most evidence of themselves in North Bulgaria and in the delta of the Danube. From the above, it can be seen that in these lands in this period it was a matter of many and various ethnic elements. The old Thracian population was preserved longer (until the end of the fourth century) in the regions south of the Balkan Range and the sources (chiefly Procopius) show that in the fifth and sixth centuries the Thracian were mostly peasants. There is evidence, however, that in the fourth century some parts of the urban population in North and South Bulgaria were also of Thracian origin. We have already pointed out facts proving this to have been the case in Durostorum, Philippopolis, Adrianople, and Heraclea. 1064. Not Dign. Or. 8, 29; 34; 35; 43; 44; 48; 79; 50.

280

While in the first three centuries A.D., traces of settlers from Asia Minor can be found in almost all the towns, in the period from the fourth through the sixth century changes were taking place in them. The influx of such settlers was limited to some of the larger cities inland and to the trading ports such as Odessos, Tomi, Hcradea, and Panion. In the towns of Thrace and Dacia (for instance Serdica, Oescus and Tomi) there were Jewish people living in many towns. They can be traced until the end of the fourth century. It is uncertain to what degree there were settiers here from the western part of the Empire. The data are sparse and unreliable and those that are available pertain only to Serdica and Durostorumfthe well-known Aetius). Ethnical changes cannot always be located with precision and we have more reliable data only about the ethnic composition of the population of Serdica, Odessos, Heraclea, Panion, Tomi, Adrianople andRiilippopolis. For every place the picture is the same - themixingof ethnic groups, but to different degrees in the coastal towns the mixing was chiefly between the local population and immigrants from Asia Minor, in North Bulgaria between the local population and the barbarians, but in Thrace, the old Thracian element prevailed. The varied ethnic character of the people of Serdica has also been established through anthropological research. A study of the skulls found in well-attested Early Christian burials points to non-homogeneous elements showing the varied ethnic composition of the population of this large town.*'’“ This, along general lines, was the ethnic picture at the end of the sixth century when, through the large scale migration of the Slavs from their homes into these lands began a new stage in the development of the eastern Balkan lands: one part of the old population perished in the incursions, another part fled to the south and a third part fused with the new settlers. Future study will undoubtedly reveal the basic lines of this process.

1065. Kr. Droncilov. IBAD 7. 1919/(920, 58 sq.

281

CONCLUSION

In the present monograph we have presented data which reveal various sides of the socio-economic development of the bte ancient cities in Thrace and Dacia and at the end of every chapter we have summarized the conclusions that can be drawn from the given facts. Here we will confine ourselves to giving the most general inferences that can be drawn from a study of the whole field. A number of authors describe Thrace as a ravaged land in the period from the fourth to the sixth century, a land wdiere there was no regular city life, where the towns lay in ruins and where the population had perished, but the literary and archaeological daU set forth by us carry no confirmation of this. As a matter of fact some towns were sacked in the fourth, fifth and sixth centuries but the destruction was not on such a large scale as to bring their life to an end. Our survey of the political events has shown that in the fourth century not a single large town was captured and destroyed by the Gothic invaders. In the fifth century, the small places and the stationes, the posts along the roads, were badly damaged by the Huns and the Ostrogoths, but the large towns continued to develop although with less vigour in their trade and with some changes in their way of life. Even places, such as Naissos, which we know for certain was sacked and badly damaged, appear again in the literary sources after some time. There are, however, rather many places which are mentioned for the last time by Theophylactus Simocatta in connection with their destruction by Avars and Slavs. City life in the Roman epoch had more external splendour than in Late Antiquity but this should not lead to the conclusion that there was nothing valuable and interesting in the late ancient towns. Indeed in the fifth and sixth centuries the towns were not what they had been before and declined in some respects, but nevertheless they continued to develop, although under changed circumstances. In this period new elements appeared in the organization of the crafts, mining, administration and land relations and they probably excercised an influence uptm the socio­ economic development of the Bulgarian Sute. Future study of the early Bulgarian town of the eight and ninth century will throw li^t on this

