Greek and Latin Inscriptions from Halmyris: Inscriptions on stone, signa, and instrumenta found between 1981 and 2010 9781407308326, 9781407338187

Table of contents :
Cover Page
Title Page
Copyright
Acknowledgements
Foreword(PRAEFATIO)
I. INTRODUCTION
II. INSCRIPTIONS ON STONE
III. INSCRIPTIONS ON BUILDING MATERIAL AND POTTERY
IV. SIGNA ON STONES AND BUILDING MATERIAL
V. THE RESTORATION OF THE HALMYRIS FUNERARYMONUMENT
VI. CONSIDERATIONS ON THE LITHIC MATERIAL USED FOR STONE MONUMENTS FOUND IN HALMYRIS, WITH A SURVEY ON A SPECIFIC ROCK TYPE FROM NORTH DOBROGEA
Bibliography
INDICES*

Citation preview

BAR S2261 2011

HALMYRIS SERIES MONOGRAPHS II

ZAHARIADE & ALEXANDRESCU (Eds)

Greek and Latin Inscriptions from Halmyris Inscriptions on stone, signa, and instrumenta found between 1981 and 2010 Edited by

Mihail Zahariade Cristina-Georgeta Alexandrescu

GREEK AND LATIN INSCRIPTIONS FROM HALMYRIS

B A R

BAR International Series 2261 2011

HALMYRIS SERIES MONOGRAPHS II

Greek and Latin Inscriptions from Halmyris Inscriptions on stone, signa, and instrumenta found between 1981 and 2010 Edited by

Mihail Zahariade Cristina-Georgeta Alexandrescu

BAR International Series 2261 2011

Published in 2016 by BAR Publishing, Oxford BAR International Series 2261 Halmyris Series Monographs II General Editor: Mihail Zahariade Greek and Latin Inscriptions from Halmyris © The editors and contributors severally and the Publisher 2011 The authors' moral rights under the 1988 UK Copyright, Designs and Patents Act are hereby expressly asserted. All rights reserved. No part of this work may be copied, reproduced, stored, sold, distributed, scanned, saved in any form of digital format or transmitted in any form digitally, without the written permission of the Publisher.

ISBN 9781407308326 paperback ISBN 9781407338187 e-format DOI https://doi.org/10.30861/9781407308326 A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library

BAR Publishing is the trading name of British Archaeological Reports (Oxford) Ltd. British Archaeological Reports was first incorporated in 1974 to publish the BAR Series, International and British. In 1992 Hadrian Books Ltd became part of the BAR group. This volume was originally published by Archaeopress in conjunction with British Archaeological Reports (Oxford) Ltd / Hadrian Books Ltd, the Series principal publisher, in 2011. This present volume is published by BAR Publishing, 2016.

BAR PUBLISHING BAR titles are available from:

E MAIL P HONE F AX

BAR Publishing 122 Banbury Rd, Oxford, OX2 7BP, UK [email protected] +44 (0)1865 310431 +44 (0)1865 316916 www.barpublishing.com

CONTENTS

Acknowledgments ................................................................................................ I Foreword (PRAEFATIO) .................................................................................... III I. Introduction ...................................................................................................... A. The ancient and medieval sources on the site .............................................. B. The ancient place name ................................................................................ C. The modern historiography on the identification of the ancient site ............ D. The circumstances of the discovery of the inscriptions and the present state of epigraphic research ..........................................................................

1 1 13 15

II. Inscriptions on stone ....................................................................................... 1. Public and honorary inscriptions (TITVLI OPERVM PVBLICORVM ET HONORARII) .............................................................................................. 2.Votive altars (TITVLI SACRI) ...................................................................... 3.Tombstones (TITULI SEPVLCRALES) .......................................................

21

17

21 28 39

III. Inscriptions on building material and pottery ............................................ 57 1. Bricks and tiles (TEGULAE ET IMBRICES) .............................................. 57 2. Pottery (VASA ET LUCERNAE) ................................................................. 64 IV. Signa on stones and building material ......................................................... 89 V. The restoration of the Halmyris funerary monument cat. no. 151 (Ileana-Ildiko Zahariade) ............................................................................. 103 VI. Considerations on the lithic material used for stone monuments found in Halmyris, with a survey on a specific rock type from North Dobrogea (Albert Baltres). ........................................................................ 107 Bibliography...................................................................................................... Abbreviations ................................................................................................... Indices ............................................................................................................... Sources of illustrations .................................................................................... Plates ................................................................................................................

I

114 122 124 133 134

Acknowledgements We are indebted to a number of institutions and persons whose help and contribution were particularly important for the issue of this volume. We owe special gratefulness to the Institute for Military History and Theory, today The Institute for the Studies in the Defense Policy and Military History, a notable scientific structure of the Ministry of the National Defense of Romania, which had the initiative of opening large scale excavations at Halmyris in 1981, assigning a great deal of material and human resources and expertise. In the years of tight collaboration most of the epigraphic monuments were found, processed, and published. The Institute of Archaeology ‘Vasile Pârvan’ in Bucharest holds a distinctive role. The proficiency and expertise of the experienced researchers who were part of the teams of investigations and the publication of the results in different fields (Gh. Poenaru Bordea, Monica Mărgineanu Cârstoiu) had a marked place in the all out research enterprise. Prof. dr. Alexandru Suceveanu, the ‘brain’ of the team in the first decade of excavations (1981-1992), published, in collaboration, the lot of votive altars, as well as a littera commendaticia (cat. no. 36) found at the western gate. The Museum of the Danube Delta in Tulcea, later turned into the Institute for Ecological-and Museographical Studies in Tulcea, a modern and renewed cultural institution due mainly to its first director and mentor, dr. Gavrilă Simion (1954-2002), accommodates in a spacious lapidarium the collection of inscriptions, while pottery with graffiti and dipinti, presented in this volume, are part of a large permanent exhibition in the Museum of Archaeology of the same institute. We owe particular appreciation for the solicitude, help, and understanding to the nowadays leadership of the institute, Cristina Dinu (manager), Cristian Micu (scientific director), as well as to some of its researchers and personnel: Dorel Paraschiv, Mihaela Iacob, George NuĠu, Adina Ailincăi. Of considerable help in tracking down, reading, and interpreting some hidden details of the inscriptions was the friendly assistance of the well-known epigraphists Constantin C. Petolescu (The University of Bucharest), Maria Bărbulescu (The Museum of History and Archaeology in ConstanĠa), Alexandru Avram (University of Le Mans), as well as the steady support and expertise of Alexandru Suceveanu. The endeavour and dedication of other colleagues which put high expertise in this collective work deserve special gratitude: George Chelmec (photography) and Iuliana Barnea (drawings). The sizable present collection contains the complete number of the epigraphs found before and during the excavations at the site of Murighiol (ancient Halmyris) in the span of time before ca. 1896 and 2010. The epigraphic material presented in this volume intends to be a contribution to the knowledge of the social, economic and military history of the local society in the remotest part of the province of Moesia inferior, the extrema Minoris Scythiae (Iord. Get. 266; Beshevliev 1973, 139-141), and to provide additional documents to the already impressive collection of Greek and Latin inscriptions related to the territories between the Danube and the Black Sea. The ongoing project ARHEOMEDIA1 made possible the geological study on the lithic material due to A. Baltres (National Geological Institute, Bucharest) and the physico-chemical analyses of cat. no. 21 ( by O.-H. Barbu, National Museum of History of Romania). The Authors Bucharest, May 2011 1

ARHEOMEDIA: Formation, transmission and transformation of images and texts in Greco-Roman era with special regard to the use of polychromy in the Carpathian-Danubian-Pontic area (NCSRHE Project TE 113 (2010-2013) in the frame of PN II (2007-2013) Human Resources) – www.arheomedia.ro with database (director C.-G. Alexandrescu).

II

Foreword (PRAEFATIO) In 1981, systematic archaeological excavations have been inaugurated at the impressive fortress situated 2.5 km eastward from the centre of the modern village of Murighiol (Turk. Mor=purple; ghiol=lake), the administrative hub of the present day commune with the same name. The event produced much hope among archaeologists, epigraphists, historians, and specialists in the related fields. The late 19th and early 20th century Romanian and German scholars who visited and described the place focused their attention on topographic details and attempts to identify the ruins with one of the ancient place names recorded in the written sources (see below). The present volume is the second in the series of the monographs on the present day site of Murighiol. The first volume was published in 2003 by Al. Suceveanu, M. Zahariade, F. Topoleanu, Gh. Poenaru Bordea. It tackled the history, stratigraphy, as well as coinage and pottery, together with some general matters concerning the economy, religion and the garrison of the Roman fortress.2 Except the chapter dedicated to the basic stratigraphy, which established the benchmarks of the chronology of the site, other specific topics in the volume were all restricted to the available knowledge accumulated until ca. 1997. The 2003 monograph had been preceded by a dissertation exclusively dedicated to the early and late Roman pottery found in the fortress between 1981 and 1997.3 The initiative of elaborating a collection of this specific category of written sources, the inscriptions on solid materials: stone, bricks and tiles, as well as pottery was finally accomplished at the end of 30 years of ceaseless and painstaking work. The epigraphic documents, as a corollary of the literary evidence and different categories of archaeological finds (stratigraphy, coins, and pottery, animal and human bones) are of valuable significance, casting lights and opening a new chapter in better understanding the thus far gloomy historical evolution of life and occupancy in the lands towards the mouths of the Danube. The Imperial dedications stress on the importance given by the Roman central administration to the defence of this critical point at the then contact between the Danube and the Black Sea. The votive altars yielded evidence of a new rural settlement of military character (vicus militaris, or rather vicus stationis classis), recorded as vicus classicorum, ‘the village of the marines’, as a witness of the solid presence of the Roman veterans from Classis Flavia Moesica in the area alongside with the Roman citizens (cives Romani) who resided (consistentes) in this key position at the very mouths of the Danube. A significant number of gravestones display a vivid picture of the cosmopolite society in which the Getic-Thracian native population held an important position. Of particular importance for the interest for the mouth of the Danube of south Mediterranean centres in Classical, Hellenistic, and Roman times is the considerable number of stamped amphora handles, graffiti and dipinti found on a yearly basis during the excavations within the fortress or in the Getic necropolises.

2

Suceveanu, Zahariade, Topoleanu, Poenaru Bordea, 2003. Specific subjects and fields to be approached have been assigned to each member of the team as follows: Al. Suceveanu: The history of the research; elements of administrative organization; elements of economic and social organization; considerations on the spiritual life; M. Zahariade: The landscape; The north gate; elements of castrametatio and urbanism; The garrison; F. Topoleanu: The edifice no. 1; The pottery; Gh. Poenaru Bordea: The coinage. There have been also chapters written in collaboration: Al. Suceveanu, M. Zahariade, F. Topoleanu: The stratigraphy; Al. Suceveanu, M. Zahariade: The ancient name of the settlement; The inscriptions. 3 Fl. Topoleanu, Ceramica romană úi romano-bizantină de la Halmyris (sec. I-VII d. Chr.), Tulcea 2000.

III

Some of the inscriptions are at the same time monuments of art of authentic value, mirroring not only general influences and tendencies of the times when they have been produced, but also skills and trends of the local artists who treated themes and orders of private persons through their own eyes and handiness. The present day Museum of Archaeology in Tulcea and the National Museum of Military History in Bucharest lodge the greatest majority of the epigraphs presented in this volume. Some are exhibited on the Murighiol site, in a lapidarium especially configured for such type of monuments. The significant reorganizations the two museums went through lately left some of the pieces without inventory numbers. That includes also the extant inscriptions on the site. Until such inventory numbers will be assigned to each of the epigraph, the specialists will be recognizing them by their text and appearance which can be checked on the spot.

IV

I. INTRODUCTION A. Ancient and medieval sources on the site The site which yielded a sizable number of epigraphs and was the subject of a significant records in the ancient sources is situated at the eastern limits of the present day Murighiol village (MDGR 393-395; Tocilescu mss. 5132, 95; Netzhammer, 1907, 15-16; 1909, 206-207; Ionescu 1904, 401403; Moisil 1909, 89; 1910, 93-94; TIR L 35, 52; Zahariade, in: Suceveanu, Zahariade, Topoleanu, Poenaru-Bordea 2003, 9) (fig. 1). It is commonly associated in the recent archaeological and historical literature with the ancient Halmyris. The early traditional name given to the place by the Turkish speaking population was ‘Geneviz Kaleh’ (‘The Genovese stronghold’) (Ionescu 1904, 403), as an inherited tradition of the Genovese presence to the mouths of the Danube. The present day semi-official name of the place was for a long time known as ‘Cetatea’, ‘CetăĠuia’, or sometimes ‘the stronghold of Sîcă’ (Tocilescu mss.5132 no.5). The toponym ‘Dealul cu Cetate’ or ‘Dealul CetăĠii’ (‘The Stronghold Hill’)(+25m) (MDGR IV 1901, 394), to the south, comes from the place name ‘Cetatea’, although there is also an alternative term, ‘Bataraia’, given by the local inhabitants of Russian and Ukrainian origin to a position where an 18th or 19th century Russian artillery post must have been installed during the Russian-Ottoman wars. The ancient site bears a double name basically with the same meaning: Gr. ਞȜȝȣȡ઀Ȣ (Halmyris); Lat. Salmorus or Salmorude (Moisil 1909, 89; 1910, 93-94; Suceveanu, Zahariade 1987, 87-96; Suceveanu, Zahariade, in: Suceveanu, Zahariade, Topoleanu, Poenaru-Bordea 2003, 79-82). Both terms had a broad circulation. In the Greek speaking environment, the term ਞȜȝȣȡ઀Ȣ seems to have been commonly used as an old traditional designation of the local natural properties of the place (see below). The Latin term of the 2nd-4th century Roman administration, Salmorus/Salmorude, appears in the official documents although, remarkably, the use of the Greek term continued to circulate in the semi-official documents of the period. In the 5th and 6th century Greek speaking Imperial East Roman administration the place name ਞȜȝȣȡ઀Ȣ became official. There is a significant historical and geographical number of ancient and early medieval sources recording the double name of the ancient site in its geographical and historical context (fig. 2). I. Horothesia Laberii Maximi, ੘ȡȠșİıȓĮ ȁĮȕİȡȓȠȣ ȂĮȟȓȝȠȣ ਫ਼[ʌĮIJȚțȠ૨]. ISM I 67 l. 65-70; 68 l. 64-70; Pârvan 1916, 556-593 no. 15=AE 1919, 10=SEG I 329; Charlesworth 1939, 35 no. 9=Dobó 1940, 180 no. 84; Pippidi 1958, 227-247=1962, 133-153; 1964, 331-339=1988, 183-189; Smallwood 1967 no. 384; Oliver 1965, 146-149; Pippidi 1967, 349-386 =SEG XIX 1109. Descriptum / [et recognit]um factum est com[m(entariis) Mani Laberi] / [Maximi] leg(ati) Aug(usti) p(ro) pr(aetore) permi[ttente Fabio Pom]/[peiano quae iam scrip]ta sunt Charagon[io Philo]/[palaestro cond(uctori) pub]l(ici) portori ripae Thr[aciae postulanti]/[ut portor]ium sibi Halmyridi[s et Peuci daretur][...]. Translation: ‘[...] Text reproduced and verified according to the notices of Manius Laberius Maximus, Imperial legate with praetorian powers, with the approval of Fabius Pompeianus, written (and forwarded) to Charagonius Philopalaestrus, concessionaire of the incomes of the customs of

1

Halmyris II the Thracian border, who required payment for the customs of the Halmyris Lake and the Peuce mouth [...]’. [...] Fines Histrianorum hos esse con[stitui.................Pe]/ucem lacum do[minio..................] /Argamensium, inde iugo summo [..........................][...].

Halmyridem

a

Translation: ‘[...]I have established the borders of Histria as follows: [...] Peuce, the Halmyris Lake from the territory (?)[...], and from here [....]’. [...][Descriptum] / et recognitum factum est comm(entariis) M[ani Laberi] / Maximi leg(ati) Aug(usti) p(ro) pr(aetore), permitte[nte...]/Fabio Pompeiano. Quae iam era scri[pta]/Charagonio Phio

alaestro cond[uctori publici por]/tori ripae Thraciae, postulant ut [portorium sibi Hal]/myridis et Peuci daretur[...]. Translation: ‘[...] Text reproduced and verified according to the notices of Manius Laberius Maximus, Imperial legate with praetorian powers, with the approval of Fabius Pompeianus, written (and forwarded) to Charagonius Philopalaestrus, concessionnaire of the incomes of the customs of the Thracian border, who required payment for the customs of the Halmyris Lake and the Peuce mouth [...]’. From the juridical view point, the boundary regulation of 25 October 100 finally ascertains and reconfirms the Histria’s former traditional interests on its old territory of economic exploitation (Pippidi 1958, 227-247; 1962, 133-153; 1965, 153; 164-165; 1967, 349-385) on both land and water. They had been maintained and encouraged by the 1st century Roman administration of the province of Moesia (Pârvan 1916, 585-586; Condurachi 1954, 42-55; Pippidi 1965, 316-317; 19672, 361-369; 1975, 143-145; Suceveanu 1977, 38; ùtefan 1982, 199-208; Pippidi 1988, 183-189; ISM I l. 28-61). The mouth of the Peuce branch (ȆİȪțȘ ıIJȩȝĮ) as the north-easternmost area of Histria’s economic competence fell within its boundaries (intra finium Histrianorum) (Berciu 1965, 107-110; Pippidi 1965, 314-317; Pippidi 1967, 167-185; 1967, 363-371; 1988, 188; Suceveanu 1977, 79-87; 111-120). Whether or not the entire Peuce (Sf. Gheorghe) branch was assigned to Histria is difficult to establish, for the text is not very specific. Only the mouth (ȆİȪțȘȢ țĮ੿ IJ૵Ȟ ıIJȠȝȐIJȦȞ: ISM I 67 l. 60 and 68 l. 59; ıIJȩȝĮ ȆİȪțȘȢ, ISM I 67 l. 32) appears as a certainty. That implied the inclusion within this area of both the old Getae settlement, whose core seems to have lain underneath the very place of the future Roman fort, and its adjacent farming territory1. The pottery and coins of Greek Classical (Simion 1985, 272-279; Suceveanu, Angelescu 1988, 146 no. 1 fig. 1; Suceveanu, Zahariade, Topoleanu 2003 in: Suceveanu, Zahariade, Topoleanu, Poenaru Bordea 2003, 29) and Hellenistic periods (Bujor 1955, 577-578; 1958, 132-135; Preda 1980, 35-36 no. 1-8; Suceveanu, Angelescu 1988, 146-150 no. 2 fig. 2; Simion 1990 I, 33-39; II 21-34; OpaiĠ 1991, 133-136; Simion 1995, 265-302; Suceveanu, Zahariade, Topoleanu, Poenaru Bordea 2003, 28-29; 127, 170-171; cat. no. 107) found at Halmyris show a significant activity of the Greek traders in the area (Suceveanu, Zahariade, Topoleanu, Poenaru Bordea 2003, 28-29).2 1 If the mouth of the Peuce (Sf. Gheorghe) branch fell in the Histria’s competence, which is clearly stated in the Laberius’ boundary regulation, then the Murighiol Getic settlement, which lay very close, must be placed within its territory. In an unpublished article, Nicorescu (apud Pippidi ISM I 68) suggests even the restoration [... insulam Pe]ucem in the l. 1-2 which, if true, would have serious implications on the entire geographical scenery and the competences of Histria. Ptol. Geogr. III 10. 3 records a ‘Promontory of the birds’ (ȆIJİȡઁȞ ਙțȡȠȞ) south of the mouth of the Peuce branch. The promontory could be presumably identified with the ‘Dealul DunavăĠ’ (‘DunavăĠ Hill’) (+ 48m), situated ca. 1 km E from the present day archaeological site. The hill was the last firm land towards E in front of the then Black Sea, which in the centuries BCE advanced towards the eastern shores of the DunavăĠ peninsula (Panin 1983, 175-184). In ੗ȡȠșİıȓĮ, the Histria’s economic control on the entire Peuce branch (from Aegyssus to the mouth) remains rather foggy as long as the text is fragmentary. ȆİȪțȘ branch (ISM I 67 l. 6 and 68 l. 11) is very general and unclear as to on what length the Histria’s competence should have extended. 2 The discovery of some fragments of Greek type of roofing tiles (unpublished) in the composition of the mass of the imported soil used for the setting of the bed for later Roman buildings would imply larger structures in a habitable area of a possible and even probable Hellenic (Histrian?) emporium towards the mouth of the Peuce (Sf. Gheorghe) branch. The classical Greek pottery and glass finds, although not in great number is suggestive for the early interest of the Greek traders in this area. Worth noting is a 6th century BCE Greco-Oriental fragment of a Mid Style II bowl (Suceveanu, Angelescu 1988, 146), as well as a 5th- 4th century BCE blue glass Attic amphoriscos (Simion 1995, 265). The Hellenistic coinage found at the site

2

Introduction II. Plinius, Naturalis Historia. Edition used: C. Plini Secundi Naturalis Historiae, Vol. I. Libri I-VI Carol Mayhoff (ed.) Leipzig 1967. IV 12 (24) 79: primum ostium Peuces mox ipsa Peuce insula[…]; Ex eodem alveo et super Histropolim lacus gignitur LXIII passum ambitu, Halmyrin vocant. Translation: ‘[...] The first mouth of it is Peuce, soon after the island itself, Peuce; out of the same river bed and above Histropolis, a lake is bred of 63 miles in compass, which they call Halmyris [...]’. Pliny describes the circuit of lacus Halmyris considered also as a lake by the official Horothesia Laberii Maximi of 25 October 100. The present day lacustrine complex Razim/Razelm-Sinoe with a total surface of 731 km² is commonly regarded as the ancient Halmyris Lake born from a preexisting maritime gulf (Kiessling 1912, 2276-2278 s.v. Halmyris lacus; Pârvan 1916, 585-586; Pippidi 1967, 365-366; 369; 362 fig. 4; Gâútescu 1986, 21; Vulpe 1968, 50; 193; Breier 1976, 41; GR 2005, 581, 583). The geological processes that caused the transformation of a considerable Black Sea maritime gulf into a lacus in ancient times and later the lakes complex, Razim-Sinoe, have been lately intensely studied and largely debated (Brătescu 1922, 3-39; 1928, 40-41; CoteĠ 1962, 424-431; Breier 1976, 40-42; Panin 1983, 175-184; Gâútescu 1986, 21-26; GR 2005, 581-584). Polybius (Hist. IV 41. 1-7) had already noticed and explained the formation of some submerse bars as a phenomenon in progress in the 3rd century BCE. This observation, the Pliny’s statement, as well as the evidence of the official wording of the Horothesia about lacus Halmyris witnesses apparently a fait accompli probably before the 1st century CE. The thorny and much debated geological and historical issue of the formation of the lacustrine complex Razim-Sinoe consists not so much in explaining the process of siltation and isolation from the Black Sea, which geologically is easily explicable and identifiable, but in the assessment of a certain period when it happened (fig. 3). The comprehensive geological expertise and investigations (CoteĠ 1962, 430; Breier 1976, 37-39; 40-52; Panin 1983, 175-184; GR 2005, 583) showed that the fluctuation of the Black Sea level in combination with the advancement of the deltaic terrain played a critical role in this evolution. The submerse bars (ıIJȒșȘ, in Polybius’ description) could have been wiped out and recreated according to the fluctuations of the maritime level and the strength of the N-S maritime currents as long as the evolution of the small deltas of the Danube branches was still in slow progress. The isolation of the Halmyris gulf from the sea by the first littoral cordons from the north (Crasnicol, Dranov) and south (Chituc, Lupilor, and Saele) is considered by P. Gâútescu (1986, 21) to have commenced and progressed between ca. 7200 and 2000 BCE They could have appeared only when the advance of the deltaic terrain, due to large quantities of alluviums deposited at the mouths of the river, created a kind of firm soil, later fossilized, that triggered a general trend of the moving of the N-S maritime current off eastward (Brătescu 1967, 99-100; GR 2005). This long process took gradually the seashore of the old Halmyris gulf out of the direct action of the maritime currents and created consists of two Callatian (320-300 and 300-260 BCE) and eight Olbian pieces which would have been part of a coin hoard of ca. 23-24 coins (C. Preda 1980, 35-36 no. 1-8; Poenaru Bordea, Monedele, in: Suceveanu, Zahariade, Topoleanu, Poenaru Bordea 2003, 127-170). The pottery originates from Chios, Thassos, Rhodos, North Black Sea, Heraclea, and Attica. On the other hand, the discovery of a significant amount of Hellenistic pottery sherds in a Getic context (5th -1st century BCE) underneath the early Roman levels (OpaiĠ 1991, 133-136) strongly suggests the existence of a native settlement on the very place of the future Roman fort. Two considerably large plain Getic necropolises 2-3 km west (entirely overlapped by the modern Murighiol village, but partially investigated in the fifties of the 20th century; Bujor 1955, 571-580; 1956, 243-252; 1957, 247-254; 1958, 125141; 19591, 373-378; 19592, 325-330; 1961, 297-300), as well as a third tumular Getic necropolis on the territory of the DunavăĠu de Sus village (Simion 1995, 265-302) indicate the density of native occupation in the east area of the DunavăĠ peninsula, the remarkable demographic situation, and a significant Greek economic influence.