283

point. It is known that the big cities of Antiquity continued to exist in the Middle Ages.'®** In the late ancient epoch, the economic development of the towns did not proceed in a uniform way. We can say that the towns were in a flourishing state only in the first half of the fourth century, especially in the reign of Constantine. This is attested by the finds of coin hoards, inscriptions, the remains of material culture and numerous literary sources. At that time there was a great upsurge in industry and the crafts. All literary sources describe Serdica, Ratiaria, Durostonim, Noviodunum, Philippopolis, Tomi, Marcianopolis, Oescus, Beroe, Heraclea and Adrianople as rich towns with a high level of mattrial culture and good fortifications. The barbarian incursions which started at the end of the fourth century placed the towns north of the Balkan Range in an unfavourable position. Now some towns in Thrace, south of the Balkan Range, and several towns on the seacoast became the most important economic centres. The towns on the Danube were not impoverished all at once. Ratiaria is mentioned as a rich and well-populated town as late as the Hunnish incursions. But after the hinterland of the Danubian towns was devastated, trade took different commercial roads and as the barbarian incursions grew more numerous local production was reduced to bare necessities. Unlike the Danubian towns, trading centres, such as Odessos, Tomi and the towns on the Sea of Marmara, continued their economic development also in the sixth century. In this century there was still an influx of immigrants from Asia Minor and this is a proof that there were good conditions for the practice of their occupations. In the sixth century 1066. V. t'elkov. Das Schicksal der antifccn Sudte in den Ostbalkanliindcm, Wiss. Zft. der Humboldt-Universitai zu Berlin, GeseDschatts- undsprachliehe Reihe, Jahrg. XII, 1963, 7/8, 839-843; A. Petre. Quelques donnees archcologiques coneernant la eonlinuite de la population el de la culture Romano-Byzantine dans la Scythie Mineure aux Vie el Vile siiscles de n.c., Dacia, n.s., 7,1963, 317; D. Mano-/.isi. in: VI Kongres arheologa Jugoslavije, I, (Ljubljana 1963), Beograd 1964, 95-100; K B^evUev. Zur Kontinuilal der antiken Stadie in Bulgarien, Ncuc Beitriige zur Gcschichte der Allen Welt, 11, Berlin, 1965, 21 1-222; K BeievUev. Les cites antiques en Mesie et en Thrace el leur son a I'epoque du Haul Moyen Age, El.bale. 5, 1966, 207-220; V. Velkov. Die aniikc und die miiielalierlichc Stadi im Osibalkan. Siidosieuropa Jahrbuch, 8 1° Die Siadl in Sudostcuropa), Miiitchen 1968. 23-34; A •4nge/o»', V. i'elkov, Chr. Danoff. Ober einige Probleme der soeial-dkonomischen und cthnkdien Entwicklung im IhV. Jh. und der Obergang von der Anlike zum Mitlelaller in VI.-X. Jh., 11.hist. 5, 1970, 13-55.

284

Odessos became a town of international significance. This survey of the social relations shows no essential differences in the situation here from that in the other provinces. One finds the same classes and social strata, the same processes bringing ruin to the cunales and favouring the accumulation of b^ landed property. At the end of the fourth and the beginning of the fifth century, slave-holding lost its significance and a highly developed colonate and patronate system con­ nected with big landed property came to the fore. In the middle of the fifth century Thrace occupied one of the first places in the Eastern Roman Empire in the degree to which its patronate relations were developed. In the fifth century important changes took place in the internal distribution of the land belonging to the territories of the cities - the town councils and the curiales gradually lost their economic basis: the land. The Church and the big landowners acquired the land that lay within the boundaries of the cities’ territories. The literary sources reveal quite clearly that from the fourth to the sixth century one of the most important people in the top crust of city society was the bishop. Apart from ecclesiastical matters, he intervened in questions of a purely civil nature. The material culture of the late ancient city is still not well known because not a single late ancient town has been systematically excavated. Preliminary excavations have shown that it was the topography of the towns that changed the most: the layout of the streets was different and the general appearance of the towns and the building technique had changed. The towns had been turned into strong fortresses and the efforts of their citizens were directed to ensuring their everyday necessities and the defence of the fortress. The survey of the ethnical changes in the eastern Balkan lands revealed a varied and mixed population (romanized people, Thracians, emigrants from Asia Minor, barbarians etc.) with the predominance of different elements in different regions. The ind^eneous population changed and gradually lost its significance. The most important of the new ethnic groups were those that penetrated into the Lower Danubian lands. After being brought and settled here at the beginning as part of the rural population, in the course of time they became inhabitants of these regions, entered into different connections and kinship with what had remained of the ind^eneous population and minted with these people underwent political and economic changes in the next few centuries. At the same time the