3

Halmyris II favourable conditions for the configuration of new successive shorelines to the east and the sealing of the main units of the complex Sinoe-Razim (Breier 1976, 40-41; GR 2005, 583). A. Breier (1976, 41) established some stages of this development and concluded that the partial isolation of the Zmeica and GoloviĠa lakes by the ‘Lupilor’ sand banks and entirely of Tuzla and Nuntaúi lakes by the Saele bank occurred by the beginning of the 1st millennium BCE. P. CoteĠ assumes that the formation of the Saele sandbank, situated south of Histria, a formation of critical importance for the isolation of the maritime bay from the rest of the sea, occurred only in the 5th -6th centuries CE. The NNE-SSW oriented Chituc ridge to the east, which implicitly created isolation from the sea waters, would have been even more recent, in the 7th century CE. (contra Pippidi 1967, 36-37; 368 n.36).3 In the author’s opinion, that means that the creation of the Sinoe Lake in its present day rough layout is the result of a much recent than believed geological process. In the 2nd-1st century BCE and 1st -2nd century CE a short period of the Black Sea regression occurred. This could have turned some segments of the littoral in sandy, marshy plains (e.g. Histria) (CoteĠ 1962, 429). In the 1st century CE this process expanded on a considerable distance eastward and could have revealed parts of the present day Chituc, Lupilor and Saele sandy bars ridge, which could have induced the idea of a lake. P. Gâútescu (Gâútescu 1986, 21) thinks even that the first elements of the Chituc and Periboina sand banks which later isolated the Sinoe lake appeared in the 4th century CE. There is a common ground nowadays among geologists that the lacustrine complex Sinoe-Razim could have definitively turned into maritime lakes only in the second half of the 1st millennium, following a continue process from the 8th century BCE until ca. 9th century CE (Breier 1976, 41; CoteĠ 1962, 430; Gâútescu 1986, 21). Another question is what the term Halmyris lacus precisely means. The Sinoe Lake, through its position within the lacustrine complex and the remoteness from the mouths of the DunavăĠ and Dranov canals, the main ones which brings fresh water from the Danube into Razim Lake, has nowadays a bigger concentration of salt, ca. 15 g/l., than its northern neighbour, the Razim lake (Breier 1976, 114-136). If the process was in progress already in the 1st century CE, when Pliny mentions the Halmyris (‘salty’) Lake, that means that at that time its southern part (the area of the present day Sinoe Lake) remained saltier than its northern part, the today Razim Lake. The latter was continuously supplied with fresh water through four smaller branches, the today canals DunavăĠ, TureĠ, Dranov, and CerneĠ, which formed a small Delta, like in the case of the Chilia branch (Ionescu 1904, 218). The Sinoe Lake has an overall surface of ca. 135.6 km2 and a maximum depth of 1.6 m. However, the circuit (ambitu) of LXIII milia passum (= 93.240 km) of the Halmyris lake, as indicated by Pliny, roughly coincides only with the Sinoe lake, which has indeed 86-87 km in circumference, calculated for the present days. This aspect raises the question if not only the nowadays Sinoe Lake was a specific reference to lacus Halmyris in Horothesia rather than the entire Razelm-Sinoe lacustrine complex. V. Pârvan and D. M. Pippidi (Pârvan 1916, 582586; Pippidi 1958, 232-236 fig. 1; 1967, 361-368; ISM I 197-198), who construe on the boundaries of the economic territory of Histria, noticed the important point made in Horothesia that there was a split of economic-administrative competence between Histria and Argamum on the today lacustrine complex. According to the document, Histria had a complete water control until a certain boundary which did not go beyond the dominium [...] Argamensium. The control was exerted on the surface of the Halmyris lacus which presumably could have referred generally to the surface of the present day Sinoe Lake. This seems to have been viewed as ‘the brackish/briny lake’, which reproduces exactly the state of salinity more of the Sinoe and less to Razim Lake, already massively contaminated by fresh water from the Danube. 3 Pârvan 1916, 587 and Diaconu 1970, 121,129 believed that the process of the configuration of the Halmyris lake ended even much later, towards the mid 1st millennium BCE. It is noticeable that until mid 19th century the waters at PortiĠa mouth towards the Black Sea (‘Gura PortiĠa’) was much deeper and ships of a smaller tonnage could have reached the high sea. In the mid 19th century and before, a significant navigation unfolded along the DunavăĠ canal 5-6m in width and ca. 45 km in length due to its 47 meanders. It served as a route to circulate abundant fish from Razelm to Sulina, Tulcea and GalaĠi. Already by early 20th century the siltation of the DunavăĠ canal was significant and put a serious damper on the supply of the Razelm Lake with fresh water; also its waters became improper for navigation and, as a result, the fish trade on the route Razelm-Sf. Gheorghe branch suffered a severe blow (Ionescu 1904, 218-219).

4

Introduction That means, on one hand, that the Razim Laguna, largely connected to the Sf. Gheorghe (Peuce) branch of the Danube through canals, but also through a wide area of lacustrine vegetation south of the DunavăĠ Peninsula was economically controlled by the town of Argamum and on the other that we have to find in the future another ancient hydronym for the Razelm Lake. Therefore the mouth of the Peuce branch of the Danube could have been reached by the Histrian boats, either crossing through the dominium Argamensium or by sea. It is worth noting that neither Salsovia, nor (H)Almyris are mentioned in Ptolemy’s Geography. That would suggest that east of Aegyssus the ancient geographer did not consider any of the settlements worthy of being included in a certain standard of urban life worthy to be recorded as polis. III. Scutum Durae Europi repertum Editions used : Uhden, 1932, 116-125; Cumont 1925, 1 – 15; Cumont 1926, 323-327; Mititelu 1943, 78-91; Zahariade 1975, 507-527; Rebuffat 1986, 85-105; Arnaud 1989, 373-387. [.............] ȉȅȂǼǹ ȋox ȂȁīȊ ȉȠȝȑĮ ȝȓ (ȜȚĮ) ȜȖǯ ȅȁȊȂȊȇȊǹ ঽȅǻ ǿ[C]ȉȇȅȆȅȉī ঽMǻ ੍[ı]IJȡȠȢ ʌȠIJ(ĮȝઁȢ) ȝȓ(ȜȚĮ) ȝǯȖ(ો) ȋĮȁȖȠț ǻǹȃȅȊǺǿC Ȇȅȉ Ȃ... ǻ੺ȞȠȣȕȚȢ ʌȠIJ(ĮȝઁȢ) [ȝȓ(ȜȚĮ)..] ȋȇȁ? [...............]. F. Cumont, R. Rebuffat, and P. Arnaud offer a variant with twelve, while I. Mititelu sees thirty place names inscribed on the parchment. F. Cumont and R. Rebuffat discuss the photography of the document (fig. 4) which reproduces a water colour painting of M. Lauras, created shortly after its discovery in the Archers’ Tower at Dura Europos, garrisoned by a detachment of cohors XX Palmyrenorum milliaria equitata sagittaria (Spaul 2000, 434-436). I. Mititelu provided a picture of the document which seems to have revealed new details. R. Rebuffat and P. Arnaud ignore the contributions of I. Mititelu and his readings. The document mentions OȁYMYPYA, which is placed at ঽOǻ = LXXIV m.p. (=109.520km) from Tomis. If the author(s) of the document navigated along the Black Sea shore, as it is likely, then the distance matches almost perfectly. The real distance is ca. 104 km in straight line, following roughly the sea shore line. The difference of ca. 5 km could result from the then configuration of the littoral. A direct navigation from the sea to the DunavăĠ Peninsula was possible at that date as long as the littoral cordons which later cut off the Sinoe and Razelm Lakes from the sea allowed a normal navigation still in the early Medieval times (cf. Anna Comnena, Alex. V 1. 2; Pippidi 1971, 182-184=1988, 189-191).4 Fr. Cumont, apparently accepted by R. Rebuffat, suggests that ǿ[C]ȉȇȅȆȅȉ means rather Istropo(lis)=Histria than the River Hister. In Cumont’s view the proximity of Istropolis to the Danube caused the successive record of the two names of the same river, the Danube: “c'est Istro po(lis) qui a été compris comme Istros po(tamos)”. Beside the fact that Histria is not close to the Danube in such a measure to make the author confuse a town with a river,5 one of the major 4

Cf. Ionescu 1904, 219. Hdt. Hist. 2. 33 states that the Istros River runs into the Black Sea where Histria, the Milesian colony, is situated. The Herodotus wording remains confusing, unless a more ancient branch, NW-SE oriented, detached from the Danube could have run directly into the Black sea gulf, the future

5

5

Halmyris II disadvantage of Cumont’s theory is that he does not discuss the obvious succession HalmyrisIstro(s) river(=potamos). The group of letters Ȇȅȉ appears very clear on the document and it follows after ȅȁȊȂȊȇȊǹ. I. Mititelu thinks that the document reproduces the two branches of the Danube: one called ǿ[C]ȉȇȅȆȅȉ-Istro(s) pot(amos)=Hister, the Sf. Gheorghe southernmost branch and another ǻǹȃȅȊǺǿC Ȇȅȉ=Danubis pot(amos) which would correspond to the Chilia arm (cf. Sil. Ital. Pun. 326; Stat. Silv. V 1. 89; Lyd. De Mag. III 8). The indicated distance between them in the parchment is ঽMǻ= XLIV m.p. (= 65,120 km). The distance in straight line between Halmyris and the remotest point of the Chilia arm is no more than 46-47 km. The group of letters ȋĮȁȖȠț, identified also by I. Mititelu remains puzzling as yet. Also, I. Mititelu sees the letter ī at the end of the word Istro(s) pot(amos) and considers it as an indication for Ȗો, land. If so, the author of the inscribed parchment was aware or has been told of a possibility to travel through a relatively firm land between the southern and northern branches. Whether or not the journey was done on foot between the two branches is difficult to say, but the meanders of such a way would justify the additional 19-20 km indicated between the two Danube branches.6 At the time when the parchment was written, the official 2nd-3rd century Latin name used in the imperial chancellery for ȅȁȊȂȊȇȊǹ was Salmorus or rather Salmorude as showed in the Antonine Itinerary (see below). ȅȁȊȂȊȇȊǹ=OȜȣȝȣȡȓĮ as a slightly corrupted form for Almyria= Halmyris was probably a term used in the everyday spoken Greek of the early Empire, which could have been heard by the author(s) of the document. IV. Itinerarium Antonini. Edition used: Itineraria Romana vol. I Itineraria Antonini Augusti et Burdigalense, edidit O. Cuntz, Leipzig 1929, 32-33. 226. 1 Novioduno leg II Herculea m.p. XX 226. 2 Aegiso m. p. XXIIII 226. 3 Salsovia m. p. XVII 226. 4 Salmorude m.p.VIIII 226. 5 Vallis Domitiana m.p. XVII Itinerarium Antonini is an official chancellery document of the Roman Empire. The original map and text seems to have been deposited in Rome, but copies should have been sent for the use of the provincial administration. As the title shows, it was compiled during the Antonine Imperial administration, i.e. Caracalla’s (Antoninus) reign; whether or not it has any connection with the issue of Constitutio Antoniniana remains a subject for further debate (Kubitschek 1914, 2318-2353; 1917, 2022-2149; 1928, 1231-1251; van Berchem 1937, 117-201; 1974, 310-317). An updated version was created during the Tetrarchy, probably by 293. This later version contains information on the major changes, i.e. new legions and legionary garrisons that had taken place especially toward the end of the 3rd century.

Halmyris Lake; that remained a thorny issue among the geologists. Some identified that Danube’s Istros branch with the present day DunavăĠ canal. Even so, Histria was far from any other mouth of the river; on this disputable subject: Pippidi 1967, 367-368. 6 A system of joint sand banks in the Delta were built by the alluviums brought by the Danube since Pleistocene era (Letea, Caraorman, Sărăturile, Chilia). They were sedimented by the circular Black Sea current which formed a specific Deltaic relief. The transversal (fluvial-maritime) sand banks: Letea (+13m), Caraorman (+8m), and Chilia (+9m) could have offered opportunities of a N-S Delta crossing on dry ground.

6

Introduction The Antonine Itinerary displays the following distances between the sites eastward Aegyssus (modern Tulcea): a. 26. 2: Aegyssus (Tulcea) – Salsovia (Mahmudia) XVII m. p. = 25.160 km. The indicated stretch corresponds to the real distance between the two forts; b. 226. 3: Salsovia – Salmorude: VIIII m. p = 13.320 km fits exactly the distance between the Mahmudia and Murighiol fortresses; c. 226. 4: Salmorude - Vallis Domitiana (the latter not exactly identified): XVII m.p. = 25.160 km; d. 226. 5: Vallis Domitiana - Ad Salices (both not exactly identified): XXVI m.p.= 38.480 km. Vallis Domitiana and Ad Salices display significant distances from the line of the Danube. There is a considerable distance (25.160 km) between Salmorus and Vallis Domitiana. That gives little chance for the identification of the latter with the Murighiol site, as once proposed by Gh. Brătianu (Brătianu 1935, 91)7. Remarkably, the distance of VIIII m. p. (=13.320 km) from Salsovia eastwards fits exactly the place of the Murighiol fortress. The Rosweydus and Bollandus commentaries in Acta Sanctorum Mensis Iulis, f. 539, 4 on the Halmyris episode of the execution of two Christian martyrs show clearly that the two scholars had already understood and postulated the identity (H)Almyris-Salmorus/ Salmorude. Bollandus cites and accepts Rosweydus’ opinion (15961665) that: ex his colligitur Almiridensium civitatem in Scythiam esse [...] forte Salmorudis Antonini. V. Tabula Peutingeriana Edition used: E. Weber, Tabula Peutingeriana. Codex Vindobonensis 324. Akademisch Druck und Verlangsanstalt, Graz 1976. VII 4 o: Noviodunum (Isaccea)-Salsovia (Mahmudia) XLI m.p. = 60.680 km Salsovia- Ad Stoma (likely DunavăĠu de Sus) XXIV m. p. = 35.520 km This itinerary is little later than Itinerarium Antonini (Levi 1967; Weber 1976).8 It does not record Salmorus/Salmorude. According to the document, the segment between Noviodunum and Salsovia encompasses 60.680 km which is rather close to the real distance of 58.66 km with a difference of only 2 km, which is largely acceptable (fig. 5). However, the distance of 35.520 km from Salsovia to Ad Stoma indicated in Tabula does not correspond at all. If Ad Stoma is DunavăĠu de Sus, where the 4th -6th century 50 x 47 m stone fortlet, 2 km eastward from the Murighiol site, is situated (Popescu 1969, 39-40 note 18; Polonic mss I 216-239; Tocilescu mss, 5132, 95) the real distance between the two sites is only 18.770 km, roughly half the stretch. The reasonable explanation would be that a mistake occurred in the later manuscripts of Tabula. Instead of XXIV it could very well be XIV m. p. which is 20.72 km, a distance much more realistic than 35.52 km.9

7 The identification of Vallis Domitiana remains a prickly issue for the modern historiography. The significant distance from Salmorude strongly suggests a location further south, somewhere on the shore of the once Halmyris Black sea gulf, possibly, although not certainly, at Agighiol while Ad Salices has been proposed for the modern Caramanchioi (Aricescu 19771, 142). 8 For a commentary on the historical geography of the NE region of Dobrudja see Aricescu 1977, 139-142; Suceveanu 19771, 57-58; Bărbulescu 2001, 69-73. 9 Aricescu 19771, 140 rejects the possibility of a mistake in Tabula Peutingeriana on the ground that the rest of the distances are correctly indicated in the document. However, Ad Stoma is unlikely to be located somewhere at the nowadays mouth of the Sf. Gheorghe branch (Aricescu 19771, 141), as long as at that time the Danube Delta was considerably shorter; the western limits of the Black sea followed roughly a S-N line, from DunavăĠu de Sus to Chilia (Zahariade 2003 in: Suceveanu, Zahariade, Topoleanu, Poenaru-Bordea 2003, 14-16 with the bibliography). In a botched attempt to explain the long distance given in Tabula between Salsovia and Ad Stoma (35.496 km), Aricescu (19771, 140-141) uses the nowadays geographic argument locating the latter at the present mouth of the Sf. Gheorghe branch. The argument is not solid, for on one hand the river branch was at that time ca. 40 km shorter than the today’s one and ended by the eastern limits of the DunavăĠ peninsula, and on the other if the length between the stations were considered to have been measured on a water course, then the nine meanders of the branch, as it is today, result in a distance longer than 80 km.

7

Halmyris II VI. Acta Sanctorum. Edition used: Acta Sanctorum. De SS Epicteto presb. et Astione Monaho. Martyribus Almiridensibus in Scythia tomus secundus Julii 8 (pp. 540-551). Ed. I. Bollandus - I. Carmandet, Paris-Bruxelles-Roma 1867. I 6 [9] [Col. 0542D]: ‘[…] ambo ab urbe egrediuntur: & descendentes navim, in Scytharum fines ingressi sunt, atque in Almiridensium civitatem devenerunt, ubi nullus erat, qui eos vel eorum patriam posset agnoscere […]’; Translation: ‘[...] both left the city: and embarking themselves on a ship they entered the boundaries of the Scythians, and arrived in the city of Halmyris where nobody could recognize them or the country where they came from [...]’; II 8 [14] [Col. 0543D]: ‘[...] Cumque hoc miraculum cerneret Almiridensium multitudo, dedit gloriam Deo: & plus quam mille animæ in illa die crediderunt in Dominum Salvatorem[...]. Translation: ‘[…] and while the crowd looked at this miracle, glory to the God was given and that day more than 1000 people began to believe in God[…]’; III 12 [19] [Col. 0544D]: ‘[…] subito advenit Latronianus dux in Almiridensium civitatem […]’; Translation: ‘[...] unexpectedly, the duke Latronianus arrived in the city of Halmyris […]’; III 16 [25] [Col. 0545F] [...] Igitur cum in urbe Almiridensium sancti Martyres hæc tormenta pro Christi nomine tolerarent [...]’; Translation: ‘[...] While the saints martyrs endured these tortures in the name of Christ [...]’. III 16 [26] [Col. 0546A] ‘[...] navigare cœperunt, ut in Scytharum terram, atque in Almiridensium [Col. 0546B] civitatem devenirent [...]’; Translation: ‘[...] they started sailing, in order to reach the lands of the Scythians and arrive in the city of Halmyris [...]’; IV 27 [47] [Col. 0550F] ‘[...] Igitur cum quadragesima dormitionis eorum dies illuxisset, & Christi pontifex Euangelicus in urbem Almiridensium devenisset [...]’; Translation: ‘[...] Therefore, after forty days spent by them in that land, Evangelicus, the bishop of Christ arrived in the city of Halmyris [...]’; IV 27 [49] [Col. 0551D] ‘[...] Pertulerunt autem martyrium Sancti atque athletæ Christi, Epictetus presbyter & Astion monachus in Almiridensium civitate, octava die mensis Julii, temporibus Diocletiani tyranni, sub duce Latroniano[...]’; Translation: ‘[...] The martyrdom fulfilled by the saints and athletes of Christ, the priest Epictetus and monk Astion in the eighth day of the month of July, during the time of the tyrant Diocletian, under (the office) of the duke Latronianus […]’; Passio Epicteti et Astionis in Acta Sanctorum relates the torturing and execution of two early Christian martyrs in Almiridensium civitas, on July 20, 290 CE (Delehaye 1928, 1-5; Netzhammer 1937; Popescu 1994, 92-99; Zahariade 2009, 83-111).10 The text states clearly that the civitas was situated in Scytharum fines, therefore in the Roman province of Scythia (present day Dobrudja, Romania) and describes in detail the topography of the fortress and its position on the very border of the Danube; it also makes reference to some buildings inside the fortified area (praetorium, 10

For this event and the value of the Acts of the two Saints see: Delehaye 1936, 3-22; Barnea 1968, 380; Popescu 1994, 92-99.

8

Introduction carcer, and tribunal), the existence of a functional port (portus) and ships (naviculae) docking to the harbour, and how inhabitants were able to easily take water out of the river. Halmyris is recorded seven times in the Acts, in a Latinized variant, under the common and probably mostly spoken form at that time, Almyris. Four times Almyris is mentioned as civitas Almyridensium and two times as urbs Almiridensium. The account of the lives and deeds of Epictetus and Astion was written apparently at the end of the 4th century. The famous bishop of Tomis, Theotimus I, is the best candidate for the authorship of the text (Coman 1957, 46-50; Rămureanu 1974 1001-1006=1980, 325-341; Popescu 1994, 111123). The term urbs appears certainly overstated compared to the extension and juridical situation of Halmyris. The position of civitas is much more close to reality. The 2nd-3rd century administrative units, canabae and the military vicus (vicus classicorum) could have merged in late 3rd early 4th century in a single settlement around the fortress. It must have known a considerable progress especially in the Constantinian period. This type of territorial-administrative transformation is known in other provinces, but it is particularly noticeable in case of the military settlements along the Lower Danube (Jones 1964, 712-714; Claude 1969, 45-68; Ivanov 1969, 491502; Popescu 1978, 176; Zahariade 1991, 311-317; 1997, 9-12; 2006, 61-65). The result was that the demographic and architectural progress in the former civil settlements was so markedly growing, especially in the first half of the 4th century, that by the end of the same century the urbanlike structures and administrative organization became dominant as a common trait in most of the cases. The coin evidence collected in area of the Halmyris civil settlement shows apparently a 4th century extension of the former occupation, even if one can notice the existence of two distinct nucleuses. Although limited in surface, the surveys and partial archaeological excavations traced roughly the perimeter of a ca. 20 ha in size civil settlement defended to the west by a system of double walls and ditches. The density of occupation outside the fortress appears remarkable as a considerable amount of stone structures and artefacts have been found. The coin-based evidence shows an intensification of occupation predominantly between the reigns of Constantine I and Theodosius I. It could mark the final transformation of the former 2nd - 3rd century civil area (canabae and vicus militaris) in a district of urban appearance that produced probably a change in its juridical status and justified the term of civitas in the 4th and ʌȩȜȚȢ in the 6th century applied to the settlement in its entirety (Zahariade 1997, 11; 2006, 67; 93-95; see also infra A IX). The term civitas Almiridensium repeatedly mentioned in the hagiographic text covered a topographical, administrative, and juridical reality of the 4th century. Almiris in the Acts applied to the settlement is the sole reproduction in Latin of the Greek ਝȜȝȣȡȓȢ as a common and very popular term in the area in the 4th - 6th centuries. VII. Philostorgios, Historia Ecclesiastica. Edition used: Philostorgios, Kirchengeschichte, ed. Dr. Joseph Bidez, (Die griechischen christlichen Schriftsteller der ersten drei Jahrhunderte) Leipzig 1913. X 6. ‘[...] IJઁȞ į੻ Ǽ੝ȞȩȝȚȠȞ ਥț IJોȢ ȋĮȜȤȘįȩȞȠȢ IJ੽Ȟ IJĮȤȓıIJȘȞ IJȠઃȢ ਖȡʌĮıĮȝȑȞȠȣȢ ਥțʌȑȝIJİȚ, țĮ੿ ʌȡઁȢ IJ੽Ȟ ਞȜȝȚȡȓįĮ ijȣȖȐįĮ ʌȠȚİ૙Ȟ ਥȖțİȜİȪİIJĮȚ. ȉઁ į੻ ȤȦȡȓȠȞ IJોȢ ਥȞ Ǽ੝ȡઆʌૉ ȂȣıȓĮȢ ਥıIJȓȞ, ਥȞ Ȥȫȡ઺ IJȠ૨ ੍ıIJȡȠȣ įȚĮțİȓȝİȞȠȞ. ਝȜȜࣲ ਲ ȝ੻Ȟ ਞȜȝȣȡ઀Ȣ țȡȣıIJĮȜȜȦșȑȞIJȠȢ IJȠ૨ ੍ıIJȡȠȣ ਫ਼ʌઁ IJ૵Ȟ įȚĮȕȐȞIJȦȞ Į੝IJઁȞ ȕĮȡȕ੺ȡȦȞ ਖȜȓıțİIJĮȚ [...]’. Translation: ‘[...] As for Eunomios, (Theodosius) sent his men to take him into the custody as fast as possible and ordered to be banished at Halmyris. This is a place of Mysia of Europe situated in

9

Halmyris II the territory of the Hister River. But Halmyris was taken by the barbarians, who crossed the Hister when it froze [...]’. Philostorgios narrates the episode of the capture of the fortress in the winter of 384/385 stating that the barbarians (the Huns?) crossed the frozen Danube and took the place.11 The event coincides with the presence of the Arian bishop of Cyzicus, Eunomius (Julicher 1907, 1131-1132 s.v. Eunomios; Destephen 2008, s.v. Eunomios 1, 295-342) banned by Theodosius at Halmyris. The local disaster caused by the Huns’ invasion left some noticeable archaeological evidence. The investigation of the NE gate of the fortress seems to confirm the late 4th century disaster. The Tetrarchic massive and monumental three arched gateway which had given access to the port was sealed by a massive, cyclopean made blocks wall, set as a curtain between gate towers I and II at the end of the 4th century. The traffic and the commercial activities through the NE gate ceased completely. The stratigraphy obtained in S1 and S2 yielded traces of a violent fire in several areas; two coins issued between 395 and 402, one found nearby a newly built wall (S1 Ƒ42-44), and another on a street with clear traces of repair (S2 Ƒ56-61) (Suceveanu, Zahariade, Topoleanu 2003 in: Suceveanu, Zahariade, Topoleanu, Poenaru Bordea 2003, 35-36) are good chronological ante quem benchmarks for the date of the debacle of the fortress in 384/385 and the beginning of its general reconstruction during the reign of Theodosius I. However, the dramatic event in the history of the Halmyris fortress recorded by Philostorgios is intrinsically related to a change in garrison recorded in the Scythian section of Notitia Dignitatum (Zahariade 2006, 178). VIII. Notitia Dignitatum in partibus Orientis. Edition used: Notitia Dignitatum accedunt Notitia Urbis Constantinopolitanae et Laterculi provinciarum, edidit Otto Seeck, Berolini 1876. XXXIX Dux Scythiae: 18. Cuneus equitum Arcadum, Talamonio. Notitia Didnitatum records Thalamonium as the headquarters of the cavalry regiment, cuneus equitum Arcadum (Aricescu 19771, 116; Zahariade 1988, 82-83; 2006, 178). O. Seeck (1876, 87 n. 2) (fig. 6) restored Talamonio in Thalamonio vel Thalamono12 but errs in associating it with Theophilact Simocatta, Hist. II 10. 2; 4 Thamanon, in Mesopotamia. Thomaschek (1980, 99) reproduces the place name in Notitia as Salamorio as a derivative from ‘spätlateinische salmuria’. In fact, Notitia reproduces in a rather corrupted form Thalamonium, the 2nd -3rd century official Salmorude (It.Ant. 226. 4) still in circulation by the end of the 4th century. The place name rendered as such is a hapax among the place names in the Roman Empire. However, if Seeck’s restitution T(h)alamonium is correct, then the corrupted form of the place name in Notitia acquired something of a Greek language tinge reproduced in Latin, with TH=Ĭ (Suceveanu, Zahariade, in: Suceveanu, Zahariade, Topoleanu, Poenaru Bordea 2003, 81). In the case of Notitia there was a transposition of the pronunciation of the Latin S into the Greek dental Ĭ a proof that the widely spread Greek speech had a considerable influence even on the official language at that late date. It is difficult to know in what form the last draft with the updated situation of the frontier troops in Scythia reached the primicerius notariorum at Ravenna (Jones 1964, 347-358; Clemente 1968, 11-24), but it seems likely that the author of the list in the provincial chancellery had already standardized at least 11

On the frequent freezing of the Danube in late Antiquity see e.g. Lib. Or. 59. 90 (Foerster IV 252); Philost. Hist. Eccl. X 6 (383); Claud. Paneg de tertio Cons. Honorii Aug VIII 50 (391); Agath. Hist. V 11. 5 (559): cf. in general Ps.-Caes. Erotapokr. I 68. Black Sea and the Danube: Amm. Marc. XXII 8. 48; Marc. Comes. Chron. 401. 2 (401). A collection of Late Greek and Latin sources on this common phenomenon in the last centuries of the Antiquity: M. Zahariade in 2003 (Zahariade 2003, 184 and 186). 12 As to T(h)alamonium, Böcking notes in his edition of Notitia Dignitatum (1853): Crediderim de Halmyride h.l. sermones esse.

10

Introduction Thalamorium for Sal(a)mor(i)um, while the final corrupted rendering of the place name with m instead of r could have belonged to the final editor (primicerius) of the document. Everything resulted in a corrupted term in Notitia: Th-al (a) monium for S-al-(a)morium/Salmor(i)ude. There is an alternative likelihood that the initial S could have been simply renderd as T in the provincial draft sent to the central authority, and the letter was similarly reproduced as such by the last editor of the list. In that case Seeck’s additional h remains highly doubtful. IX. Hierocles, Synecdemus Edition used: Le Synekdèmos d’Hierokles et l’opuscule géographique de Georges de Chypre, texte, introduction, commentaire et cartes par Ernest Hönigmann, Bruxelles 1939. Corpus Bruxellense Historiae Byzantinae, Forma Imperii Byzantini fasc. 1. 636. 9: ȈțȣșȓĮȢ Ȣ‫މ‬. ਫʌĮȡȤȓĮ ȈțȣșȓĮȢ, ਫ਼ʌઁ ਲȖİȝંȞĮ ʌંȜİȚ Țİ‫މ‬ [--------------------] 637. 15: ਞȜȝȣȡ઀Ȣ Synecdemus (or Synekdemos), as basically a geographic work is one of the most important source to study the administrative geography of the 6th century Roman Empire; it was written in 527-528 and is structured as a table of administrative divisions of the Eastern part of Roman Empire, listing 912 cities divided among 64 eparchies. As the author used official documents and lists, the work in its entirety is trustworthy. Hierocles and Stephanus of Byzantium were the main sources for Constantine VII's work on the Themes of the Byzantine Empire (De Thematibus) (see infra XIII). The cities are recorded on a zigzagged geographical order. The arrangement certainly has no meaning at all as to the importance and size of the sites, except maybe that Tomis, the capital of the province of Scythia, holds the top of the list. Halmyris appears among the 15 cities of the province. The mention of Halmyris among the ʌંȜİȚȢ of the province (Zahariade 2006, 94-95) is the result of its significant demographic and urban progress. The 6th century Halmyris ਞȜȝȣȡ઀Ȣ ʌંȜȚȢ could be a continuation of the 4th century civitas Almiridensium (Acta SS II Julii), although definite answers will be given as the research of the neighbouring area of the fortress will progress. X. Procopius, De Aedificiis Edition used: Procopius, vol. 7: On Buildings, General Index (Loeb Classical Library, No. 343) (English and Greek Edition). Translated by H. B. Dewing, Harvard University Press, Boston 1940. IV 7. 20: ‘[...] țĮ੿ ਙȜȜȠ į੻ ijȡȠ઄ȡȚȠȞ ȈțȣșȓĮȢ ਥȞ ਫ਼ıIJ੺IJ૳ țİ૙IJĮȚ, ਠȜȝȣȡȚȢ ੕ȞȠȝĮ, Ƞ੤ į੽ IJ੹ ʌȠȜȜ੹ ıĮșȡ੹· ȖİȖȠȞંIJĮ įȚĮijĮȞ૵Ȣ ਕȞȠȚțȠįȠȝȘı੺ȝİȞȠȢ įȚİıઆıĮIJȠ [...]’. Translation: ‘[...] At the extremity of Scythia lies another fortress, Halmyris by name, a great part of which had become manifestly insecure, and this he (i. e. Justinian) saved by rebuilding it [...]’. The Procopius’ statement on the insecurity of the Halmyris fortress alludes to its exposure to the Danube Delta, an area from where many forays had been fomented from the 4th throughout the 6th century: e.g. Themistios, Or. X 136; C.Just. I 3, 35(36) (480); Nov. XLI(537). Halmyris is recorded by Procopius as ੕ȞȠȝĮ which is apparently conflicting with Hierocles’ ʌȩȜȚȢ. However, Procopius seems likely to have referred strictly to the fortress, while Hierocles’ evidence pictured an all-out administrative entity encompassing both fortress and the densely occupied civilian area.

11

Halmyris II In the Justinian’s epoch, the building activity (Proc. De Aedif. IV 7. 15-19; 11. 20; Zahariade 2006, 94, 107) seems substantial at Halmyris. The 10th level of occupation is commonly associated with the first half of the 6th century rebuilding and repair works noticed at some buildings, N and NE gates (Suceveanu, Zahariade, Topoleanu, in: Suceveanu, Zahariade, Topoleanu, Poenaru Bordea 2003, 37-38). A coin found in S2 Ƒ44-47, dated shortly after 537-539 shows considerable interventions at the Edifice I, situated in the centre of the fortress, consisting in the building of additional rooms and walls and new flagstone pavements, (Suceveanu, Zahariade, Topoleanu, in: Suceveanu, Zahariade, Topoleanu, Poenaru Bordea 2003, 71-73). The Christian basilica was now considerably enlarged. The altar was surrounded to the exterior by an additional rectangular ambulatory. To the south, a new large undivided rectangular building with two central pillars and a considerable wide entrance to the E was bonded against the main body of the church. This structure conferred a perfect rectangular layout of the entire complex and presumably coincides with the promotion of Halmyris to the rank of bishopric, most likely during Justinian time (see below XI; Zahariade 2001/2003, 148-149 fig. 10, 12). The northern gate in its 4th phase shows also signs of important repairs consisting in the restoration of some parts of the gate towers no. 1 and 13. The interventions at the NE gate leading to the water front were significant. The massive Theodosian curtain wall between the towers no. 1 and 2 was replaced with two new interior rectangular towers. The access to the water front and harbour was reopened through the building of a double monumental gate. XI. Notitiae Episcopatuum. Editions used: Notitiae Episcopatuum Ecclesiae Constantinopolitanae. Texte critique, introduction et notes par Jean Darrouzès, Paris 1981; H. Gelzer, Ungedruckte und ungenügend veröffentlichte Texte der Notitiae Episcopatuum, München, 1900; H. Gelzer, Georgii Cyprii Descriptio orbis romani Leipzig, 1890. Notitia 3. 40, 650: șǯ ੒ ਞȜȝȚȡȓȠȣ. The Notitiae Episcopatuum are official lists recording mainly hierarchical rank of the metropolitan and suffragan bishoprics of a church in the (Eastern) Roman Empire. They display hierarchical rank of each bishop determined by the see he occupied. Notitia no. 3 is heavily dependent on, but not identical with, Hierocles’ Synekdemos, at least in the reproduction of the place names. In spite of the same number of sites in both documents, 15, it is obvious that new settlements are involved in this specific record of bishoprics: ȈĮȜıȠȕȓĮȢ, ȀȠȪʌȡȠȢ (?), ǺȚʌĮȓȞȠȣ the last two not yet clearly identified. Halmyris became a bishopric very likely during Justinianic epoch when the extant church was considerably extended (see above). The Halmyris bishopric which seems to have lasted to the end of the 6th century must have had under his religious authority the Christian communities living in the DunavăĠ Peninsula (Extrema Scythiae Minoris) and possibly some significant influence over the neighboring Danube Delta, where mixed ethnic groups are recorded to have lived for centuries. XII. Nicephoros Callisthenes Xanthopoulos, Hist. Eccl. Edition used: J.-P. Migne, Patrologiae Graecae, vol. 146, Paris 1865, 840. XII 29 [...] IJȠઃ į੻ Ǽ੝ȞȩȝȚȠȞ ਕȡʌĮıȠȝȑȞȠȣȢ ਥț IJોȢ ȋĮȜțȘįȩȞȠȢ IJ੽Ȟ IJĮȤȓıIJȘȞ ਥȟȑʌİȝʌİǜ țĮ੿ ʌȡઁȢ IJ੽Ȟ ઐȜȝȣȡȓįĮ ijȣȖĮįİȪİȚȞ ਥȞİțİȜİȪİIJȠ. ਺ įǯǹȜȝȣȡ੿Ȣ ȤȦȡȓȠȞ IJોȢ ਥȞ Ǽ੝ȡઆʌૉ ȂȣıȓĮȢ ਥıIJ੿, ʌĮȡ੹ IJઁȞ ੍ıIJȡȠȞ țİȓȝİȞȠȞǜ ੑ į੽ Ƞ੝ț İੁȢ ȝĮțȡ੹Ȟ ਥ੺ȜȦ ਫ਼ʌઁ IJ૵Ȟ ਥțİ૙ıİ įȚĮȕȐȞIJȦȞ ȕĮȡȕ੺ȡȦȞ, IJȠ૨ ੍ıIJȡȠȣ IJ૶ țȡȚıIJ੺ȜȜ૳ ਱ʌİȚȡȦș੼ȞIJȠȢ. [...]. The text of this late Byzantine writer reproduces basically the information provided by Philostorgios’ The Church History X 6 (see A VII). Xanthopulos renders almost word by word his 12

Introduction source on this episode with slight variations in words and phrasing according to his Greek spoken epoch. XIII. Constantinus Porphirogenitus, De Thematibus, ĬȑȝĮIJĮ. Edition used: Constantino Porphyrogenito, De thematibus, Introduzione, testo critico, commento a cura di A. Pertusi, Citta del Vatticano 1952. [47] 1. 58-60. ਫʌĮȡȤȓĮ ȈțȣșȓĮȢ· [...] ਞȜȝȣȡ઀Ȣ [...]. The work on the provinces of the Byzantine Empire was written by the Emperor Constantine VII around 930 when the Halmyris settlement had been for a long time abandoned. Hierocles seems to have been his main source for the Scythian list of towns, including Halmyris. XIV. The nowadays modern place known as Murighiol is first recorded in the Turkish rolls (DT1 Pas KT; FT 344) from 1543 (950 hegira; Yürükleri defter Baúvekalet Arsivi, Istanbul; fund: Tapu defteleri no. 222) under the name of Mor-Kasim, έϮϣ ϢѧѧѧѧѧγΎϗ which belonged to the Hârúova region (Gökbilgin 1957, 123-128; 150-152; 218-225, 243; GhiaĠă 1980, 29-31.). In the Turkish land registers issued between 1864 and 1877, which indicate the land owners’ titles in the Dobrudjan villages, the place is recorded as Mori-gol ϱέϮϣ ΔѧѧѧѧѧϴϟΎΧ which pertained to the district of Tulcea. The modern name derives therefore from the words moru ϭέϮϣ or mori ΕϮѧѧѧϤϳ meaning ‘purple’, which is a pure coincidence and has no relation with the initial particle mur/mor of the ending of the ancient name (myris), and göl ϑΪѧѧϬϟ΍ ‘lake’.13 The village was later occupied by some Crimean Tartars oppressed by the Russians. They found here good quality soil for agriculture and grazing without being forced to pay taxes to the Ottoman state. Most of the Muslim population moved to the Turkish territories after the Russian-RomanianOttoman war of 1877-1878. The settlement was occupied instead by the Lipovan-Russians and Ukranians, whose main occupation was fishing, from the neighbouring villages Caraorman and Uzlina, (MDGR IV 1901, 395).

B. The Ancient Place Name The only known Latinized form of the Gr. place name, ਞȜȝȣȡ઀Ȣ, is Almiridensium civitas in Acta SS II Julii 8, 540-551 (see infra A VI); there is no transliteration in Gr. of the Lat. form Salmorus/Salmorude. The occurrence breaches the rule of an apparent clear division of terms: ਞȜȝȣȡ઀Ȣ- Salmorus. In a Hellenic spoken environment, ਞȜȝȣȡ઀Ȣ could have been actually an everyday circulated form. The term apparently originates in the hydronym, Halmyris (lacus) recorded in an official bilingual (Gr.-Lat.) document of economic and administrative character (see infra A I). The official form of the place name in the 2nd-4th century Latin written Imperial chancellery was Salmorude still in use by late 4th century (see infra A IV and VIII). The Gr. ਞȜȝȣȡ઀Ȣ seems very old, in the centuries BCE. It continued to be in use in the everyday spoken language of the 1st -3rd century local society (see infra A I, II, III). That explains why in the 6th century, the official name of the settlement becomes finally ਞȜȝȣȡ઀Ȣ, both in the semi - and official documents that record the place name (see infra A VII, IX-XI). Almyros (ਞȜȝȣȡȩȢ), a Bronze Age site of copper mining and smelting, is nowadays a modern place name and river in Crete with 13

In the 19th century toponimy, the commune and village bore the official name Moru-ghiol (MDGR IV 1901, 393-395; Ionescu 1904 passim).