285

more frequent barbarian raids and incursions were bound up with the destruction of the rural population, stationes, smalltownsand villages. The people in the interior were impoverished and sought shelter in the big towns, which were the only places that withstood the pressure of the invasions in the late ancient period and continued their normal life. Here attention must be drawn to an important point • the change in the material and spiritual culture of the cities in Thrace and Dacia proceeded in a quite different way in the regions north and south of the Balkan Range. The cities in North Bulgaria were surrounded by barbarian settlers who because of their lower cultural level contributed to the more rapid ’barbariza­ tion’ of the material culture in the respective towns and to the rapid disappearance of the ancient elements in the culture they found in these lands. Regardless of the fact that there was continuity in the life of the towns • Bononia, Durostorura, and other cities - the population and the aspect of the material culture was radically changed. The situation was different in the regions south of the Balkan Range. Here certain strata of the Thracian people survived, although reduced in number, and they undoubtedly contributed to the maintenance of the old cultural traditions. Here barbanan ravaging and plundering was neither so wide-spread nor so frequent and fewer barbarians settled here. The number of big and small towns which survived in this region till the end of the sixth century was considerable • Serdica, PhSippopolis, Pautalia, Beroe, Adrianople, the towns along the coast of the Sea of Marmara, Mesembria, Dcultum and Sozopolis. Under these conditions the continuity of the Ufe in the towns was better guarded. Some of the questions we have touched upon in the present mono­ graph cannot be considered to have been finally dealt with because of the difikulties encountered through the present sute of the factual material. However, future archaeological excavations of late ancient settlements will enrich and complete our idea of their economy and culture. Only after more exhaustive study shall we have a more complete picture of the Bulgarian lands at the close of Antiquity. This work is only the beginning of this study.

286

INDEX

Only Names of all inhabited localities, ethnic groops and Emperors arc included Abdera; 126. Abrittus: 7, 59, 99, 102, 163, 169, 176, 195, 199, 201. 216, 221, 225, 230, 246. Abydos: 123. Acrac: 14, 111. Adina: 105, 266. Adrianople (Hadrianopolis, Adrianopolis » Dscudama); 1, 11. 14, 23, 24, 26, 28, 30, 32, 34, 35, 36, 41, 44, 49, 50, 54, 55, 59, 61, 73, 82, 114, 115-118, 136-139, 172, 196, 198, 214, 228, 245, 247, 253, 254, 255, 274, 280, 281, 284, 286, 234, 237, 244. Aedava (AioSoPa): 92, 97 Aegeta: 67, 90, 144. Aegyssus: 107, 111, Aenos: 51,61, 124, 125, 145, 196, 214. Akis: 56. Alans: 22, 38, 58, 264, 265. Alaron ( "AXopop): 97. Aldanes ( 'AXSopee): 95. Almus: 13,67,91,264. Altinum (‘AXr'ii’u. 'AXTpPwf): 67, 105, 114, 162, Aluzore: 132. Amulo ('A^iouXo): 87. Anagonkli (’Ai^'YOT'KXt): 118. Anaplus: 45. Anastasius: 46. 47, 64. 74, 79, 108, 117, 161, 164, 177, 185-189, 213, 226, 265, 266, 258. Anastasiopolis: 126, 127, 225. Anchialus: II, 13, 14, 24. 44, 54, 55, 68, 105, 114, 115, 129, 145, 196, 215, 226, 247,