13

Halmyris II brackish karsts springs due to the Sea water intrusion. ਞȜȝȣ૦૧Įȟ-ĮȖઁȢ (Gr. Acc.) is a term for potassium nitrate, silitrum, soda, closely related to ਖȜȝȚȡઁȢ-‘salsus’, ‘salty’ and ૧੹ȟ- ĮȖઁȢ-‘eruptio’ ‘eruption’ from ૧੾ııȦ or ૧੾ȖȞȣȝȚ –‘to erupt’(Plin. Nat. Hist. 31. 10. 46), a white substance extant in some dry valleys in Media: ([…]Exiguum fit apud Medos canescentibus siccitate convallibus, quod vocant halmyrraga, minus etiam in Thracia iuxta Philippos, sordidium terra, quod appellant agrium [...]) (ThLL II 391). The native (Getic) name is not explicitly known. Tomaschek (1980 99) places Salmuris among the Thracian place names. N. Jokl (1929, 291) construe on the Dac. ȈȐȜįȘ (in Dacia) wherefrom the ethn. ȈĮȜįȒȞıȚȠȚ compared to ȈĮȜįȠȕȣııȩȢ (present day Glava Panega, Lower Moesia, on the Isker River) and the theoforic ȈĮȜįȠȕȣııȘȞȩȢ, for the Thracian Asklepios (Dechev 1976, 412-413). A Thracian origin for Salm>Salmorus is accepted also by D. Dechev (1976, 412-413) who brings the strong argument of ȈĮȜȝȣįȘı(ı)ȩȢ (present day Midhia, Turkey), on the Thynia promontory, as Thracian place name and probably also a river (Hdt. Hist. IV 93; Aesch. Prom. 725; Soph. Antig. 969; Xen. Anab. VII 5. 12; Strab. Geogr. VII 6. 1; Diod. Sic. XXXVIII 2; Ptol. Geogr. III 3. 11.3; Arr. Peripl. Pont. Eux. 37; Apoll. Rhod. II 177; Steph. Byz 106.1). Suid. s.v. states: ȈĮȡȝȣįȘııȩȢ IJȩʌȠȢ ĬȡઈțȘȢ (Stronk 1991, 97-112; Portalsky 2005, 35-43. I. I. Russu (1967, 119) accepts sal- as a Thracian radical from the indoeuropean sal-m- which composes some PN or place names (Walde, Pokorny II 78, 99; Bratu 1992, 106-107). Salmydessos turns sometimes in Halmydessos in Pomp. Mela II 39 (Halmydeson) and Plin. Nat Hist. IV 45 (Halmydesos) referring to ȈĮȜȝȣįȘııȩȢ as to a pair name. But Halmydessos is commonly associable with Gr. ਖȜȝȣȡȩȢ. ȈĮȜȝȣįȘııȩȢ> ȈĮȡȝȣįȘııȩȢ is considered by Tomaschek (1980 78-79) also Thracian; he invokes a Carian (Luwian) origin like ȈĮȜȝĮțȓȢ near Halycarnassus with ıĮȜȝȣį containing the particle -ȣį like in e. g. ıȘȝȪįĮ ‘birch’. The nouns sal-ਚȜȢ produced rather similar derivation in the case of ਞȜȝȣȡ઀ȢSalmorus according to the same scheme: ȈĮȜ-ȝȣįȘı(ı)ȩȢ–Hal-mydessos, Sal-morus > Halmyris/Al-miris. The linguistic evidence substantiates significantly the environmental argument: the proximity of the sea. ਢȜȢ=sal are intrinsically related to the domain of salt. Gr. ਚȜȢ, Gen. ਖȜંȢ m. ‘salt’; Dat. pl. ਚȜĮıȚ; pl. ਚȜİȢ as Lat. salƝs, ਚȜȚȠȢ ‘marinus’, ਕȜȚİ઄Ȣ ‘seaman’, ‘fisherman’; lat. sƗl, sălis m., late Lat. also Nom. sale n. ‘salt’; umbr. salu ‘salem’, perhaps also lat. insula as ਲ ਥȞ ਖȜ੿ Ƞ੣ıĮ (Walde, Pokorny 1928, 452-453; Pokorny 1946-1959, 878); ਚȜȝȘ ‘sea water’, ‘brine’ from where ਖȜȝȣȡȩȢ ‘salt’, ‘briny’ in Homer (Od. II 123); reference to the taste, ‘salty’ ‘brackish’ in Thuc. IV 26; Xen. Cyr. VI 2. 31. ਞȜȝਫ਼ȡĮ as fem. PN in Daldis (Lydia) in 36 A. D. (TAM V 1, 623.4; LGPN V 2010, 22). Lat. sal, sale ‘salt’ produced all the derivations: sal-acia, sal-aria, sal-ariarius, sal-arium, sal-sus etc. (OLD 1681-1682; Walde3 1935-1954, 465-466). Myris-morus-muris is an indoeuropean radical (Russu 1967, 135): maryä, but also mara-‘sea, ‘swamp’, ‘moor’; skr. Mira, m. Ocean, for mara.; lat. mari; muria for ‘salt lake’; lit. mare-s pl. for Haff. mare = marja.; ksl. morje n. meer. ; goth. mari- ‘saltwater’, ‘Salzwasser’; in mari-saivs, ‘Sea’; ags. mere m., ahd. mari m. n. ‘sea’; cf. afries. mar m. ‘trench’, ‘ditch’, ‘moat’ and ahoUd. maere. ‘swamp’, ‘pond’ even the use of the sea for nhd. ‘landsea’ (Walde, Pokorny 1928, 234-235; Walde3 1935-1954, 33-34; Pokorny 1946-1959, 748). ȂȠȣȡȚįİȕȐ (unidentified) in Scythia Minor (Proc. De Aedif. IV 11. 20) is a composite place name: mur> ȝȠȣȡ(Ț)= ȝĮȡȚ ‘salt lake’ ‘salt water’, and Thr.-Dac. deva. Beshevliev (1970, 146 no. 53, 2) and Holder (1897 II 629) believe the name is Celtic. Dechev (1976, 320) thinks also to a Celtic root, but inserts it among the Thracian ‘Sprachreste’. Tomaschek (1980 II 2, 67) attributes it to the Thracian stock. Beshevliev adduces the arguments of the Celtic root -mur from where Muridunum, and PN Murius, but the root is common

14

Introduction indo-european (Russu 1967, 135), ȝȠȣȡȚ-mur-mori, although the second part, -deva would suggest rather a Thracian, or even Dacian tinge of the place name (Georgiev 1958, 92). Salmorus-(H)Almyris is particular important for the geography of the place. In Homer (Il. I 141, ਲ ਚȜȢ takes the meaning of ‘sea’. Sal-m-acidus in Pliny (Nat. Hist. XXXI 36; cf. Flor. Epit. II 20) is another composite adjective meaning ‘briny and sour’, ‘brackish’, as in ਚȜȝȘ, and ‘acidus’. Theophrast, (Caus. Plant II 5, 4) means a ‘salty’ terrain.14 It commonly refers to the sea water. Another variant would be ‘salmo’ for ‘salimo’ (OLD 1682) a salmon fish for food (Salmo salar) from the family of Salmonidae (Plin. Nat. Hist. IX 68) living both in maritime and river waters, where he often migrates to lay down the spawn. Another case is Sal-sovia, the fort at 13. 350 km Danube upstream from Salmorus (Tab. Peut. VII 4 o; 226. 3; Rav. Cosmogr. IV 5. 47; NDOr. XXXIX 26; IGLR no. 271; Pârvan 1916, 63; Polonic mss 214/37; Tocilescu mss 5132, 95-96). Jokl (1929, 292) construe on sald-t-ov-iia (Pokorny 19461959, 879; Dechev 1976, 415; Duridanov 1985, 129) in connection with Pliny’s sal-sugo for ‘salty taste’, with indoeuropean ‘dem’ ‘to build’, ‘to joint’ and the particle d- of Nom. sg. n. sal-d-; Illyr. place name Saldae (Pannonia); Thrac. Salsovia (sal-d-t-ou֒ -) (Pokorny 1946-1959, 878-879; Russu 1967, 120; Bratu 1992, 106), but specifically referring to the ‘sea water’ (ਚȜȝȘ). As there is a Saldovissos (ȈĮȜįȠȕȣııȩȢ) the resemblance seems attractive for the construction Sald-t-ov> Salsovia>, ȈĮȜįȠȕȣııȩȢ> Salsovissos – with ı as a substitute for į (cf. Dechev 1976, 415). Both parts of the word Alm-myris=Sal-morus make reference to salt, sea, and salty water. There is a joining of two words that accentuates a reality in the geography and environment: salt, salty place/lake/sea. The neighbouring sea at that time or a considerable in size salty lake, ‘Lacul Sărat’, whose traces can be still observable nowadays, are the two geographical units to which the ancient place name was connected.

C. The modern historiography on the identification of the ancient site In 1898, P. Polonic made the first attempt to find an ancient place name for the fort situated between the Murighiol and DunavăĠu de Sus villages. He suggested the name Ad Stoma recorded in Tab. Peut VII 4 o (Polonic mss I 215/38), although the distance from Salsovia indicated in the document does not match any real length (see infra A IV). The assumption was later shared by R. Netzhammer (Netzhammer 1907, 15-16; 1909, 206-207; 1918, 25, 36). On the base of an accurate scrutiny of the ancient itineraries, C. Moisil was the first scholar who connected the ancient name of Salmorus to the extant fortress, 2.5 km eastward Murighiol village and noticed the corrupted form of T(h)alamonium for Salmorus in Notitia Dignitatum Orientis (XXXIX, 18) (Moisil 1909, 89). One year later (Moisil 1910, 93-94) he postulated the identity of the three ancient place names: Halmyris=Salmorus= T(h)alamonium, and definitively concludes on their identification with the present day site at Murighiol. Moisil’s demonstration was gradually forgotten. In 1911, J. Weiss proposed the location of the ancient Halmyris at the DunavăĠul de Jos fortlet, found and roughly investigated and described by E. Desjardins in 1865 (Desjardins 1868, 267; Tocilescu mss 5132, 94-95; 5139, 188) on the simple ground that it is located on the border of the Razelm Lake (Weiss 1911, 55-56), as part of the ancient Halmyris lacus. This assumption was taken for granted by C. Patsch (Patsch 1910, 2878-2879). Initially hesitant in placing Halmyris or 14

The term knows a remarkable wide generalization in the Greco-Oriental world.

15

Halmyris II Gratiana at Murighiol, V. Pârvan (Pârvan 1913, 597 n. 2) finally opted (19241, 335; 19242, 130) for the second variant which became broadly accepted. V. Pârvan’s undisputable authority, doubled by C. Patsch acquiescence to J. Weiss’ supposition enforced among scholars the idea of the identification of the Murighiol fort with Gratiana. The hypothesis was consecutively accepted by R. Vulpe (Vulpe 1938, 301), I. Barnea and Gh. ùtefan (Barnea, ùtefan 1974, 16), Em. Popescu (Popescu, 1969, 44, 52), and H. Gajewska (Gajewska 1974, 154), even if Gh. Brătianu, relying on questionable arguments, tried to place the ancient place names Ad Salices or Vallis Domitiana at Murighiol (Brătianu 1935, 91). The straightforward question marks put forward by Al. Suceveanu (Sucevenu 1974, 58, 96, 132)15 and Al. S. ùtefan (ùtefan 1984, 297-310) did not produce additional commentaries at that time. Starting with 1938, when the R. Vulpe’s monumental Histoire ancienne de la Dobroudja was published, the location of Gratiana at Murighiol became a common place.16 In 1977, A. Aricescu (Aricescu, 19771, 116, 118-119, 168) strongly challenged the solution Murighiol=Gratiana and proposed instead the location of T(h)alamonium at Murighiol, while Gratiana was thought to be located on the western section of the Danube frontier of Dobrudja, in the W-E oriented ȝİıȠȖİȓ઺ of Procopius (De Aedif. 4. 11. 20). In his collection of Greek and Latin inscriptions from the 4th to the 13th century found on the territory of Romania, Em Popescu (1976, 180), following J. Weiss, places Halmyris at DunavăĠu de Jos, on the southern shore of the DunavăĠ Peninsula, at ca. 5 km W from the village with the same name. The 45 x 53 x 30 x 53m, trapezoidal in shape fortlet bears nowadays, in the local popular toponimy, the name of ‘Cetatea Zaporojenilor’. Both early (Polonic mss I 154, 2; Popescu 1969, 39 nota 18) and latest investigations (Barnea, 1989, 296; 1990, 317-318; 1991, 57; 1992, 435; Barnea, Zahariade 1994, 24 no. 47; 2005 155) indicate a date not earlier than 4th century for the building of the fortlet. The size, the small amount of the artefacts, and the absence of any Episcopal church within the fortified area, eliminate from the beginning the possibility of a civitas or polis, as Halmyris is labeled in late sources, and certainly its location in this remote and isolated part of the peninsula. The last stand in the debate on the location of Halmyris occurred in 1986, when Al. Suceveanu and M. Zahariade (1987, 87-96) resumed the dispute in an approach which reviewed all the previous attempts to situate the ancient Halmyris=Salmorus/Salmorude on the Danube or in the surrounding area. They re-examined the sources which recorded the place name and concluded on four important evidence which can be hardly contradicted: 1. T(h)alamonium(=Salamorium) is nothing else than a corruption from Halmyris-Salmorus/ Salmorude; 2. Halmyris=Salmorus/ Salmorude cannot be placed at DunavăĠu de Jos; 3. Gratiana cannot be situated at the modern Murighiol site in view of the information provided by Notitia Dignitatum which mentions both T(h)alamonium and Gratiana; 4. Halmyris, as a Greek place name, and his Latin variant Salmorus/Salmorude, which is a loan translation, as well as the corrupted form T(h)alamonium, is the site to be located at 2.5 km eastward of Murighiol commune.

15 16

This theory as well as the main opinions have been reviewed by Suceveanu, Barnea 1993, 160-166. Later, in the accompanying map VI of the Din Istoria Dobrogei vol. II 1968, R Vulpe placed the ancient Plateypegiae at Murighiol.

16

Introduction

D. The circumstances of the discovery of the inscriptions and the present state of the epigraphic research Paradoxically, the first inscription assignable to Halmyris (infra, cat. no. 28 = IGLR, no. 168) comes not from the very site, as a result of a systematic digging or random discovery, but from the DunavăĠu de Jos fortlet, 5 km southward. Gr. Tocilescu (1896, 91-92 no. 34 = CIL III 13799) on the basis of the available information at that time had initially indicated the place of the discovery of the epigraph as ‘nearby Babadag’ (prope Babadag), which proved to be wrong. Em. DoruĠiu Boilă (1964, 132 no. 7) reconsidered and corrected the older information on the provenance of the stone whose find spot was in fact the south-west corner of the ‘Cetatea Zaporojenilor’ (‘The Zaporojians stronghold’) and had been found during some random excavations done by E. Desjardins in 1865. The stone, which was dated by E. Popescu in late 3rd – early 4th century, seems very likely to have been transported from the Halmyris’ Roman necropolis and reused as building material in the stone wall of the early-mid 4th century fortlet. The piece was first published in 1896. A fragmentary tombstone was found and brought to the elementary school in the Murighiol commune likely before 1934. The fragment bore the indication ‘from Cetatea’, which certainly means the Halmyris fort. The stone (infra cat. no. 23 = Bujor 1954, 599-601 fig. 1) was already on display in the same place previous to its publication by Ex. Bujor who carried out the first systematic, although limited, archaeological excavations in the Getic necropolis, as well as within the fort (Bujor 1955, 571-580; 1956, 243-252; 1957, 247-254; 1958, 125-141; 1959, 325-330; 373378; 1960, 297-300). However, the piece seems to have been considered by Em. DoruĠiu Boilă unworthy to be included within the fifth volume of the collection of inscriptions found along the Danubian limes zone and its immediate inland neighbouring area in Scythia Minor (DoruĠiu Boilă 1980 no. 1-342). These two pieces (infra cat. no. 23 and 28) were the only epigraphic perception and reference from Halmyris in the three quarters of the 20th century, if we except some few stamped amphora handle published by Ex. Bujor in 1957. The site itself seemed to have dived into oblivion. The year 1981 produced a great revival of the interest on the site, once the systematic and long term excavations began (fig. 7). The first promising signs of the epigraphic opulence in the years to come were the first fragmentary epigraphs, all possibly remains of votive altars, found one year later during the diggings at the E-W (S1) main trench (infra cat. no. 13-16). The hope and awareness remained high. The incredible days of 8th and 9th of the month of June 1985, yielded within a period of two hours excavation at the N gate in Ƒ C 18-19 votive altars, complete or in fragmentary state and numerous other fragments engulfed in stone and mortar debris (fig. 8). Most belong to a particular series of inscriptions mentioning a vicus classicorum. Initially, the main fragments have been reunited, as that has been thought at that time, in eight complete or fragmentary inscriptions and published as such in 1986 by Al. Suceveanu and M. Zahariade (Suceveanu, Zahariade 1986, 109-120). A recent reassessment of the entire lot of fragments finally established the number of epigraphs mentioning vicus classicorum to ten (infra cat. nos. 6-15). An altar dedicated by a combined vexillation from the legions I Italica and XI Claudia to Hercules (infra cat. no. 5) was found in the same rubble filled area. It was published by M. Zahariade in 1986 (Zahariade 1986, 173-176). It is highly obvious that the series of the votive altars had been reused to build the late 3rd century structure of the interior area of the N gate; they were walled in on each side of the internal entrance. Most of them were found facing down, evidence that they were set with the written face to the interior and then covered with plaster. 17

Halmyris II In 1986 the two stepped threshold of the N gate, built in yellow limestone blocks was uncovered and cleaned. On that occasion it has been noticed that the structure was made of eight blocks, three long blocks on the lower, and five on the upper step, some of them with inscriptions facing down. The three blocks on the lower step had all inscriptions (infra cat. nos. 18, 21, 25) (fig. 12- 13), while on the upper one only two (infra cat. nos. 20frg 1, 26) out of five bore inscriptions. The one walled in the upper row of blocks of the threshold (infra cat. no. 20frg 1) was in fact a fragment of tombstone which matched perfectly with another fragment of the monument with the funerary banquet, found later in the exterior area of the gate between the towers no. 13 and 1, where an extension of the excavation was carried out in the same year. The two stones joined perfectly in recomposing, although not completely, a tombstone with the representation of the funerary banquet (infra cat. no. 20). A number of tombstones which collapsed from the structure of the interior sides of the gate tower walls were recuperated. Cat nos. 20frg 2, 22 and 27 were also found collapsed and mixed with a huge quantity of debris in the outer space of the gate, between the towers. The tombstones found thus far in the Halmyris fort, including the one published by Ex. Bujor in 1954 (infra cat. no. 23) were altogether made public in 1990 by M. Zahariade (Zahariade 1990, 259-266). The find spot of the votive altars and the tombstones uncovered at the N gate revealed their strict repartition when reused in the new structures. It is clear that the tombstones were recycled as building material for the threshold and the interior faces of the both protruding U-shaped towers. The threshold appears as a likely demarcation line. The votive altars were walled in both sides of an intense circulated area of the gate. What is the significance of this situation is still only presumable. Was it a simple coincidence resulted from the work of different teams which collected the recyclable material from two different places, the 2nd -3rd century necropolis and the military vicus (vicus classicorum) at Halmyris, or, well, the walling in certain positions of the spolia, votive and tombstones, was made on purpose?. In 1982, the archaeological excavations focused on an important building (Edifice 1), located in the centre of the fort, at the crossroad of decumanus with cardo maximus. The building was supposed to have been a 4th - 6th century praetorium of the fort, although much caution must be given now in attributing this structure to such an important place in the fort. A gravestone was originally cut in four fragments of which a quarter (infra cat. no. 29) was used as a support for the base of a column in one of the rooms (Suceveanu, Zahariade, Topoleanu, Poenaru Bordea 2003, 47 fig. 34). The other three quarters, lost today, were reused as building material in unknown as yet other places. The excavations carried out in 1986 and 1987 in the E-W trench (S1) yielded two fragments of a Tetrarchic building inscription (infra cat. no. 1). The fragment a was found in 1986 in Ƒ U 2 by Al. Suceveanu. This was followed by the lucky discovery of the fragment b found at a considerable distance in Ƒ H 1. Both showed signs of having been reused as stones in the later 6th century interior buildings. Shortly after the discovery, their easy joining in a bigger fragment has been noticed. The letters revealed some typical standard Tetrarchic wording used also in the case of other finds on the Lower Danube. The two fragments were published in 1997 (Zahariade 1997, 228 - 236). Another fragment (infra cat. no. 2) of a Tetrarchic building inscription was discovered behind the N gate as recycled material for a wall, later in date. Although it bears only a few letters the find is of exceptional importance, for it shows that each gate had its own monumental inscription celebrating the early 4th century ending of the massive reconstruction of the fortress.

18

Introduction A third fragment of Tetrarchic inscription (infra cat. no. 3) was found in 2009 outside the fort in the harbour area in the trench S3Ƒ4 in a context particular only to that structure. It shows that the third monumental gate to the NE was adorned with similar building inscription commemorating the same event. The fragment seems not to have been reused as part of other spolia; the find spot suggests a later breaking of the main inscribed stone in many parts and the erratic spreading of its fragments. The steady research at the NE gate carried out between 1991 and 1997 yielded a fragmentary votive inscription (infra cat. no. 4) mentioning the emperors Constantius II and Constantinus II. It was found as spolia facing down in the threshold of the second half of the 6th century postern. The inscription is badly damaged, particularly the field of the inscription. Of exceptional importance is the separate but successive discovery of three fragments of a broken brick bearing a Greek uncial writing (infra cat. no. 36). There have been five years (1990-1994) of intense relentless excavations for the removal of the huge quantity of rubble in the interior of the round court of the western gate. The fragments were found among thousands of fragmentary bricks and tiles collapsed from the superstructure of the gate. The careful check of every single fragment led to the successive discovery, between 1991 and 1994, of three separate pieces which later composed a fragment of an early 4th century littera commendaticia (Suceveanu, Zahariade, in: Suceveanu, Zahariade Topoleanu, Poenaru-Bordea 2003, 125-126 no. 21). A 3rd -2nd century BCE Greek bottom of an Attic plate (IJȡȕĮ૙ȠȞ), with graffito, was found in 1986 in Ƒ C2 in the earth filling brought from afar the fort in order to set the foundations of the N gate (infra cat. no. 107). The fragment is a clear evidence for the existence of an intense trade between the natives and the Greeks, if not even the existence of a Greek Emporium (possibly established by Histria?) to the mouth of the Peuce (Sf. Gheorghe) branch of the Danube, close to the Getic settlement (see above, A I; Suceveanu, Angelescu 1988, 145-150). The concerted excavations of the area of the Halmyris western gate and the large scale works of restoration of some parts of its structure, revealed a fair number of inscriptions on stone and bricks, complete or fragmentary. Many were found during the 1991-2005 archaeological digs in specific sectors of the gate as spolia from the 2nd - 3rd century necropolis recycled as building material in the late 3rd – early 4th century walls. Others (infra cat. nos. 31, 34, 35) were fragments found in the massive layer of the 4 m thick stone and mortar debris which filled the oval of the gate. Most of the tombstones are fragmentary while one is complete. The places of their discovery are as follows: 1. Infra cat. nos. 32, 33 (1992) and infra cat. nos. 19, 151 (2005) walled in at the base of the southern side of the interior entrance (fig. 9); 2. Infra cat. no. 24 (2004) reused in the casing of the ‘secret well’ (fig. 10). 3. Infra cat no. 30 (2002) was fixed in the structure of the northern bastion of the N gate in its third phase, at 1.30m height from the threshold (fig. 11); A significant number of stamped amphora handles (infra cat. nos. 48-106) have been discovered during the excavations carried out in the fifties and nineties of the 20th century in the 4th -3rd BCE plain necropolises, identified 2-3km west of the Roman fortress, in the modern village Murighiol (se above), and particularly in a third tumular necropolis (tumuli M1 and M2) in 1983 (Simion 1995, 265-302). It is significant evidence that the island of Rhodes holds a significant majority of amphora stamped handles at Murighiol which can be a sign of the economic orientation of the settlement towards trade with this important Hellenistic centre. The later Roman occupation levels (Suceveanu, Zahariade, Topoleanu, in: Suceveanu, Zahariade, Topoleanu, Poenaru Bordea 2003, 28-29) within the fortress yielded an important number of 19

Halmyris II fragmentary amphoras with red dipinti, imports from different Mediterranean trade centers or local production (infra cat. nos. 108-149).

20

II INSCRIPTIONS ON STONE 1. Public and honorary inscriptions (TITVLI OPERVM PVBLICORVM ET HONORARII)

1 Two fragments from the same plaque with inscription. Fragment a: light grey marble, found in 1986 in Ƒ U 2, in the debris of a second half of the 6th century building; dimensions: 24 cm x 28 cm x 8 cm; the letters are 7-8 cm in height (fig. 16). S LICAE Fragment b: light grey marble, found in 1987 in Ƒ H 1 in the interior of a 6th century building; dimensions: 75 cm x 52 cm x 8 cm; the letters are 8 cm in height (fig. 15). MAXIMӎҤ ণICISMAX ুAX PERSICIৡ VM GENTES 5 ু REIPVঃ঵ ৙ The thickness, color, and structure of the marble are identical. The broken parts of the fragments join perfectly. Hederae distinguentes are visible between the words. Fragment b, l. 2: before icis the lower part of a letter belongs most likely to an H; the reading should be hicis. l. 6: the top part of a loop of an R. The joining of the fragments a and b offer the restitution of the following text: ুAXIMӎҤ ণICIS MAX ুAX PERSICIৡ VM GENTES 5 ু REIPVঃ঵ӎCAE ৙ 21

Halmyris II The two fragments compose the right lower part of a monumental inscription. The words gentes (l. 4) and reipu‫͓ۜڪ‬cae (l. 5) fall at the right margin of the inscription. The asymmetrical position of a hedera under the word reipu‫͓ۜڪ‬cae shows that it belongs to the last line of the inscription. The wording, even if fragmentary, recalls the particular expressions in the series of four Tetrarchic inscriptions found at Donje Butorke (ýermanoviü-Kuzmanoviü 1977-1978, 133-134), Sexaginta Prisca-Ruse (Kolendo 1966, 139-154), Transmarisca-Tutrakan (CIL, III 6151=Tocilescu 1902, 173-184 no. 21) and Durostorum-Silistra (Russu 1936, 210-212= AE, 1936, 10).17 They have Imperial names in Nominative, while the Halmyris titles are in the Dative case as shown by the imperial victory titles: [---]‫ۊ‬icis (l. 2) and Persici‫( ܈‬l. 3) (Zahariade 1994, p. 173-186; 1997, 230231). l. 4 before gente‫ ܈‬the letters […] um, clearly visible, from a most likely [hosti]um; the word is missing on the Donje Butorke inscription. Only the upper part of the S is preserved; the l. 4 should be restored [post debellatas hosti]um gente‫܈‬. The lower half of S is plainly visible on the fragment b. l. 5, before reipu‫͓ۜڪ‬cae, the lower right part of an ۨ from [aeternu]ۨ is to be expected. The Sexaginta Prista, Transmarisca and Durostorum inscriptions bear: post debellatas hostium gentes confirmata orbi suo tranquillitate pro futurum in aeternum reipublicae praesidium constituerunt. The Donje Butorke piece has a simpler wording following the imperial salutations: pro futurum in aeternum reipublicae praesidium constituerunt. The Halmyris fragment has no space for confirmata orbi suo tranquillitate (31 letters including the interstices at the beginning of l. 5) before [in aeternu]ۨ. On the fragment b the lower half parts of ঃ঵ӎ are easily readable. The Halmyris wording must have had therefore an even more shortened variant such as: [post debellatas hosti]um gente‫ ܈‬/ [pro futurum in aeternu]ۨ reipu‫͓ۜڪ‬cae. l. 5. Apparently there is no other word after reipu‫͓ۜڪ‬cae such as e.g. [praesidium] clearly readable on other Lower Danubian inscriptions; it seems more than likely that [praesidium] followed reipublicae but it must be obligatorily placed on l. 6 before the most probable [constitue]‫[܀‬unt] of which only the upper part of the loop of an R is preserved. The text in l. 4-6 on the Halmyris inscription must have been: [post debellatas hosti]um gentes [pro futurum in aeternu]ۨ reipu‫͓ۜڪ‬cae [praesidium constitue] ‫ [܀‬unt] This would be another variant of the wording compared to the Sexaginta Prista, Transmarisca and Durostorum inscriptions on one hand, and the Donje Butorke piece on the other. On the Halmyris fragment, the imperial victory titles are not followed by usual iterations. The first common victory title of the Tetrarchs would be Germanicus maximus in l. 2. There are two variants of reading on this line, both with some implications as to the text of the inscription. On the lower left side of I there are traces of a letter from a very likely ‫ۉ‬. If l. 2 had had Nobilissimis Caess, the reading [Germa]۬icis max(imis) would have been possible and therefore the lower part of the letter could have belonged to an ۫. In the abbreviated variant, Nobb Caes, the title Germanicis max(imis) 17 An inscription found at Seimeni (CIL III 7487=IGLR no. 205) seems likely to be part of the same Tetrarchic series (Zahariade 1997, 230-236; Zahariade 1999, 455-456 no. 5).

22

Inscriptions on stone would fall too much to the left. The solution in this case is to accept rather an ‫ۉ‬, which necessarily imply a previous [T], which results in [t]‫ۊ‬icis max(imis), and therefore [Got]‫ۊ‬icis max(imis). The title of Gothicus maximus is rarely attested in the Tetrarchic epigraphy. It is not mentioned in the standardized Edictum de Pretiis (CIL III 802-803; Lauffer 1971, 1-361). P. Brennan (1984, 142146) showed that the relations of the Tetrarchic regime with the Goths were in general peaceful, except the conflict between 292 and 294, when Diocletian assumed officially the title of Gothicus Maximus (Ensslin 1948, 1430; Brennan 1984, 143-144). A list in P. Thead. 2. 2, which contains an imperial letter (Ensslin 1948, 1520; Barnes 1982, 234-236; Brennan 1984, 143-144), dated 11th March 303, records the title Gothicus. P. Oxy. 889 records the titles [Ge]rmanikos megistos, Gounthik[os megistos]. In accordance with G. M. Parassoglu, the last editor of the document, P. Brennan (1984, 145) suggests Armenicus instead of Gothicus admitting, however, that ‘the variant Armenicus would be a unique title in the period between 301and 306’. The titles Gothicus recorded in the Durostorum inscription and in P. Thead. 2. 2 are beyond question. They also appear in the Cirta (CILVIII 7003) and Gunugu (CIL VIII 21450) inscriptions. Lactantius (De mort. persec. 13. 2) alludes to a conflict with the Goths: cum irridens diceret victorias Gothorum et Sarmatarum propositus. The panegyric of the 1st of March 297 speaks only of a war with the Sarmatians (Pan. Lat. XI [3] 5. 4. 7. 1; 16. 1), but also stresses on submittente se Gotho pace poscenda, which implies a conflict with the Goths. That brings the Imperial title Gothicus Maximus as a constitutive part of imperial titles and its record in the Halmyris inscription appears highly probable. The second Tetrarchic victory, title which could be easily restored on the Halmyris inscription at the beginning of the l. 5 is Sarmaticus Maximus. In inscriptions and papyri, Persicus Maximus stands usually before Britannicus Maximus, which ends the series of imperial titles and iterations in the Sexaginta Prista, Transmarisca and Durostorum inscriptions. The spacing between the possible and very probable [Sarmaticis max(imis)] and Persicis [max(imis)] in l. 5 on the Halmyris fragment requires another victory title which could be [Britannicis] max(imis). The succession of the imperial titles in the Halmyris inscriptions would have been [Sarmaticis max(imis)], [Britannicis / Brittanicis] max(mis), Persici‫[ ܈‬max(imis)]. But Britannicus Maximus before Persicus Maximus has not yet been recorded in the Tetrarchic imperial titulature. Persicus Maximus was held for the first time in 294 and later in 298 by Galerius, while Britannicus Maximus was taken in 296 by Constantius Chlorus (Barnes 1976, 188). The reference on the Halmyris inscription seems to have been made to the title Britannicus maximus from 296 and to Persicus Maximus from 298 what explains the sequence. Another major issue in restoring the text is the use of the Dative case which conflicts with [constitue]‫[܀‬unt] at the end of the text. The only solution required in this case would be the use of the relative pronoun qui which the official Imperial lapicid could have utilized in order to match [post debellatas hosti]um gentes with [constitue] ‫ [܀‬unt]. (The National Museum of Military History, inv. no. 53157) (fig. 14). Date: 301-305 CE. Zahariade 1994, 173-186 = 1997, 228-236 = Suceveanu, Zahariade, Topoleanu, Poenaru Bordea 2003, 115 no. 1; AE 1995, 1345 = 1997, 1318 = 1999, adn. 1323 = 2003, adn. 1550.

23

Halmyris II [Impp(eratoribus) Caess(aribus) C(aio) Aur(elio) Val(erio) Diocletiano et M(arco) Aur(elio) Val (erio) Maximiano piis fel(icibus) Invictis Augg(ustis) et Fl(avio) Val(erio) Constantio et Gal(erio) Val(erio)] ۧaxim͓̩[no nobb(ilissimis) Caess(aribus) Germanicis Max(imis) Got]‫ۊ‬icis Max(imis) 5 [Sarmaticis Max(imis), Britannicis] Max(imis), Persici‫܈‬ [Max(imis) qui post debellatas hosti]um gentes [profuturum in aeternu]ۨ reipu‫͓ۜڪ‬cae [praesidium constitue]‫[܀‬unt] ‘To the Emperors Caesars Caius Aurelius Valerius Diocletianus and Marcus Aurelius Maximianus, the Fortunate and Invincible Augusti and Flavius Valerius Constantius and Galerius Valerius Maximianus the most Noble Caesars, the Greatest Victors of the Germans, of the Goths, of the Sarmatians, of the Britons, of the Persians, (to them) who, after defeating the enemy peoples forever, established defense for the Republic in eternity for the future’. The Halmyris inscription is the fifth piece in the Tetrarchic series (Donje Butorke, Sexaginta Prista, Transmarisca, and Durostorum) with a text and wording basically identical. This must be the result of a previously standardized text sent from the central Imperial chancellery to the provincial authority. The propagandistic language on the Lower Danube building inscriptions appears unique as yet in the Tetrarchic period. However, there was a slight local draft and interpretation of the text and imperial titles given the particular local circumstances. Each inscription attests the intense work of rebuilding and consolidation in the Lower Danubian frontier provinces. The Halmyris inscription belongs to a period of massive reorganization of the 2nd – 3rd century Roman fort. The Vth level of occupation in the fort was dated to late 3rd – early 4th century when substantial repairs were initiated under Aurelian and Probus. The Halmyris fort was included to the grandiose Tetrarchic program of reconstructions and consolidation of the frontiers. The visit of Latronianus, the duke of the province, at Halmyris in 290, as recorded in detail in the Passio Epicteti et Astioni, had as main purpose the inspection of the state of the reconstruction works (opera publica). Shortly after that date, they seem to have been interrupted by a Gothic inroad, sometime between 292 and 294, stimulated by the massive withdrawals of troops from the Danube frontier. The imperial visits along the Danube, when Transmarisca was inspected on the 18th of October, Durostorum on the 21st and 22nd of October 294 envisaged rebuilding works. If Brennan's assumption (1984, 146) proves to be correct that the local authorities directly involved in the conflict assumed the title of Gothicus for the Tetrarchic team, for morale-boosting purposes, then Durostorum and Halmyris were presumably two points of resistance against the Goths where the title was particularly recorded. The numbers of the victory titles were omitted in both Halmyris and Donje Butorke inscriptions. If the rendering of the victory titles without the iterations means a final but local record of the imperial titles, then the Halmyris inscription dates sometime between c. 301 and 305. The Tetrarchic series of the Danubian inscriptions is generally dated before 300. The Halmyris piece seems the latest in the series, suggesting a prolongation of the building efforts to the first five years of the 4th century. Diocletian's victories over the Sarmatians and Carpi in 302 and over the Carpi in 303, his journey upstream Danube in 303 on his way back from Nicomedia to Rome, and the circuit of the Ripa Thraciae in 304 could have been a good opportunity for the local authorities to erecting a dedicatory inscription at the end of the building a fundamentis of the Halmyris fort.

24

Inscriptions on stone

2 Fragment of light grey marble plaque; found in 2003 in Ƒ P 6, -0.90m. The piece was used as building material in the wall of the barrack no. I; dimensions: 23 x 17 x 6.5 cm. The fragment bears seven letters set on two lines; the letters are straight, neatly traced, indicating the hand of an official engraver; 6.5 cm in height. The fragmentary inscription field is 15 x 10 cm. The surface bears slight traces of fire (fig. 17). Date: 301-305 CE. Zahariade 2009, 107-108 no. 1 pl. I fig. 1.

Ҥ৫Ҥৡ [I]NҤҼ l. 1: bottom halves of four letters are clearly visible; the first letter seems very likely the bottom right of an A; a straight vertical line would indicate I or rather T; the bottom of a second A. The bottom of an S is clear. l. 2. N is clearly readable; before N, a small upper trace of a letter is vaguely perceptible, most likely I; an A is probable and is followed by the upper right part of a very probable E. The group ATAS on l. 1 renders a plural perfect participle and the most convenient word would be [DEBELL]Ҥ৫Ҥৡ, a grammatical construction well represented, together with the temporal POST on the Tetrarchic inscriptions at Sexaginta Prista, Transmarisca and Durostorum (cat no. 1; Zahariade 1997, 230-236; 1999, 453-457). The letters on the second line fit with [I]N ҤҼ[TERNVM] on all the Tetrarchic Lower Danubian inscriptions of that type. As the inscription no 1 is in Dative case, presumably that the second one was written in the same case. The possible reading: [Impp(eratoribus) Caess(aribus) C(aio) Aur(elio) Val(erio) Diocletiano et M(arco) Aur(elio) Maximiano piis fel(icibus) invictis Augg(ustis) et Fl(avio) Val(erio) Constantio et Gal(erio) Val(erio) Maximiano nobb(ilissimis) Caess(aribus) Germanicis Max(imis), Gothicis Max(imis), 5 Sarmaticis Max(imis), Britannicis Max(imis), Persicis Max(imis) qui post debell]atas [hostium gentes profuturum i]n ae[ternum reipublicae praesidium constituerunt] ‘To the Emperors Caesars Caius Aurelius Valerius Diocletianus and Marcus Aurelius Maximianus, the Fortunate and Invincible Augusti and Flavius Valerius Constantius and Galerius Valerius Maximianus the most Noble Caesars, the Greatest Victors of the Germans, of the Goths, of the Sarmatians, of the Britains, of the Persians, (to them) who, after defeating the enemy peoples forever, established defence for the Republic in eternity for the future’. This is the third Tetrarchic fragment of inscription found at Halmyris. Its discovery at a considerable distance from the initial place where the location of the dedicatory inscription must have been set, shows that the epigraphs either naturally collapsed from their socket or was intentionally broken to pieces in a later period and reused as building material. The 2003 fragment certainly does not belong to the inscription cat. no.1; There are no physical characteristics of the fragments to sustain such a match. The 1997 fragments are dark gray, while

25

Halmyris II the 2003 piece is light gray marble. The most obvious difference is the thickness of the fragments, with 8 cm in thickness in the first case and 6.5 cm in the latter. The 2003 fragment belongs therefore to a different building inscription set in another location, most likely at the northern gate given its place of discovery. If so, the NE gate must have had its own building inscription of the same type and text with the one at the western gate, although differently hewn in thickness and provenance.

3 Fragment of light grey marble; found in 2009 in the port area (S 1 Ƒ, at -0.08m).. The stone bears traces of chiselling in depth at the upper part, on a line that borders the field of inscription. Dimensions: 15.3 x 15 x 8.5 cm; the letters are 6 cm in height. The field of inscription has a remarkably smooth surface. Three letters are clearly readable. T falls mostly in the breaking but is easily identifiable through its horizontal line. The lower parts of the letters GG and E fall in the breaking of the fragment; triangular dot between G and E (fig. 18). Date: 301-305 CE. [AV]GG E৫ [Impp(eratoribus) Caess(aribus) C(aio) Aur(elio) Val(erio) Diocletiano et M(arco) Aur(elio) Val(erio) Maximiano piis fel(icibus) invictis Au]gg(ustis) e‫ܒ‬ [Fl(avio) Val(erio) Constantio et Gal(erio) Val(erio) Maximiano nobb(ilissimis) Caess(aribus) Germanicis Max(imis) Gothicis Max(imis) 5 Sarmaticis Max(imis) Britannicis Max(imis) Persicis Max(imis) qui post debellatas hostium gentes profuturum in aeternum reipublicae praesidium constituerunt] ‘To the Emperors Caesars Caius Aurelius Valerius Diocletianus and Marcus Aurelius Maximianus, the Fortunate and Invincible Augusti and Flavius Valerius Constantius and Galerius Valerius Maximianus the most Noble Caesars, the Greatest Victors of the Germans, of the Goths, of the Sarmatians, of the Britains, of the Persians, (to them) who, after defeating the enemy peoples forever, established defence for the Republic in eternity for the future’. The fragment is the fourth piece from the series of Tetrarchic inscriptions found at Halmyris. Unlike the fragment b of cat. no. 1, this case exhibits the conjunction ET on the same line with AVGG. The right edge of the inscription must be therefore very close to ET. The text was supposedly written in Dative case, as the first two inscriptions (cat. no. 1 and 2) were carved in the same case.

4 Fragment of yellowish limestone plaque; found in 1994 facing down at the postern of the northeast gate. The four corners of the piece were cut in order to be easily accommodated between the narrow walls of the last quarter of the 6th century postern and used as a threshold. The text was seriously damaged. The plaque has a rough, uneven surface that shows that it was not properly prepared for writing. Therefore, there are visible repercussions in the layout, size, and quality of the letters. Dimensions: 47 x 42 x 7 cm. The preserved field of inscription: 24 x 32 cm; the letters are 3.5-4 cm in height. The writing is unequal and asymmetrical; the letters are cut in a shallow manner (fig. 19). Date: 337-340 CE.

26

Inscriptions on stone Zahariade 2009, 108-109 no. 2 pl. I fig. 2.

l. 1: the first letter, is highly probable a D, completely disappeared. l. 2. O is considerably damaged; S is bigger than the rest of the letters; only the left upper part of a letter is preserved; due to its sharp angle-like form it strongly suggests an N. l. 3: G is rendered through a C. l 4: the second T is shorter than the rest of the letters; the S at the end of CONSTA, which is visible enough, might be an additional error of the engraver. l. 5: the bottom part of the plaque shows clearly the letters NT; I, N, and V are broken at the lower part but are easily distinguishable. The Emperors recorded are: l. 2 and 3: Constan/tius Aug., Constantius II (Flavius Iulius Constantius, 337-361). l. 4 and 5: Consta/ntinus, Constantinus II (Flavius Claudius Constantinus, 337-340); he was Augustus after 9 September 337 together with Constantius II and Constans (337-351).

5

[DD(omini)] ۫N (ostri) Const̩۬tius Aͭ[g(ustus)] et Con‫ܒ܈‬ant[inus] [Augustus] [………]

‘Our sovereigns, Constantius Augustus and Constantinus Augustus [...]’ The milestones found in Scythia Minor and dated after the death of Constantinus I record only Constantius II and Constantinus II as associated Emperors.18 The Halmyris inscription shows the same pattern, with Constantius II and apparently Constantinus II as recorded Augusti. The former held at a certain time an extended authority over the other two Augusti, Constans and Constantinus II, although the latter was older in age and appear frequently on the first place in inscriptions.19 The Carcaliu building inscription (IGLR, no. 238) datable between 337 and 340 mentions three Augusti altogether, Constantinus I (Flavius Claudius Constantinus), Constantius II (Flavius Iulius Constantius), and Constans(Flavius Iulius Constans) shortly before or after the death of Constantine the Great. The Halmyris inscription dates after the 9th of September 337, but before the spring of 340, when Constantinus II Augustus, in an attempt to forcibly discipline his younger arrogant brother, Constans, invaded Italy, but was defeated and killed at Aquileia.20

18 The association, at least in Scythia, is usually with Constantine I (Maximus, the Great), either in the position of Caesares or as Augusti, but always without Constans; IGLR no. 6 (323-337); 167 (324-326); 275 (ante 337); 276 (324-326). 19 On Constantinus II see Seeck 1901, s.v. Constantinus (3), col. 1026; PLRE I 223 s.v. Fl. Claudius Constantinus. 20 For these events, see: Lucien-Brun 1973, 585-602; Leedom 1978, 133-36; DiMaio 1988, 236-249; DiMaio, Arnold 1992, 198-212.

27

Halmyris II

2. Votive Altars (TITVLI SACRI) 5 Altar; dune limestone; found in 1985 in the debris of the interior area of the N gate (□ C 1-3). Dimensions: 96 x 49 x 35 cm; the letters are 6, 5 cm in height. The top of the altar has a round rimmed place for sacrifice. The words are separated by dots (fig. 21) (The National Museum of Military History inv. no. 53159). Date: 101-106/7 CE. Zahariade 1986, 173-176; Suceveanu, Zahariade, Topoleanu, Poenaru Bordea 2003, 116 no. 2; AE 1988, 992; 1989, 640; AE 2003, 1550.

The letters are clear and carefully written. l. 2: T + I in ligature. Herculi vexillatio leg(ionis) I Itali(cae) et leg(ionis ) XI C (laudiae) P(iae ) F(idelis ) ‘To Hercules. The detachment from the legions I Italica and XI Claudia Pia Fidelis (have set this)’ The inscription shows the presence of a combined detachment of the two Moesian legions, I Italica and XI Claudia at Halmyris. Combined legionary detachments from two or more legions reunited in a single corps are commonly known in the Empire (e. g. CIL III 1980, Salonae; 10471, Aquincum; VIII 7978, Rusicadae; XIII 11542, Augusta Raurarica; ILS 9116, Newcastle-upon-Tyne; AE 1957, Lambaesis; AE 1934, 193, Lychnidus). In Lower Moesia, such a reunion in an army corps (vexillatio) is known at Tropaeum Traiani, where I Italica and V Macedonica (CIL III 142143; 14433) sent detachments. A vexillation from all the three legions of the province is recorded on stamped tiles N of the Black Sea (IOSPE I 322). This is the first known record of reunion of detachments from I Italica and XI Claudia in Lower Moesia in a single army corps (vexillatio). The troop had been specifically entrusted with the building of the first stone phase of the Halmyris fort. The abbreviation of the patronymic and the epithets CPF ends its circulation in late Trajan’s or early Hadrian’s reign (Ritterling 1925, 1691, 1694, 1696-1697; Muşeţeanu, Zahariade, Elefterescu 1979, 164-175). That would be an indication of an early date of the inscription. In 106/7 the legion V Macedonica was moved from Oescus to Troesmis and a vast territory of military competence (territorium legionis) has been assigned to it. It started from Sacidava to the south (Scorpan 1977a, 160-164 no. 1 fig. 1; 1977b, 203-207 no. 1 fig. 1) and ran along the right bank of the Danube downstream until the mouth of the Sf. Gheorghe branch. Halmyris/Salmorus was included in this vast territory of competence (infra cat. no. 18; Doruţiu Boilă 1972, 45-62; Aricescu 19772, 32-37). Consequently, the presence of the legionary vexillation at Halmyris would have occurred sometime between 101-106/7, before the arrival of legio V Macedonica (Zahariade 1986, 176), otherwise the legion would have taken over the task of erecting the fort. Hercules, to whom the altar was dedicated, is widely known in the religious military environment, with different epithets, alone or in association with other deities, many times invoked by soldiers, 28

Inscriptions on stone officers, or military units as a protective god, a symbol of strength, valour in combat and also patron of hard works. In Dobrudja, as a consistent military area, his cult is widespread (Munteanu 1973, 73-86; Covaceff 1975, 329-428). The building of the Halmyris/Salmorus fort in stone, in early 2nd century was a good occasion for the personnel of the vexillation to invoke him as their patron.