287

Ankynana CA.fKVpiat'a): 114. Ansinon ( 'Apouw): 118. Anti: 47. 48, 49.51; Antoinon CAt'rojowi'): 118. Aphrodisia: 119, 121, 122. Apollonia: 1. 117. s. Sozopulis Appiaria: 14, 24, 55, 67, 99, 102, 235, 246, 273. Apri: 115, 116, 1 19, 122, 125, 136, 196, 266. Aquae: 54, 74, 75, 246. Aquae Calidae: 115, 227, 247. Arbatias CAplSariae); 98. Arcadiiis: 38, 39, 40, 120, 139. Arcadiopolis (= Bergule): 44, 51, 119, 120, 264. Ardeia (’ApSetd): 97. Ardiensis, campus: 26. Argamo ('Apyopw); 114. ArganokJi ('Apycu-oxtXi): 87. Argentares ( ApreiTaptc): H. Arina CAptwi): 113. Arkuncs { ApKoCwe): 98. Arrubium: bl. Arsena ( 'Apaepu); 95. Arsaza ( ^'^poa^d): 95. Artacia, regio: 74. Arzos: 131, 132. Asamus: 12, 41, 56, 59, 67, 69, 102. 103, 237. Asdings: 261. Asgarzos ( 'Aoyap^ot;): 118. Asgizus ( Acryi'fwe); 118. Asilba ('AafAjJa): 114. Asti: 120. Athyras: 123, 124, 226. Augusta (Aii7ouc>Tae; = Sebastopolis?): 54, 67, 90, 91, 132, 214 279 Augusta Trajana (• Bcroe): 1, 8, 115, 127-129. 132, * 136,’ 146,’ 152' 153, 156, 166, 195, 196, 201, 216, 217, 246, 249 '•80 Aurelian: 21, 93, 207, 250, 261, 262. Auriliana (AuptXrdwi): 87. .Autliiparu (Ain^endpou); 118,

288

Avars; 6, 13, 51, 52, 53-59, 86. 88, 91, 94, 99, 100, 102, 103, 107, 109, 112, 116, 117, 124, 128, 129, 183, 194, 195, 196, 227,266,231,275,276,283. Axiopolis (’AltoTra): 70, 67, 107, 109, 271. Badziania (Baiftam); 98. Baika (Baixa): 118. Balanstra: 98. Balauson (BaXauaw); 97. Balbai (BoXM: 97. Banes (Bdvec): 98, Barachtestes (BopaxTearee); 95. Barbarics (Bap^aptee)- 98, 275. Bargala: 93, 98, 211. Basibunon (BaoQJowor'): 118. Basilisk; 42, 43, 44, 128, 152, 153, 189, 232. Baskon (Bdoxw); 132. Bassidina(Baa0(£u'a); 114. Bastarnae: 22, 261, 262. Bastemas (Boorepwic): 113, 275. Bcdizum (= Bithenas): 124. Bckis (Bckic): 114. Bekuli (BeKovXi); 118. Beiaidipara (Bi^XoiSirrapa): 131. Belasiyras (BrjXaarppa?): 118. Belcdina (BeXeSira): 114. Belisarius: 51, 97. Belluros (BeXXoupoe): 127. Bcmasics (Bepdaree): 98. Beodizum: 124. Bepara (Benopa); 131. Bergison (Bep7(O(»'); 131. Bcrgule, s. Arcadiopolis. Bcriaros (Bnpuipoe); 131. Bcripara (Bnprrropu): 113. (Scythia) Bcripara (Brtpiffopa); 131. (Thrace) Berkadion (BepKoSuw): 95. Beroe, s. Augusta Trajana: 12, 14, 24, 27, 55, 59, 69, 78, 214, 246, 269, 284, 286.