6 Plaque; spongolite; recomposed of three fragments; found in 1985 (Ƒ C 1-3); the upper part seems intentionally destroyed possibly when it was embedded into the wall. The lost part contained probably the first two lines; dimensions: 70 x 62 x 15 cm; the letters are strait, carefully traced, 6.0 cm in height; no pointed signs or hederae between the words (ICEM Tulcea, no. inv. 41347) (fig. 25) Date: early 2nd century CE. (?) Suceveanu, Zahariade 1986, 110 no. 2 fig. 1/2; Suceveanu, Zahariade, Topoleanu, Poenaru Bordea 2003, 116-117 no. 4 fig. 46; AE 1988, 987; Avram 2007,106 no. 10.

[I(ovi) O(ptimo) M(aximo)] [c(ives) R(omani) c(onsistentes) vic(o)] c̩ۜ‫͓܈܈‬c͕‫[܀‬um] cura(m) agente ۧ(arco?) 5 Paparione St[ratonis magistr(o) ܑ(itus) Collumela d[e] suo posuit ‘To the best and greatest Jupiter. The Roman citizens residing in the village of the marines (have set this altar) through the care of Marcus Papario (sic!), son of Strato (or native of Stratonis!?), mayor (of the village), Titus Columella set (this altar) of his own (funds)’. l. 3. the upper part of the last two letters from classicor [um] falls in the break of the block. l. 4. cura instead of curam; An M after cura is most likely, but its half part falls in the break of the stone. The mayor’s praenomen could be M(arcus); l. 5. the letter R from STR is 3 cm in height and placed underneath the horizontal dash of the T; l. 6: M + A in ligature; l. 7: the correct spelling of the name is Columella; here, the situation is reversed with a duplication of the first L and a single L at the end of the name. That might prove a bad knowledge of the spelling of this famous personal name in this remote corner of the Empire; l. 8: superfluous reduplication of the letter s in possuit. The text mentions two dedicants: cives Romani consistentes and Titus Columella. The wording is different from other inscriptions of the series (see below). The complete rendering of some words: agente, classicorum could be evidence that this particular inscription is earlier than those of the same series (see below). Noticeably, the consuls are not mentioned in the document, which is another peculiarity of this monument. Marcus is a Roman theophoric name (Schulze 1991, 464; OPEL III 57). Papario could be either a slightly altered form of a frequent middle and north Italic name, Papirius, a Latinized form of initial Etruscan origin (Schulze 1991, 331 n. 5; OPEL III 123; Solin, Salomies 1988, 137; cf also infra cat. no. 29): Papasa>Paperis (CIL XI 2440); Papisius (CIL III 2876); Papirius (CIL 11, 2171); Paperius (CIL IX 1024) from where Paparius, or as a hybrid form between the Greek ȆĮʌĮ૙ȠȢ, ȆĮʌȓȡȚȠȞ, ȆĮʌȓȡȚȠȢ (Pape-Benseler 1911, 1129; LPGN III A 150) and the Latin Papirius (cf. Plut. 29

Halmyris II Cam. 22) However, there was a minor gens in Rome, Papiria, from which the name spread in Italy and the Empire. A Papi(rius) Valens, tubicen is known in Almus (Lom) in second half of the 2nd century (Gerov, 1954, no.16; Minkova 2000, 75). Halmyris displays the second case of such name in Lower Moesia. Stratonis (in Genitive) from Strato could be interpreted as a Greek patronime ȈIJȡȐIJȠȢ, ȈIJȡĮIJȫ, ȈIJȡȐIJȦȞ (Pape-Benseler 1911, 952; LPGN I, II, IIA s. v.). A Stratonis appears in Britain (OPEL IV 95) and a variant Stratonius in Dalmatia (CIL III 2959) or Moesia Inferior (AE 1963, 99). The name is rare. It could be more likely, a locative in Gen., indicating the place name Stratonis (turris ?) on the western Black Sea coast (TP VII 4 o; Sc.DE. no. 12),21 from where Marcus Papirius would have originated (Suceveanu, Zahariade 1986, 111 no. 2). Titus and Collumela (sic!) (Titus Collumela) are typical Roman praenomen and cognomen. Collumela (sic!), a diminutive from the f. n. columna recalls the famous Roman writer, Lucius Iunius Moderatus Columella. In a provincial environment, as that at Halmyris, the cognomen, Collumela (sic!), was turned into a nomen. Both Publius Pompeius and Titus Collumela (sic!) unveil their initial peregrine origin, while later they acquired the Roman citizenship.

7 Altar; yellowish limestone; broken in three massive fragments; found in 1985 (Ƒ C 1-3); the front profiles with text were cut when the block was embedded into one of the lateral walls of the gate; dimensions: 1.47 x 46 x 29cm. The letters are 6.0-7.0 cm in height. (ICEM Tulcea, no inv. 41342) (fig. 26). l. 2–3: the community of the Roman citizens is recorded almost unabridged, which would only suggest an early dating of the inscription. l. 5: A+M in ligature; curam is written correctly, in the Ac. l. 6-7: Sossius is the mayor’s name Date: early 2nd century CE (?). Suceveanu, Zahariade 1986, 112 no. 5 fig. 2/5; Suceveanu, Zahariade, Topoleanu, Poenaru Bordea 2003, 118 no. 7 fig. 49; AE 1988, 989; Avram 2007,106 no. 11.

I(ovi) O(ptimo) M(aximo) cives Rom(ani) consiste۬‫(ܒ‬es) [vic]o classi(corum) 5 [c]ͭram ag(ente) Sosio ‫܇‬osi ۨ[ag(istro)] ‘To the best and greatest Jupiter. The Roman citizens residing in the village of the marines (have set this altar) through the care of Sossius, son of Sossius, mayor (of the village)’. The writing as well as the wording particularities, places this inscription among the earliest of the vicus classicorum series at Halmyris/Salmorus. The names of the consuls are also missing. 21 The place name is displayed only in the Mitititelu’s edition of the document (1943, 78-91) and is ignored by Cumont’s (1925, 1-15; 1926, 323-331), Rebuffat (1986, 85-105) and Arnaud’s (1989, 373-387) editions. For Stratonis (turris) see also Rav. Cosmogr. 4. 6. 15; Slobozianu 1959, 736-737; Suceveanu 1992, 218-219. In Rome, a bilingual inscription mentions a Strato Stratonis filius, Stratonis nepos (AE 1981, 40 and 42).

30

Inscriptions on stone Sossius (masc.)/Sossia (fem.) (cf Sosibius; ILIug. 2113) is a rather rare Latin gentilice (Schulze 1991, 425; OPEL IV 89; Solin, Salomies 1988, 174). Two Sossii are known in Dacia Superior: Lucius Sossius, decurio of the cohors II Flavia Commagenorum at Micia (IDR III/3, 105), while Claudius Sossius was the prefect of ala I Bosporanorum (IDR III/3, 107). On the Halmyris inscription both father and son bore the same name, Sossius, which is used probably in this case as a nomen. The individual, who must have been also of peregrine origin, records his filiations but does not provide a praenomen. A Sosius Longinus, a soldier in legio V Macedonica is known at Troesmis (ISM V 137 II 18).

8 Altar; sandstone; found in 1985 (Ƒ C 1-3); profiles only on the left side of the block. The upper and lower profiles of the inscription field were destroyed when the piece was embedded in the wall. The block is broken along the entire length of the l. 7; dimensions: 96 x 52.5 x 26cm; length of the inscription field: 46.0 cm; the letters are between 3.5 and 8.0 cm in height; vine leaves as hederae distinguentes; (The National Museum of Military History, inv. no.53158) (fig. 27). Date: 171.CE. Suceveanu, Zahariade 1986, 110 no. 1 fig. 1/1; Suceveanu, Zahariade, Topoleanu, Poenaru Bordea 2003, 116 no. 3 fig. 45; AE 1988, 986; 2003, 1550; Avram 2007,106 no. 8.

I(ovi) O(ptimo) M(aximo) c(ives) R(omani) c(onsistentes) vic(o) class(icorum) curam ag(ente) P(ublio) Pom5 peio mag(istro) Severo et Herenniano co(n)s(ulibus) ‘To the best and greatest Jupiter. The Roman citizens residing in the village of the marines (have set this altar) through the care of Publius Pompeius, the mayor (of the village) during the consulship of Severus and Herennianus’. l. 4: A + M from curam and M + A from the final m and the initial a from ag(ente), in ligature. An oblique dash is visible in ligature with P, which would result in a PV> PV(blio); l: 5:M + A in ligatue. l. 8: COS are 8.0cm in height The two consuls, T. Statillius Severus and L. Alfidius Herennianus (both ordinarii) are known for the year 171 (Degrassi 1952, 48). Pompeius is an old, frequent Roman personal name (Oscian origin) (OPEL III 150-151; Solin, Salomies 1988, 146). In Lower Moesia, the name is relatively spread in the 2nd century (ILB 84, 431, 433; Minkova 2000, 77). The peregrine origin of the mayor is obvious as he bears a given name when citizenship was granted.

9 Altar recomposed of five fragments; spongolite; found in 1985(Ƒ C 1-3). When first published (1986), the fragments were considered to have belonged to two different altars. The same view was maintained on the occasion of their re-publication in 2003. The complete restoration of the stones carried out later added one smaller fragment. The upper part of the altar, partially destroyed, displays two acroteria, flanking the pinecone with an on top band decorated with vine rods and 31

Halmyris II leaves; the lower part of the inscription is broken in four other smaller fragments; dimensions: 86 x 52 (length of the field inscription) x 19 cm; the letters are between 4.5 and 8 cm in height; vine leaves as hederae distinguentes; (ICEM Tulcea, no inv. 41340) (fig. 28). Date: 200 CE. Suceveanu, Zahariade 1986, 111 no. 3 fig. 1/3; 112 no. 6 fig. 2/6; Suceveanu, Zahariade, Topoleanu, Poenaru Bordea 2003, 117 no 5;118-119 no.8 fig. 47; AE 1988, 988, 990; 2003, 1550; Avram 2007,106 no. 12.

I(ovi) O(ptimo) M(aximo) c(ives) R(omani) c(onsistentes) vic(o)[c]ۜass(icorum) c(uram) ag(ente) ۧ[ar]cio(?)[....mag(istro)] 5 Victo‫[܀‬ino et] Se‫[܀́ܤ‬o co(n)s(ulibus)] ‘To the best and the greatest Jupiter. The Roman citizens residing in the village of the marines (have set this altar) through the care of Marcius(?), mayor (of the village), during the consulship of Victorinus and Severus’. l. 3. C falls into the break of the stone; the upper part of L is visible; l. 4. An M seems most likely; it is room for AR which fall into the break; l. 5. R from Victorinus preserves only the vertical dash; ET is hardly legible; l. 6. SEVER is clearly legible; The word mag(istro) designating the mayor of the village has no room to be placed in the field of the inscription which means that the office must be implicitly understood. The recorded consuls are C. Aufidius Victorinus and Ti. Claudius Severus Proculus, both consules ordinarii in 200. Usually, the names of these two consuls are recorded in an inverse order (Degrassi 1952, 56; Leunissen 1989, 134), but there are exceptions (e.g. AE 1922, 105-Crotona; ISM V 19Capidava) like in our case.

10 Altar recomposed of six fragments; sandstone; the fragments were found in 1985 (Ƒ C 1-3); dimensions: 88 x 54 x 23 cm; the letters are between 2.0 and 5.0 cm in height; vine leaves as hederae distinguentes. In the 1986 and 2003 publication of the inscription, the authors considered the inscriptions cat. no. 4 and cat. no. 7 as representing separate fragments from two different inscriptions. A later general re-examination of the stones brought more pieces into view and led to a new reunion and joining of six fragments (a-f), initially regarded without any connection among them. (ICEM no.inv. 41341) (fig. 29). Date: 209.CE. Suceveanu, Zahariade 1986, 111 no. 4 fig. 1/4; 113 no. 7 fig. 2/7; Suceveanu, Zahariade, Topoleanu, Poenaru Bordea 2003, 117-118 no. 6 fig. 48; 119 no. 9 fig. 50; AE 1988, 991; 2003, 1550; Avram 2007, 96, 105 no. 9.

[I(ovi) O(ptimo) M(aximo)] [c(ives) R(omani)] c(onsistentes) v͓[c(o)] clas(sicorum) [cura(m)] ag(ente) Fl(avio) 32

Inscriptions on stone 5 Vale[r]͓o ma[g(istro)] C[o]mm[odo] [e]t Lael(iano) co(n)s(ulibus) ‘To the best and the greatest Jupiter. The Roman citizens residing in the village of the marines (have set this altar) through the care of Flavius Valerius, mayor (of the village), during the consulship of Commodus and Laelianus’. Frg. b: l 3: vico falls in the break; it is followed by a vine leaf as hedera distinguens; Frg. b: l. 4: curam falls entirely into the break; Frg. c: l. 5: V+A and L + E in ligature; R is completely eroded; I is slightly visible; the reading Valerio is most probable; it represents without any doubt the name (nomen), while Flavius is the praenomen of the mayor which would justify the reconstruction ma[g(istro)], with M+A in ligature; Frg. d and e: l. 6: the most probable name is COMM[ODO] as consul; frg. 5 preserves the second M from the name. Frg. f: l. 7: E from ET falls in the break; LAEL[IANO] as consul is the most likely reconstruction. The re-examination of the reunited seven fragments creates a different interpretation of the text of the inscription. In 1986 and 2003 the authors considered the consul Commodus as being very likely L. Ceionius Commodus, who occupied the office for the first time in 136 and was later adopted by Hadrian, under the name of L. Aelius Caesar (Degrassi 1952, 39). At that time, the reconstruction was thought to have been: C]omm/[odo] c[o (n)]s(ule); therefore the date of the fragment was considered 136, although, given other Commodi as consuls in 78 (D. Iunius Novius Priscus and L. Ceionius Commodus) (Degrassi 1952, 22), 106 (L. Ceionius Commodus and Sex. Vettulenus Civica Cerialis) (Degrassi 1952, 32), and 154 (L. Aelius Aurelius Commodus and T. Sextius Lateranus) (Degrassi 1952, 43), and certainly the series of consulship of the Emperor Commodus, a welcome reserve as far as the date of the inscription has been expressed from the beginning. Recently, A. Avram (2007, 96 note 23 and 105 no. 9) suggests in an attractive reconstruction the consulship (in Abl.) of the Emperor Commodus himself as unique consul: [imp (eratore) C]omm[odo-] c[o(n)]s(ule), the name possibly followed by the figure of the current consulship. The new configuration of the stones composing the altar makes now all the previous suggestions pointless. Laelianus was seen by the authors on the fragment cat. no. 7 (1986) and cat no. 9 (2003) as the pair consul of Q. Mustius Priscus. There were two Laeliani as consuls with the same name, the father and the son. M. Pontius Laelianus, consul suffectus with Q. Mustius Priscus in 145: [Prisco] et Lael[iano] co(n)s(ulibus) and M. Pontius Laelianus Larcius Sabinus, consul ordinarius, together with A. Iunius Pastor L. Caesennius Sospes in 163 (Degrassi 1952, 41, 46). These suggestions appear now to be excluded considering the new text resulted from the recent composition of the inscription. On the other hand, no common consulship of Commodus and Laelianus are to be noted on the 2nd century consular lists. As Commodo and Laeliano are more than obvious on the new restored inscription, the only option is to date the altar in 209, when two consuls, L. Aurelius Commodus Pompeianus and Q. Hedius Lollianus Plautius Avitus were in charge (Leunissen 1989, 135). In that case we are compelled to agree with a local lapicid’s mistake in writing Laelianus instead of Lollianus, two names with a very close pronunciation and spelling often confounded.22 The mayor of the village bears two typical Roman names, Flavius Valerius. Both names are gentilices used as praenomen and nomen disclosing his peregrine origin (OPEL II 145-146; IV 144146; Solin, Salomies 1988, 80; 197). 22

See e.g. the famous case of Lollianus, the Gaulish usurper in Gauls in 268 (HA, Tyr. Tryg. 5. 1-8), called correctly by Eutrop. Brev. 9. 9. 1 Laelianus, on his real name C. Ulpius Cornelius Laelianus. 33

Halmyris II

11 Fragment of altar; yellowish limestone; found in 1985 in Ƒ C 1-3; dimensions: 17.5 cm x 15 x 12 cm. The letters are 6.5 cm in height (fig. 30). Date: 2nd century CE (?). Suceveanu, Zahariade 1986, 119 no. 10 fig. 2/8; Suceveanu, Zahariade, Topoleanu, Poenaru Bordea 2003, 118 no. 7.

l. 1: a small fragment of the bottom of the letter O. l. 2: four letters: C MAG;.of C only the upper right part is preserved; M+A in ligature [I(ovi) O(ptimo) M(aximo)] [c(ives) R(omani) c(onsistentes)] [vic] ͕ [class(icorum)] [cura(m) a]g(ente) ۨag (istro) 5 [--------------------------] [--------------------------] ‘To the best and greatest Jupiter, the Roman citizens residing in the village of the marines (have set this altar) through the care of the mayor (of the village) […]’. The stone belongs to the same series of altars mentioning “the village of the marines” in which through the care of a magister (mayor) the altar was set.

12 Fragment of altar; yellowish limestone; found in 1985 (Ƒ C 1-3); preserved dimensions: 22 x 13 x 4.5cm; the letters are 5 cm in height (fig. 31). Four letters on two lines are preserved. l. 1: O M; the left upper part of O falls into break of the stone; the right oblique bar of M, although in the break of the stone, is certain; l. 2: only the letter M, which is very likely, is preserved; the lower half of the letter falls into the break of the stone. Date: early 2nd century CE (?). [I(ovi) O(ptimo) M(aximo)] [c(ives) R?]oۨ[ani c(onsistentes)?] vic(o) class(icorum)?] [cura(m) agente-----?] ۨ [ag(istro)?] 5 [---------------------------] [---------------------------] To the best and the greatest Jupiter, the Roman citizens residing in the village of the marines (have set this altar) through the care of the mayor (of the village) [...] Usually, as noticed on the series of inscriptions mentioning the Roman citizens residing in vicus classicorum, cives Romani consistentes are rendered as C(ives) R(omani) C(onsistentes). There is

34

Inscriptions on stone only one case in which the abbreviation for the Roman citizens is recorded as ROM(ani) (cat. no. 7), which could also be the case of this altar.

13 Fragment of altar; yellowish limestone; found in 1982 (S I Ƒ 26). Dimensions: 11 x 9 x 4 cm. The right part of the letter M falls in the break of the stone. One fragmentary letter, M, is preserved (fig. 32). Date: 2nd century CE (?). Zahariade 2009, 120 no. 13.

[ I(ovi) O(ptimo) M(aximo)] [C(ives)R(omani) c(onsistentes)] [vic(o) class(icorum) cura]m [agente----------------------] c͕ 5 [mag(istro)---------------------] [----------------------------------] ‘To the best and the greatest Jupiter, the Roman citizens residing in the village of the marines (have set this altar) through the care of the mayor (of the village) [...]’.

14 Fragment of yellowish limestone; found in 1982 in S1Ƒ 24. Dimensions: 13 x 7 x 4 cm; traces of the letter M preserved in a fragmentary state; the left part of the letter falls in the break of the stone; the right part is only incompletely preserved; the stone indicates the same composition as those of other votive altars of ‘vicus classicorum’ type. The restoration is highly hypothetical (fig. 33). Date: 2nd century CE (?).

[ I(ovi) O(timo) M(aximo)] [C(ives)R(omani) c(onsistentes)] [vic(o) class(icorum] [cura(m) ag(ente----------] 5 [---------------]ۨ[ag(istro)] [----------------------------- ] ‘To the best and the greatest Jupiter, the Roman citizens residing in the village of the marines (have set this altar) through the care of the mayor (of the village) [...]’.

15 Fragment of altar; yellowish limestone; found in 1982 in S1Ƒ 22. Dimensions: 16 x 10 x 8 cm; the upper part of the letter C is preserved; the bottom part falls in the breaking; the stone indicates the same composition as those of other votive altars of ‘vicus classicorum’ type. The restoration is highly hypothetical (ICEM Tulcea) (fig. 34). Date: 2nd century CE (?).

35

Halmyris II [ I(ovi) O(timo) M(aximo)] C[(ives)R(omani) c(onsistentes)] [vic(o) class(icorum] [cura(m) ag(ente----------] 5 [-----------------mag(istro)] [-----------------------------] To the best and the greatest Jupiter, the Roman citizens residing in the village of the marines (have set this altar) through the care of the mayor (of the village) [...].

The number of small fragments could be supposedly part of the ‘vicus classicorum’ series of inscriptions. If so, the fragments from the five additional altars, infra cat. nos. 11-15, might be considered in the same sequence. The most significant documents in this series are cat. nos. 6- 10, with first hand information on religion, onomastic and administration. The years for cat. nos. 8-10 are specifically indicated through the name of the consuls: Cat no. 8: T. Statillius Severus and L. Alfidius Herennianus - 171; Cat. no. 9: C. Aufidius Victorinus and Ti. Claudius Severus Proculus - 200; Cat. no.10: L. Aurellius Commodus Pompeianus and Q. Hedius Lollianus Plautius Avitus: 209. The date for cat. nos. 6-7 and cat. nos. 11-15 covers in general the span of time between early 2nd and early 3rd century. Iuppiter Optimus Maximus is invoked without exception in this type of inscriptions. The name of the Emperor(s) appears in some other known cases in Scythia Minor (ISM III 83; V 134, 135; 141) although the dedications are much smaller in number than those to IOM. The invocation of IOM is most frequent. Unlike some other votive dedications of the same category found in Dobrudja, the Halmyris altars yield neither the names of the Emperors nor a more specific date (e.g. day and month; cf. ISM I 326). Cat. nos. 6 and cat. no. 7 have no consuls indicated in the text, which arose the suspicion of an earlier date (Suceveanu, Zahariade 1986, 111-112), although the lack of the consuls’ names does not imply automatically an early period.23 However, what might be suggested on the basis of some indirect evidence is that the community of the Roman citizens at Halmyris/Salmorus could have been indeed earlier than thought thus far. How early is difficult to assess. By mid 1st century, if not earlier, the interest of the Roman authorities for the mouths of the Danube was increasingly manifest. The Horothesia Laberii Maximi of 25 October 100 (ISM I 6768) (see commentary above), reveals the repeated issue of a series of documents by the previous governors who constantly reconfirmed the economic interests of Histria at the mouth of the Peuce (Sf. Gheorghe) branch of the great River. Classis Flavia Moesica played an important role in this area in the second half of the 1st century strategy of the Roman Empire. The Halmyris/Salmorus settlement situated next to the then mouth of the Peuce branch as a key installation in the area, as well as the early dates of discharge of soldiers (classici see below) from the river war fleet is a good ground to suggest the presence of a veterans’ and Roman citizens’ community in late 1st century.24 Many of the altars set by the cives Romani in Dobrudja mention usually two magistri of the vicus and sometimes its quaestor (ISM I and V passim). The Halmyris/ Salmorus votive altars record

23

ISM I 324: vicus Quintionis (139-161); ISM V 21: vicus Scenopesis (138-161). The increasing number of late 1st century military diplomas issued for Classis Flavia Moesica is good evidence for an intense activity of the war fleet on the Lower Danube in the Falvian and early Trajanic epochs: CIL XVI 37; 45 (92); Pferdehirt 2004, 20-21 no. 8 (99).