289

Bcroe (in Scythia): 67, 111. Bcros (Bijpoc): 118. Bessapara (Beooimafiov): 131,132. Bcssi; 96. Betzas (BeTf«); 98. Bia (Bm); 118. Bidigiz (BtSQif): 113. Bidzo (Bi6fw); 91. Bigrane: 92. Bikulea (BixouXea); 95. Bimeros (BiA«j?pd; 97. Prista. s. Sexaginta Prisla. Probinu (1). (2), 118. 301

Probus: 21, 22 62, 207, 262. Procopius: 32, 33, 128, 234, 250, 251, 252, 264. Protiana (Upomava): 94. Pulcheria: 257. Pulchra Theodora (IlooXxPa ©eo6wpa); 114. Pusinon (nououw): 131. Putedin (« Pomodiana?): 92. Radices: 98. Racdestus(= Byzanlhe); 123. 145, 183, 204, 215. Rampiana: 98. Rakuli CPoxoOXjj): 118. Ranilum: 132, 196. Ratiaria: 8, 12, 24, 41, 54, 59, 63, 67, 73, 86, 88, 89, 95, 137, 138, 144, 146, 150, 151, 171, 172, 180, 195, 214, 222, 224, 229, 243, 245, 269, 284. Region: 46. Rcmeslana: 74, 93, 96, 214, 245. Remetodia: 91. Repordcncs ('PeirdpSepec): 97. Rcsidina ( Peoifiipa): 114. Rcsistus: 196. Rhamac: 132. Rjgianon ( Piyuu'dr = BrypoM)?): 92. Riginokastellon CPQO^tcdoreXXw): 97. Roll^eras ('PoXXiyepdc): 97. Romaniana ('PwMJdXwi/): 131. Taurokoinon (TaupoKwpot'): 118. Tcgelitiuin: (>1, 105. Tcmpyra: 127. Tera: 118. Tcrvingi: 261. Tharsandala (dopocu^aXa): 127. Thcodorias (deoSuptdc): 215. Thcodoropolis (©eofiwpoffoXic) in Dacia Ripensis: 90. Thcodorupolis. in Mocsia: 56, 102, 103, 215. Thcodoru, tu agiu (Too aiux deoSupou) (1): 118. Thcodoru, tu agiu (Too a7(ou OcoSupov) (2): 118. Thcodorupolis (SeoScupouirdXic) in Hcmimont: 118, 215. Theodorupolis (©eoSupowroXic) in Rhodopa: 127, Theodosiopolis (= Apri): 122. Thcodosiopolis (= Panion): 121.

305

Theodosius I: 10, 36, 37, 38, 40, 168, 185, 192, 242, 256. Theodosius 11: 17, 40, 41 42, 119, 120, 138, 144, 185-189. 226, 240 244. Therma (©eppd): 114. Thessalonica: 27, 37, 49, 53, 56, 63, 125, 137, 172, 192, 264. Thokyudis (GukuuSk): 118. Thrasarichu (Qpaaofiixov): 118. Tlirasu, To tu (To roO Qpdoov): 127. Tiberius 11 Constantine: 52. 53, 54,94,116,154,185,188, 222,227. Tiesimonti (Tijeo^ioi'rT?): 118. Tigra, Tegra (T^pa, Tnoe): 67, 105, 114. Tilikion, to (Td TtJuxtwr): 105. Tilito (TiXXtrw): 114. Timacum Maius (TtyaiJoxiwM): 87, 92. Timacum Minus fTtpoxtoXw): 87, 92. Timena (Tifieva): 90. Tiniiana (Ttjuiax’a): 95. Timogitla. Timum: 113. Tipsum: 124. Tirissa, Trissa (= Acrae? ): 113. Tiunkoiia (TtcxzyKwt'a): 95. Tomes (Tijpee): 97. Tomi: 3. 10, 14, 30. 33. 47, 55, 57, 61, 68. 73, 107, 108, 145. 149. 150. 156, 161, 164, 170, 171, 175, 182, 183, 188, 237, 246, 253, 273. 278, 280, 281, 284. Tonzos: 131. Topiros (Toirepa); 13, 49, 59, 97, 125. 127, 136. Trajan: 99, 116, 136. Trajanopolis: 125. 127. 196,214. Trajanu, Tu agiu (Too ayiov Tpaiavov): 132. Transalba: 67, 92. Transdierna: 67, 89, 180. Transdrobeia: 90. Translite: 98. Translucus: 67, 92. Transmarisca; 24. 25. 29, 67. 102. 104. 141. 144. 157, 180, 209, 21d Trasiana (Tpooidra): 87. Trebonian Gal: 21.