24

36

Inscriptions on stone invariably only one magister, without any other administrative personnel. The case is not unique. The vicus Ulmetum and vicus Vergobrittianus have also recorded only one magister each.25 Vicus classicorum is definitely a hapax legomenon in the Roman administrative terminology.26 The Halmyris vicus was conventionally a settlement of the discharged marines (classici) from the local squadron of the Danubian war fleet. The composition of the local garrison, structured on a combination of a legionary detachment and a navy squadron (Zahariade 2003, 89-90), places Halmyris/Salmorus among the classis forts type (Suceveanu, Zahariade 1986, 117; Zahariade 1991, 314; Zahariade 2003, 89-90). Vicus classicorum was therefore a vicus militaris or rather a vicus stationis classis as an administrative unit closely related to the auxiliary fort.27 The Halmyris/Salmorus votive altars record only the juridical term cives Romani (Kornemann 1901, 922-926; 1173-1180; de Ruggiero 19612; 1189-1200; Bounegru 1986, 59; 65-67; 69-71) labelled consistentes (Kornemann 1901, 922; de Ruggiero 19612, 620-623; Bounegru 1986, 61-62; Suceveanu, Zahariade 1986, 114)28 as inhabiting the vicus. The presence of classici in the vicus is suggested only by the term proper in Genitive Plural of those who conferred the name of the administrative unit. Classici were both active and discharged personnel from the navy, but Roman citizenship was granted to them only on discharge. Vicus classicorum would refer mainly to the discharged personnel from the navy. The specificity of the term, classicorum, meaning ‘of the classici’ or rather ‘belonging to the classici’ strongly suggests on one hand that there was a territorial unit outside the fort, and on the other that the cives Romani from this vicus were in great proportion the discharged personnel from the navy squadron together with their families, already granted the Roman citizenship. The additional term veterani in association with cives Romani consistentes as shown in other cases (ISM I 138; 324; 326-328; 330-332; V 154; CIL III 14442; Bounegru 1986 61-62; Avram 2007, 97-99) would have been futile in this case, as long as the vicus had a strong military profile and was ordained to be a place for the navy veterans. Allegedly, the presence of navy active soldiers in peace time, or rather their future families in the vicus can also be postulated, as shown by e.g. vicus navaliorum at Moguntiacum where the active ships’ builders lived.29 The territorial organization of the Halmyris/Salmorus civil settlement is poorly known as yet. Excavations remain still a desideratum. The vicus was presumably a separate administrative unit, but the existence of the canabae as distinct administrative component could be supposed. Canabae in the close vicinity of auxiliary forts are epigraphically attested (ISM I 67 l. 72-73-Dimum; AE 1957, 97-Abrittus; CIL XIII 1437010 = ILS 7111-Castra Regina). One might wonder whether or not the duality vicus-canabae could have been a juridical reality at Halmyris/Salmorus, too? The existence of a legionary detachment entailed also repeated discharge of the veterans. Some would have opted to remain at Halmyris/Salmorus. There is little but solid evidence on the legionary veterans who settled in the civil settlement. Valerius Longinus, the ex beneficiario consularis from the legion V Macedonica (cat. no. 18) remained in the area and was buried in the settlement’s cemetery, while Valerius Ponticus, very likely a military himself, the father of an active soldier 25 ISM V 62 (Ulmetum); 222 (Petra). See also the case at Aquincum (CIL III 3505), or Nauportus (CIL III 3777); see also one-magister-led vicus at DorobanĠu: vicus Hi[…] (ISM V 6), possibly dependent to the Capidava auxiliary fort. 26 Vici closely related to the naval activities: vicus navaliorum at Moguntiacum, an administrative unit connected with the arsenal of the classis Germanica (CIL XIII 11827=AE 1911, 227); vicani Portenses (ILS 7051=CIL XIII 3106; 7052=CIL XIII 3015; CIL XIII 3107), revealing the existence of a vicus Portensium, a section of civitas Namnetum inhabited by nautae and also by craftsmen as the inscriptions were dedicated to Deus Volkanus. 27 For the vici in Dobrudja in general: Bărbulescu 2001, 31-132; on the relation vici and cives Romani consistentes: Bounegru 1986, 59-73; Avram 2007, 91-103 and Supplementum epigraphicum (104-109); on the vici militares with discharged personnel from the Roman navy see: Weiß 2000, 279-285. 28 The term consistentes (Kornemann 1901, 922-926; de Ruggiero 19612, 622-630) refers to the cives Romani, temporarily present in the settlement. Ulp. Dig. V 1. 19. 2 states clearly that they do not have ius domicilii and cannot be assimilated with incolae which were the stable section of the population in a region. 29 For the explanation of the term navalia see: Lucan 3, 182: ‘sunt… navalia locas ubi naves stant’, but rather Isid. Orig. 14. 8. 38 who states: ‘navalia sunt loca ubi naves fabricantur’.

37

Halmyris II from the legion I Italica (cat. no. 26), settled around the fort and married a local woman, Valeria Nene. The question is where the legionary veterans who chose to settle at Halmyris/Salmorus lived after discharge. The one magister-led-vicus would suggest that the surface of the vicus was small. Even if cives Romani are recorded as consistentes in the vicus, the term classicorum is too precise to accept an additional presence of body of legionary veterans in the vicus. Usually the legionary veterans appear as residing in canabae developed around their legionary fortresses,30 but also in canabae near the auxiliary forts where legionary detachments were also billeted, as in the case at Dimum31 and Abrittus.32 Given the precise term with which the vicus at Halmyris/Salmorus was indicated, we might expect a duality vicus-canabae as two separate administrative units, where the classici granted with Roman citizenship after discharge and other cives Romani have settled, while the legionary personnel occupied the canabae area, as typical wording for this location in different regions of the Empire.

16 The middle part of a fragmentary plaque of white limestone; found in 1982 (S1Ƒ 26). Dimensions: 38 x 17 x 6 cm; the letters are 6-7 cm in height. The field of the inscription is slightly deepened and sided by a 2.5 cm and 4 cm wide double frame, without decoration. Four lines are preserved (ICEM Tulcea) (fig. 35). l. 1. Slight traces of an unidentifiable letter, followed by an S; l. 2. Very likely a G of which only the upper and the bottom part are preserved; l. 3. Possibly the right bottom part of an A l. 4. The right upper part of a V. Date: 2nd century CE (?). Zahariade 2009, 121 no. 15.

[-----------] S [---------------G] [-------------] Ҥ [-------------] ৽

17 Milestone. Fragment of yellowish limestone; found in 1986 (Ƒ M 2); dimensions: 29.5 x 23.5 x 10 cm. The letters are 5 cm in height (fig. 36). The stone is broken vertically in two halves; only half of the circumference is preserved. Few letters are preserved on three lines. l.1: O C E; a chiseling between O and a supposed C; C is clumsily traced; E could also be read as F, but it seems unlikely. l.2: OB; O is carved in a leaf-like form and it is slightly attached to the upper part of the letter B. 30 ISM V 157: veterani et cives Romani consistentes ad canabas legionis V Macedonicae; CIL III 3505=ILS 2473: veterani et cives Romani consistentes ad legionem II Adiutricem. 31 The canabae of the auxiliary fort at Dimum were situated within its military territory, as stated in the Laberius Maximus’ boundary regulation of 25. 03. 100 (ISM I 67: a finibus canabarum Dimensium). Together with ala Solensium, which was the 2nd -3rd century auxiliary unit billeted here, legio I Italica dispatched an important detachment which produced bricks and tiles in its own workshop (CIL III 144641, 3-6; Shkorpil 1905, 460; Mitova-Dzonova 1978, 219; 1991, 10-15; Zahariade 1997, 73 no. 13; Ivanov 1997, 554-556). 32 In the 2nd -3rd century, Abrittus was garrisoned by a sizable detachment from legio XI Claudia together with cohors II Lucensium (Wagner 1938, 161-162; Ivanov 1955, 180; Zahariade 1997, 94 no. 132; Matei Popescu 2001-2002, 216). An inscription records: veterani et cives Romani et consistentes Abrito ad canabas Aelias (Ivanov 1980, 16).

38

Inscriptions on stone l.3: the letter N is asymmetrical. The stone is very much deteriorated; the reading of the text is extremely difficult (ICEM Tulcea). Date: 2nd -3rd century CE (?).

3. Tombstones (TITULI SEPVLCRALES) 18 Tombstone; fragmentary; sandstone; found in 1987 in the lower threshold of the phase II of the N gate (block no. 2). Dimensions: 68 x 90 x 20 cm; the slightly deepened inscription field is 58 cm wide; the letters are 5-6 cm in height; the letters are separated by hederae distinguentes; traces of lead minium on some letters. (ICEM Tulcea) (fig. 37). Date: 107-166/7 CE. Zahariade 1990, 262-263 no. 5 fig. 7; Suceveanu, Zahariade, Topoleanu, Poenaru Bordea 2003, 121-122 no. 15 fig. 54; AE 1991, 1386

[-----------------------------] [------------------------] [vi] x[(it) a۬[۬]͓s XXX͒͒ C(aius) Val(erius) Longinus ve‫(ܒ‬eranus) 5 ۜ[e]g(ionis) ‫ۧ ܣ‬ac(edonicae) ex ‫(ڪ‬eneficiario) [...] [c]ӑ(n)‫(܈‬ularis) [----------------------------] ‘[-----] lived 32 years, Caius Valerius Longinus, veteran as beneficiary of the consular (set this dedication) [....]’. 1.2: x on the left side certainly comes from vix(it); A + N in ligature; 1.5: M + A in ligature; 1.7: uncertain reading, letters erased; probably CON or COXI. Caius Valerius Longinus appears as veteranus holding previously the post of b(eneficiarius), as the letters on l. 8 would strongly suggest, likely of the legatus legionis V Macedonicae. The name Valerius Longinus is mentioned twice in the same laterculum legionis of 134 at Troesmis (ISM V 136 col II l. 22; VI 18). He could have well been either one of those individuals or quite a different one. Normally, if one of the Valerii Longini at Troesmis is our Longinus, the laterculum should have contained the indication ex beneficiario since the document mentions veterans. It is preferable then to consider Longinus at Halmyris as a third Valerius Longinus known in the legion. When settled as a veteran and Roman citizen, likely in the canabae near the Halmyris fort, Caius Valerius Longinus erected a monument in honor of an unknown person who died at 32. Longinus is an old 39

Halmyris II Italic name (Schulze 1991, 181; OPEL III 31; Solin, Salomies 1988, 353) usually employed as a cognomen, like in our case (Minkova 2000, 63), although it is used sometimes as a nomen gentile.

19 Tombstone; fragment (upper part); sandstone; found in 2005 underneath no. 33. Dimensions: 107 x 79 x 24 cm; the letters are 4, 5-5 cm in height. The letters D and M are 7 cm in height. Traces of mortar from the walling into the masonry are still visible at the bottom part of the inscription field. The stone was found broken in two. The left upper part was cut in order to be fitted in the new structure. The preserved field of inscription is 70 x 57 cm and 6 cm deepened. On the right side there is a Corinthic style, double drummed column, rectangular in profile, with stylized leaves, roughly chiselled with irregular incisions (ICEM Tulcea) (fig. 38). Date: first half of the 2nd century CE. Zahariade 2009, 117-118 no. 6 pl. II fig. 6.

D(is) M(anibus) M(arcus) Ulp(ius) Marcellinus pos(uit) sibi et Cl(audiae) Bersil5 le b(ene) m(erenti) coniu g͓ et natis [---------] ‘To the Gods Manes. Marcus Ulpius Marcellinus set (this tombstone) to himself and to Claudia Bersille, to the wife (who) well deserve (that) and to those born (i. e. children)[...]’ Marcellinus had tria nomina, typical for a Roman citizen. He himself set the tombstone (sibi posuit). He received the praenomen and imperial gentilice, Marcus Ulpius, during Trajan’s reign. This is the only case of a Marcus Ulpius known thus far at Halmyris. That would entail an early date of the inscription, during or shortly after Trajan’s reign. He might have been either an active soldier, likely in the legionary detachment of V Macedonica from Troesmis, or a civilian (in the administrative service), although there is no clear indication for any of these positions. It seems unlikely that he had been discharged when the inscription was set otherwise he would have had indicated the common formula militavit. As a cognomen, Marcellinus is diminutive from Marcellus, but it is not a common occurrence in the first two centuries A.D and is rare, although not exceptional.33 Names ending in the suffixes -inus, anus become increasingly numerous in later periods (Kajanto 1963, 173; Alföldy 1969, 236). The cognomina derive from the parental ones with the addition of the suffix, which in the long run increased the number of extended forms. Marcellus, as widely spread in early period, becomes Marcellinus as a more common personal name in a later epoch (Dean 1916, 36-38; Kajanto 1982, 31-39; 167-169; OPEL III 53; Solin, Salomies 1988, 357). Claudia Bersille was a native woman of peregrine origin of some condition, inheriting the imperial gentilice from his grandfather who might have taken it during Claudius’ or Nero’s reigns. The feminine gentilice Claudia is well documented in Moesia Inferior and elsewhere. Bersille seems very likely a hapax in the long list of Thracian feminine PN. Dechev’s list could not produce any example of an identical or similar feminine PN. A Berilo, masc. PN, appears in an album of the 33

Minkova 2000, 202. Marcellinus as a cognomen is used to some extent only since late 2nd and in the 3rd century, as shown by examples from Upper Moesia (IMS I 79; II 53, 60, 141), Dalmatia (ILIug 1594, 2152, 14672075), and Dacia (IDR II 135; III/3, 243). The only known Marcellinus in Lower Moesia dates from the 4th century (ILB 146).

40

Inscriptions on stone sodalicii of Bacchus from Nedan, in Moesia Inferior (ILB 438 II/13). The Indo-European radical behr- ‘to carry’, ‘to bear’, ‘to cut’, ‘to split’, ‘to cleave’ (Russu 1967, 132) is widespread and used in dozens of combinations to form place names (Dechev 1976, 51-55; Vlahov 1976, 64). The ending –sille is worth noting. Sile is a feminine name in itself, like in an inscription in Koinaré: […] senecta mea Crescentilla socra tua et Sile coniux tua Bitilla curavit filias[…] (ILB 153).34 On l. 6, the word natis designates the children of the couple resulted from the marriage.

20 Tombstone; yellowish limestone; found cut in two fragments; no. 1 was discovered in 1986, walled in the upper row of the threshold (block 2); no. 2 was found in 1985 in the debris of the North gate (Ƒ C 2); overall dimensions: 171 x 147 x 17 cm; the slightly deepened field of the inscription is 41cm wide; big, vertical, carefully engraved letters, 6-8 cm in height. The two fragments fit perfectly. The fragment no. 2 shows that the monument was cut in two pieces, both serving simultaneously and not successively as building material for the reconstruction (second phase) of the northern gate. The fragment no. 2, which forms the upper part of the gravestone, shows the scene of the funerary banquet (coena funebris). The deceased lies on his left side, on a kliné, with a thick mattress leaning against a high, S-shaped, back curved side at the upper extremity of the piece of furniture. The legs of the kliné have protuberances; the deceased lies with his head propped directly on the upper edge of the bed. He is leaning on a little pillow set under his left elbow. His right hand is bent at right angle, touching the mattress. The legs are stretched out at full length; the feet are not covered. The table (mensa tripes) is of round shape with straight legs ending in hooves; fruits on the table (probably apples). Two personages appear on both sides of the mortuary bed; on the right side a woman, half turned to the onlooker, seated on a kathedra with a high flipside, slightly curved at the upper extremity; her legs rest on a rectangular stool which is set at the bottom of the kathedra; a man in a static attitude, probably the slave of the deceased, stands dressed in a chiton on the left side. The lower register includes the inscription field (ICEM Tulcea inv. no. 41344) (fig. 45-46). Date: mid 2nd century CE. Zahariade1990, 260-261 no. 3 fig. 5; Suceveanu, Zahariade, Topoleanu, Poenaru Bordea 2003, 120 no. 13; Conrad 2004, 182 no. 214 pl. 95, 1); AE 1991, 1384.

D(is) M(anibus) ̨eۜ(ius) Valens v͓[x(it)] an(nis) XLV ́[t] 5 Ael(ius) Sab[i]nus fil(ius) e[t-----] vix (it) an(nis) VII[I ?] t (itulum) p(osuit) Ael(ius) V̩ۜ(ens?) ‫([ ܒ́ܤ‬eranus?)------] 10 [----------------------] ‘To the Gods Manes. Aelius Valens, lived 40 years, and Aelius Sabinus, the son, lived 8 years, Aelius Valens, veteran, (set this inscription)’.

34

On the name see Minkova 2000, 253; Vlahov 1963, 221-273; Velkova 1974, 55-77.

41

Halmyris II The letters E (l. 2) and I (l.6) are 2 cm in height; E (l.8) is 4 cm in height; l.6: ET is wrongly placed by the lapicid; l. 7: it is enough space for the numeral VIII; l. 8: V + A in ligature. The gentilice Aelius in association with the two cognomina, Valens and Sabinus is most frequent combination (Dean 1916, 54-55; OPEL IV 26-28; 139-140; Solin, Salomies 1988, 417). Valens is particularly adopted cognomen in the Danubian provinces among the Thracian speaking population (Minkova 2000, 269-270). Sabinus, as an old Italic (Etruscan) name (Schulze 1991, 222-223) is highly frequent in mid Italy and Celtic speaking provinces (Alföldy 1969, 116; Minkova 2000, 82). In Lower Moesia it has a certain extension (Minkova 2002, 82). The tombstone, t(itulum), is set by Aelius Valens for another Aelius Valens who died aged 45 and his son Aelius Sabinus, deceased at 8. The departed, Aelius Valens seems to have been in the military and he was rather a veteran when he died, as tombstones decorated with the scene of a funerary banquet were frequently dedicated to this category (Covaceff 1985, 175). Sabinus was his son. The dedicant, Aelius Valens, held a posture of either the father (?)(of Aelius Valens) and grandfather (?) (of Aelius Sabinus) or comrade-in-arms of the first and in the same time his heir. Our restitution in l.9, vet [eranus], although uncertain, seems very likely, as the breaking of the slab in this very place bears traces of a V, the upper part of E, and the enough readable horizontal dash of a T. They are followed by two or three more letters, which are not distinguishable. Stemmata (proposal) Aelius Valens (veteranus)----? | Aelius Valens---? | Aelius Sabinus

21 Tombstone; cherty sandstone; found in 1987; set in the lower level of the threshold of the phase II of the N gate (block no. 3). Dimensions: 231 x 90 x 20 cm; the deepened and framed inscription field is 135 x 64 cm; the letters are 5 - 6 cm in height; the big, artless and sometimes asymmetrical letters contain significant lead minium traces. The lower left part of the block was cut in order to fit into the right side of the gate threshold. The monument has two registers: the upper one is divided into three fields by two lateral oblique bars, creating a triangular fronton with ornaments of acanthus branches on both sides. Inside the triangle a corona and a pine fruit above it. A tenia binds the crown at its base. Two symmetrical hedera branches spring from the upper side of the crown. The lower part of the block is decorated with a krateros with two vine branches with leaves and grape clusters winding along the frame and ending in a coil under the tenia of the crown (ICEM Tulcea) (fig 51- 52). Date: mid 2nd century CE. Zahariade 1990, 264 no. 7 fig. 9; Suceveanu, Zahariade, Topoleanu, Poenaru Bordea 2003, 123 no. 17 fig. 56; Conrad 2004, 181-182 no. 212 pl. 67, 5; AE 1991, 1388.

D(is) M(anibus) Fl(aviae) Titiae matri posuit Ael(ius) Titianus filiu(s) 42

Inscriptions on stone 5 bene merenti vixit an(nis) LX ‘To the Gods Manes. To Flavia Titia, mother, (who) lived 60, Aelius Titianus, son, has set (this), for she deserved that well’. 1.4: A + N + V in ligature; 1.6: A + N in ligature; letter A in lines 2, 4, 6 does not have the horizontal bar. Aelius Titianus, the son, set a tombstone in honor of his mother, Flavia Titia, who died at the age of sixty. Titius, fem. Titia, are of old Roman origin (Schulze 1991, 425). Titius with a later variant Titianus occurs rather frequent in Lower Moesia and elsewhere (OPEL IV 123-124; Solin, Salomies 1988, 187, 412; Minkova 2000, 89). Both have the gentilice rendered as praenomen which discloses their peregrine origin. The parents of Flavia Titia could have received the citizenship in Flavian times, while her son adopted the Imperial gentilice during Hadrian or Antoninus Pius. The wording of the text denotes bad knowledge of the Latin syntax, either of the dedicator or of the lapicid. The text must have had run correctly as: D(is) M(anibus), Fl(aviae) Titiae matri, vixit an(nis) LX, Ael(ius) Titianus, filiu(s), bene merenti posuit.

22 Tombstone; yellowish limestone; broken in two parts; found in 1985 in the debris between the towers of the North gate (Ƒ C 2). Dimensions: 121 x 85 x 17 cm; the inscription field (85 x 47 cm) is slightly deepened; the field is hemmed in by a simple, non-decorated 8 cm wide border; the letters are 4–6 cm in height with slight traces of read lead minium; large, rather clumsy, asymmetrical letters (ICEM Tulcea) (fig. 60). l. 2: T from ET is missing. l. 4: A + N in ligature. Date: second half of the 2nd century CE. Zahariade 1990, 259-260 no. 1 fig. 3; Suceveanu, Zahariade, Topoleanu, Poenaru Bordea 2003, 119-120 no. 11 fig. 51; Conrad 2004, 182 no. 213 pl. 124, 6; AE 1991, 1382.