306

Tredetetilius (TpeSereriXtow): 87. Trikesa: 92. Triskiana (TpiOKioro): 97. Triinammium: 67, 102, 104. Trimontium; 25. Troesmis: 67, 107, 110, 229. Tropaeum Trajani: 3, 25, 27, 54, 102, 107, 109, 113, 114, 195, 209. Tugugerum: 132. Tugurias (Tovyoupiat;): 98. Tuleus (TooXeoik); 131. Tulkoburgo (TovTjioPovpyo}: 97. Turikla (ToupucXa): 91. Turules (ToupouAjj?): 113. Tunis (Toupoik): 98. Turrcs: 98. Tuuribas (Toupp®a?): SI. Tusudeaas (TouoouSeda?): 98. Tzasklis (TfdoKAw:): 114. Tzurt/.enuUas (TfepTfewurfac): Tzimes (Tfuiec): 91. Tzitaetus {TftTa€T«k); 118. Tzoidcs, Tzueidon (TfotSp?, TfueiSwi'): 114, 116, 118. Tzonpolegoni (TfopffoXeywi’); 118. Tzurulon, Tziralum (TfoupouXXo?): 24, 26, 49, 51, 55, 123, 124. Tzutrato (TfotkpaTo): 87. Uku, To (To Oikw): 118. Ulasianai ('TXaouiiw); 118. Ulmelum: 3,1,66, 112, 113, 187, 199,201,214,215.216,218,268. Ulmus: 98. Ulpiana: 86, 93. Ulucitra: 67, 126, 127. Una, Luna: 90. Umauparubri ('TpoujrdpooPpt): 131. Unnon (©wi’ux'): 275. Urbriana (Oup^ptdra): 95. Urdaus (OupSooik): 132. Urizium: 124. Uscudama. s. Adrianople.

; ■ : !

307

s

Utus, Utum; 13, 67, 92, 142, 264, Vale Domltiana: 112. Valens: 15,32,33,34,74,99, 104, 110, 115, 120, 138, 141, 142, 178, 180, 186, 188, 192, 194, 195, 205, 210, 211, 214, 215* 225, 234, 238, 250, 253, 255. Valcntia = Valentiniana; 37. Valentinian I.: 32, 33, 35, 81, 95, 179, 186, 188, 210, 211, 236, 244, Valentiniana (BaXeifrwtdva}: 114,211. Valeriana: 91, 279. Vandals: 41,261,262. Variana: 24,67,91, 154, 186,214, Variniana: 67. Vespasian: 116. Vetranion: 31, Vikanovo {Botopoflo): 87.

Viminatium: 24, 54, 57, 63, 144, 173. Vindobona: 192. Visigoths: 31, 32, 34, 59, 100, 142, 235, 248, 252. 254, 263. Italian: 47, 100, 109, 111, 117, 178, 257, 258, 263. Zaldapa, Zaldava: 47, 54, 55, 56, 59, 107, 109. 113, 195, 257. Zanes (Zdwe); 87. Zdebren (ZSe/Jpiji'): 118. Zcapuries (Zearrouptec): 96. Zcmarku (ZnpdpKOu): 118. Zeno: 12, 43, 44, 45, 46, 96, 177, 265. Zetnukortu (Zr^rwiiKOprou): 89. Zczutera: 124. Zikideva (Z«e5£/3a = Sacidava?): 113. 114. Zinkyro (Ziynvpo): 132. Zisnudeva (Ziava^efia): 113. Zorani: 261. Zositerson (Zuoirepoov): 131. Zyrniis: 132.

308

CITIES AND MAIN ROADS IN THE CENTRAL AND eSPeRN BALKAN PROVINCES IN LATE ANTIQUITY (FOURTH - SIXTH CENTURIES A. D.)

PANNONIA INFERIOR

MOV too rruBIUftl

THOIAUII

birmium

UimM

SH^eiDUNUM

vakum

lATROfl

OeMM

oaokoava

AOrl PANION—

M*rer

PKOPONT!a TRAIANOP THKaBALONICJI

EPIRUS NOVA OALU

MAKE THKaClUM

THESSALIA UTHROTUM

EPIRUS

vcTua

LARIMA

VZ1OO9