D(is) M(anibus) e(t) Memori(ae) T(itus) Fl(avius) Secundus vixit an5 nis L Aelia Ben‫܈ڲ‬i m̩rito suo pientissimo ei sibi vivo 10 suo posuit ‘To the Gods Manes and Memory. Titus Flavius Secundus lived 50 years, Aelia Bendsi, set (this tombstone) for her most pious husband and for herself while still alive’. Dies Manes were often associated with Memoria.35 Aelia Bendsi’s husband displays tria nomina 35

e. g. ISM, V 181 (Troesmis); IDR, III/3, 179 (Micia); 358 (Ampelum). Many inscriptions indicate only Memoria.

43

Halmyris II which means that he held Roman citizenship. Titii Flavii as praenomen and nomen gentile originates in the Flavian epoch when a considerable number of people received citizenship. Flavii Secundi are rather frequent in the Roman Empire and particularly in the Danubian and African provinces (Alföldy 1969, 38-40; Minkova 2000, 51; OPEL II 145-146; IV 60-61; Solin, Salomies 1988, 80, 399). Another Flavius Secundus appears at Halmyris in the inscription cat. no. 25, presumably one and the same individual, although a dissociation of the two could also be acceptable. Tria nomina also suggest that Secundus could have been a veteran of the legionary detachment billeted at Halmyris. Aelia Bendsi was a Thracian woman of peregrine origin who must have received Roman citizenship once she married Titus Flavius Secundus probably during Hadrian’s or Antoninus Pius’ reign. Bendsi is a variant of the widespread theophoric Bendis the fem. deity worshipped in Thrace, at Athens, and in Bithynia in a Thracian milieu. The Godess Bendis was sometimes identified with Artemis or Hekate in the Greek pantheon.36 It was used exclusively as a Thracian fem. PN (Zgusta 1955, 279-280 no. 557; Dechev 1976, 50-51;): Bendi Paibis (filiae) uxori at Philippi (Macedonia)(Dechev 1976, 50); Sises Mucasenis et Bendi marita at Beshte (Bulgaria) (CIL III 6137); ɎȜ(ĮuȓĮ) BȑȞįȚȢ (Doganovo, Bulgaria) (Kazarov 1938, 257),37 BȑȞįȚȢ ZİíʌĮįȠȢ (Picard 1921, 171 no. 33); BȑȞįȚȢ (Thasos) (Picard 1921, 173 no. 46); BȑȞȗİȚ șȣȖȐIJȘȡ MȠȣțĮʌȩȡİwȢ at Panticapaeum (IOSPE II 223; Zgusta 1955, 279-280 no. 557; Tomaschek 1980 II 2, 12; Cojocaru 1997, 44 no. 8). A Bendis was the daughter of a marine, C. Iulius Bithus, from Philippopolis (RMD 105) discharged in 160. The form Bendi-Bendis is the most frequent. If the PN was spelled correctly, Bendsi, it could be a hapax. The pronunciation must have been presumably Bentsi that would bring the name nearer to the known form ǺȑȞȗİȚȢ, with ȗ pronounced dz in the Thracian-Getae local linguistic environment (Russu 1967, 150); a mistake of the engraver is possible, although less probable.

23 Tombstone; fragmentary; dark yellowish limestone; broken in two pieces; found in 1934 (or before ?); dimensions: 110 x 82 x 10 cm; the inscription field is slightly deepened and bordered by a frame on which the vine stalk with leaves and cluster is represented; the letters are 5.5 cm in height (formerly at the Elementary School in Murighiol, present day location unknown, possibly lost) (fig. 61). Date: mid 2nd century CE. Bujor 1954, 599-601 fig. 1; Zahariade 1990, 264 no. 8; AE 1991, 1389.

[D(is) M(anibus)] F [l(avius)? Vale ?] rius vixi[t] annos LXX 5 Fl(avia) Primitiva co(n)iux bene merito co(n)[iu] gi pos[uit...] l(ocus)[m(onumenti) in f(ronte) p(edes)?] 36

Gocheva 1978, 397-404; Popov 1976, 289-303. As a fem. PN it is recorded as Bendina in an inscription from Breshte (ILB 176); see also: ǺȑȞȗȘȢ- ǺȑȞȗİȚȢ (SEG 37, 1804); ǺȑȞȗȘȢ (SEG 42, 580 c. 78); ǺİȞįȓȢ (SEG 37, 1796); ǺİȞįȚįȫȡĮ (SEG 37, 1804; 45, 227). See also some corrections at Dana 2006, 131of a wrongly read name, ǺȠȞįȚȢ, by Gocheva 1989, 114. 37

44

Inscriptions on stone ‘To the Gods Manes. Flavius Valerius lived 70 years, Primitiva, wife, have set (that) to the husband (because) he well deserved that, the place of the monument across the front (....) feet’. 1.1: letter L is followed by a vertical rod and the lower part of another vertical one; 1.4: X from LXX falls in the broken part of the slab but it preserves the initial printing. 1.4: L appears overturned; 1.5: two letters, maybe F + L, are probably in ligature, which would result in FL(avia); 1.6-7: the form with bene merito instead of bene merenti is not very common and refers directly to Primitiva's husband; 1.7-8: the only possible reading is co(n)[iu]gi as a repetition of the word mentioned above (l. 6). The reading of the last line as proposed by the author remains, in any case, entirely hypothetical. The name of the Primitiva’s husband ended in […]rius and must have been a [Vale]rius a very common gentilice used mostly as cognomen. Flavia Primitiva betrays her peregrine origin. At the date of the setting of the gravestone she could have acquired already the Roman citizenship due to her old husband who presumably received Roman citizenship (he or his father) during the Flavian times. The restoration of the acronym locus monumenti in fronte pedes is hypothetical.

24 Tombstone; yellow limestone; found in 2004 walled in the pavement of the corridor, on the edge of the ‘secret well’ between the northern bastion and the fort wall. The stone was cut at the lower part to fit in the new structure. Dimensions: 74 x 94 x 17 cm. The inscription field: 76 x 40 cm; the letters are 2-5 cm in height. The words are separated by hederae distinguentes. The field of inscription is framed by a decoration of vine sticks, leaves, and grapes which is visible only on the right side; the left side is almost completely deteriorated (on site, re-walled in the ‘secret well’) (fig. 62). Date: mid 2nd century CE. Zahariade 2009, 110 no. 3 pl. I fig. 3.

D(is) M(anibus) Aelius Sola vivo suo sibi po5 suit et Ael(ia)e Marci(a)e co(n)iugi pient(issimae) [---------------------] ‘To the Gods Manes. Aelius Sola while alive have set himself (this dedication) and for Aelia Marcia, most pious wife’. The letter O has different sizes: l. 2 and 4 (from SOLA and POSVIT) and 6 (COIVGI) are 2-3 cm; l. 3: A from SOLA is deteriorated but is easily identifiable. l.5: last E from AEL(I)E is 2cm in height; AELE, is hardly acceptable although not impossible. As it appears on the stone L+I seems likely in ligature. There was no place for an A in the last diphthong, so the lapicid preferred to render AE as E. 45

Halmyris II l. 6. MARCIE, with I included in the loop of C suffered the same process, with E instead of AE because of lack of space. Marci (a) e is the most likely restitution; coiux for co (n) iux is common wording. N+I, from coniugi, in ligature. Aelius Sola must have been a soldier discharged from the legionary vexillation or rather naval squadron stationed at Halmyris.38 Initially, Sola was of peregrine origin, but once he entered the Roman army he received the Roman citizenship either before (in case he was a legionary) or on discharge (in case he was a classicus) and acquired implicitly the imperial gentilice during the Antonine period. His wife, Aelia, could have also received the citizenship concomitantly through the well known juridical procedure. Aelius Sola dedicates the inscription to himself (sibi) and to his wife (coniugi), while he was still alive (vivo suo). It could be an indication that at the date of the setting of the inscription the two spouses had no children or heirs to take care of a proper burial after their death. Sola is a Thracian name, particularly Bessian (Katsarov 1924, 31-34; Tomaschek 1980, 43; Dechev 1976, 465-466; OPEL IV 86). It is recorded for the first time at Halmyris. Individuals bearing the name Sola appear frequently in a military environment, both in the auxiliary units and in the imperial navy. Meticus Solae, Bessus from ala I Asturum in Moesia Inferior (CIL XVI 45-Plovdiv) (99); Bithus Solae, also a Bessus from numerus Equitum Illyricorum in Dacia Inferior (RMD, 39 = IDR I 13-Palamarca) (13.02. 140). Sola Mucatri is a veteran from ala Tungrorum Frontoniana garrisoned in the 2nd century at Iliúua (CIL III 787). A Solas appear on a receipt for the squadron of Donatus of ala veterana Gallica from Egypt in 130 (P. Lond. II 48210; CPL 11410). A soldier in the praetorian navy from Misene bears a typical Roman name, C. Iulius Victor, certainly received on discharge, but he insists on making known his former Thracian name on the diploma, Sola Dini (CIL X 3593: C. Iulius Victor qui et Sola Dini). It is difficult to decide whether or not Sola from Halmyris was initially recruited in Thrace and then dispatched to the Halmyris garrison. It seems more likely that he was recruited in the army from the local Bessian communities settled in Dobrudja since early 1st century CE (Zah, Suceveanu 1971, 567-578) numerous enough to allow conscription on a regular basis. Marcia is a common Latin name in the Lower Danubian lands (OPEL III 57; Minkova 2000, 202) and is already known at Halmyris (cat. no. 25). The gentilice Aelius/Aelia becomes more and more significant in number at Halmyris: Aelius Valens, Aelius Sabinus, Aelius Titianus, Aelia Bendsi (cat. nos. 20-22), Aelius Sola (cat. no. 24), Aelius (cat. no. 29). The increasing number of Aelii is a remarkable indication that the process of Romanization was in full swing in the north-eastern corner of Dobrudja in the Antonine period.

25 Tombstone; cherty sandstone; broken in four fragments; found in 1987 walled in the lower level of the threshold of the phase II of the N gate (block no. 1). Dimensions: 256 x 90 x 25 cm; the inscription field is slightly deepened: 130 x 45 cm; letters are between 6.0 and 8 cm in height; upright, elegant letters with straight symmetrical lines. The monument is in form of an aedicula; it contains two registers: a) the upper one has an arch, 70 cm in height, with a corona of immortality bounded at the bottom by a tenia in the middle. A dolphin is shown on the top right; the same representation must have existed on the left top corner as well, where the slab was cut in a right angle in order to form the left hinge of the northern gate. A palm of acanthus is placed in the 38

The presence of the Thracians, especially Bessians, in the Roman Imperial Navy is well documented (CIL XVI+ Supplementum, passim; RMD, passim).

46

Inscriptions on stone middle of the corona sided by three petalled rosettes. The inscription field is framed by two Corinthian style columns with bases in stairs (ICEM Tulcea) (fig. 63). Date: second half of the 2nd century CE. Zahariade1990, 262 no. 6 fig. 8; Suceveanu, Zahariade, Topoleanu, Poenaru Bordea 2003, 122 no. 16 fig. 55; Conrad 2004, 182-183 no. 216 pl. 127, 4; AE 1991, 1387.

D(is) M(anibus) Memmia Marcia vixit annis XVIIII 5 Mem(mius) Marcus pater eius et Fl(avius) Martinus maritus eius et 10 Fl(avius) Secundus d(octor?) eius coniugi p(ientissimae) p(osuerunt) ‘To the Gods Manes. Memmia Marcia, lived 19 years, Memmius Marcus, her father, and Flavius Martinus, her husband, and Flavius Secundus, her teacher(?), to the most pious wife, have set this’. 1.2: A + M + A in ligature; 1.7: E + T and M + A in ligature; 1.9: E + T in ligature; dots between words on l. 7, 9, 10, 11, 12. A far off branch of the famous old Italic family of Memmii (Groag-Fluß 1932, 602-637: s.v. Memmius; 637-638 s.v. Memmia; Schulze 1991, 424) lived at Halmyris/Salmorus. The gentilice is widely spread (OPEL III 75; 116). In Lower Moesia it is recorded at Novae and Ratiaria in 2nd and 3rd century context.39 Judging from the general appearance of the monument, it seems to have belonged to the local aristocracy. The text raises no reading difficulties. The family kinship can be easily traced. Memmius Marcus (father) - ? | Memmia Marcia (daughter)- Flavius Martinus (husband) Memmia Marcia died at 19 and the monument was set by his father together with her husband, Flavius Martinus as close relatives. The Memmii from Halmyris/Salmorus had Roman citizenship, although the praenomen is not mentioned as it tends to disappear by late 2nd and early 3rd century. Martinus is recorded second time at Halmyris (cat. no. 27).

39

For Memmii in Moesia see: Minkova 2000, 67-68; ILB 270 (Novae): Quintus Memmius (2nd century CE); Gerov, 1952-1953, 214 (Ratiaria): C. Memmius Proculus iunior and C. Iulius Memmius Proculus dec(urio) col(oniae) Rat(iarense) (late 2nd – early 3rd century CE); CIL III 6308=IMS II 63 (Viminacium): C. Memm[ius] Cyri[a]cus (first half of the 1st century CE); ILIug 2249 (Salona): […] Felix vibus!/[…]t et Memmi/[…]ae conpari suae.

47

Halmyris II A Flavius Secundus who joined the father and husband in setting the tombstone is recorded as D eius, hence the D of Memmia Marcia. A Titus Flavius Secundus appear in the inscription cat. no. 22 as the Aelia Bendsi’s husband. The individual could have been one and the same person given that both names appear in the same area and roughly at the same date; however, two different persons could also be acceptable. The abbreviation D for his position in relation with Memmia Marcia is rather puzzling, but the position of Secundus in the family must have been of some importance. D could either stand for d(ispensator), manager of the goods of Memmia Marcia or, which is more plausible, d(octor), master of letters, teacher.40 He could also have been a d(omesticus), meaning ‘member of the family, client, friend’, which would justify that he was expressly mentioned in the inscription together with the other members of the Memmii family (Cagnat 1914, 421; see also http://www.case.edu/artsci/clsc/asgle/abbrev/latin/ letter D).

26 Tombstone; limestone; broken into four fragments; found in 1987 walled in the uper threshold of the phase II of N gate (block no. 3). Dimensions: 222 x 82 x 13 cm; the inscription field is slightly deepened: 77 x 43 cm; the letters are 4-5 cm in height; the writing is careful and well organized; several hederae distinguentes but no ornamental motifs (The National Museum of Military History, inv. no. 53160) (fig. 67-68). Date: late 2nd - early 3rd century CE. Zahariade1990, 261 no. 4 fig. 6=Suceveanu, Zahariade, Topoleanu, Poenaru Bordea 2003, 121 no. 14 fig. 53; AE 1991, 1385.

D(is) M(anibus) Val(erio) Pontico et Val(eriae) Nene parentibus b(ene) merenti(bus) 5 Val(erius) Valens filius mil(es) lẹg(ionis) I Ital(icae) posuit ‘To the Gods Manes. To Valerius Valens and Valeria Nene, parents, because they well deserve it. Valerius Valens, son; soldier in the legion I Italica, has set (this altar)’. 1.2: N + T, V + A + L in ligature; 1.3: N + F in a double ligature; N + T in ligature; 1.4: N + T + I in ligature; 1.5: V + A in ligature; the letter A in lines 1-5 have an oblique dash. Ponticus is a Greek PN (Pape, Benseler 1911, 123-1234) widely used as a cognomen in the Roman onomastics; it is rather common for the Balkan-Danubian and Micro-Asiatic provinces (OPEL III 152-153). A Iulius Ponticus appears in 134 on the laterculum of legio V Macedonica at Troesmis (ISM V, IX 3; VI 15). The name occurs no less than four times in another Troesmis inscription dated in 106-168 mentioning various members of a family of military men originating from Amastris (Bithynia) (veterans and active personnel in the legion) (ISM V 186). The combination gentilice-cognomen Valerius Valens (OPEL IV 144-146; Solin, Salomies 1988, 197) is extensively spread in the Roman Empire, especially in the Balkan-Danubian provinces where it became a common place. Had Valerius Ponticus, the father, any connection with the army,

40 A similar interpretation is given to the letter D on an inscription of Nemausus (Nîmes), ILS 5087: Tr. / Q. Vettio Gracili / cor. trium / annorum XXV / natione Hispan. / donavit L. Sestius / Latinus d(octor).

48

Inscriptions on stone Valerius Valens, soldier in legio I Italica, who dedicated the inscription to his parents, would have inherited the military traditions in the family. Nene, as a fem. PN, is rare in this very form (OPEL III 97); it is mentioned in two inscriptions at Sacidava and Chomakovtsi (Gostar 1964, 89-90; Aricescu 1973, 112-113; IGLR, 188); variants like ȃȐȞĮ/ ȃȐȞȞĮ (Phrygia, Lycia, Pisidia, Cilicia, Isauria) Nana, Nanea, ȃȐȞĮȢ (fem. in Phrygia, Cilicia) ȃȒȞĮȢ are somewhat frequent.41 A NȒȞȘȢ, as a familiar fem. appellative, is recorded near Nicopolis ad Istrum (IGB II 687); fem. PN as Nina, Ninna, Ninnita, martyrs in Thessalonica, Byzantium, and Noviodunum (Dechev 1976, 231). A composite NİȚȞȓıȠȢ is known as a masculine name at Resovo in Macedonia (Dechev 1976, 238). Nonna was a martyr woman in Nicomedia (Dechev 1976, 332). Fl(avia) Nona appears on a first third of the 2nd century fragment of a votive altar in Tomis.42 Nene as PN is Phrygian of Thracian tinge in Asia Minor.43 It was used mostly as a nickname, as shown in an inscription near Nicopolis ad Istrum: ǹȪȡȘȜȓĮ ȈĮȕȓȞĮ Ȓ țĮ੿ ȃȘȞȘȢ. The families of the veterans, active soldiers, and NCOs of the legion V Macedonica originating from Asia Minor and settled at Troesmis (ISM V 184, 186, 192) shortly after the discharge, as well as the individuals of the same origin mentioned at Sacidava, Tomis (see above), plead for sizable communities from Phrygia and/or Bithynia in eastern Lower Moesia (Barnea 1972, 251-256). The setting of a tombstone by a soldier serving in legio I Italica at Halmyris, a fortress under the military competence of the Troesmis legionary centre between 107 and167, would make sense only after legio V Macedonica was dispatched to Dacia in about 167 (DoruĠiu-Boiliă 1972, 56-59; Aricescu 19771, 179-190; 19772, 41-44).

27 Tombstone; yellowish limestone; broken at the lower part; found in 1985 (Ƒ C 2, in the rubble between the towers, outside the line of the threshold). Dimensions: 103 x 101 x 15 cm; the inscription field, slightly deepened, is 68 cm long; the letters are 5 - 8 cm in height; upright, accurately engraved letters; well spaced although a slightly asymmetrical writing; the ornament on the left side of the frame shows the traditional vine with leaves and grapes clusters (ICEM Tulcea inv. no. 41343) (fig. 69-70). Date: second half of the 2nd century CE. Zahariade 1990, 260 no. 2 fig. 4; Zahariade, Suceveanu, Topoleanu, Poenaru Bordea 2003, 120 no. 12 fig. 52; Conrad 2004, 183 no. 217 pl. 124, 2; AE 1991, 1382.

D(is) M(anibus) Claudius Martinus vixit ann͓[s] XX 5 Claudius Clemens pa‫(ܒ‬er) [fil]͓o pient(issimo) ‘To the Gods Manes. Claudius Martinus lived 20 years. Claudius Clemens, father, set (this tombstone) to his most pious son’. 41 Dechev 1976, 327, also NȐȞȦ, NȐȞĮȢ (Kurilovo); see also: ȃȑȞĮ (SEG 37, 1211; 40, 1175); ȃȑȞȞȚȢ (SEG 37 1294 A 40 ; 41, 1418); ȃȑȞȚIJȠȢ (SEG 45, 1796); Zgusta 1955, 302-303 no. 601 reviews the incidence of the PN in different regions of Asia Minor (Sundwall 1913, 165-166). 42 ISM II, 160 (with the bibliography); the term dumus in the Latin transcription of the Greek įȠȪȝȠȢ, as associated with a PN, is of Thraco-Phrygian origin. 43 Dechev 1976, 327; for more detailed discussions see: Holder II, 1897, 759; Kretschmer 1896, 343-344; Sundwall 1913, 170; Zgusta 1964, 357 no. 1024(1-4): 359, no. 1035(1).

49

Halmyris II 1.2 and 3: S is slightly spaced from the remainder of the names; 1.6: under the ringlet of P an oblique stroke slightly traced. The reading of an R is most unlikely. Martinus as PN is common in Roman onomastics (OPEL III 61; Solin, Salomies 1988, 359, 56). Initially a gentilice, it turned into a derivation of a theophoric cognomen (Mars)(Kajanto 1982, 55). Martinus was used more frequently in the Celtic speaking provinces. It appears several times in Lower Moesia (Minkova 2000, 205-206). An Ulpius Martinus is mentioned in 244-246 among the dedicators of an altar set for Philip the Arab at Cius (Gârliciu) (ISM V 124). The inscription (cat. no. 25) records a Flavius Martinus at Halmyris. Claudius Martinus was the son of Claudius Clemens (OPEL II 63; III 60-62; Solin, Salomies 1988, 315, 316). Both bear two names instead of three, with the gentilice as praenomen and the cognomen as nomen. Possibly initially of peregrine origin, both seem to have had Roman citizenship when the inscription was set; they could have been involved in the local military service.

28 Tombstone; sandstone; found in 1865 in the DunavăĠu de Jos fort, reused as building material. Dimensions: 180 x 70 x 19 cm; the letters are 3.0-4 cm in height. The stone is broken in two. The monument is divided in two registers: an arched niche on the top of the stone and a rectangular field underneath. The field of inscription covers both registers. l. 2: the first V is almost cursive; l.5: the letter V is the same as the one in l. 2; l. 11: the letters GI seems to stand for the figure VI; l. 16: the letter L is almost cursive. The writing is low quality, specific to a later period (MNA inv. no. L 167) (fig. 71). Date: 4th century CE. Tocilescu 1896, 91-92 no. 34; CIL III 13739; Popescu 1975, 179; IGLR 168; Suceveanu, Zahariade, Topoleanu, Poenaru Bordea 2003, 123-124 no. 19 fig.57.

Artemidora coniux cum filio suo et filia sua Viventia patri eo5 rum titulum posuerunt D(is) M(anibus) Memoria Nepotiani prin10 cipalis vixit annis XXXGI. Victor fil(ius) vix(it) an(nis) II, Iuli(a)na filia v(ixit) an(nis) III, Heraclius fra(ter) 15 vixit an(nis) III, Vitalis frat(er) vix(it) annis V valete lectores

50

Inscriptions on stone ‘Artemidora, wife, together with her son and her daughter, Viventia, set this epitaph (titulum) to their father. To the Gods Manes in the memory of Nepotianus, principalis, who lived 37 years. Victor, the son who lived two years, Iuliana, the daughter, who lived 3 years, Heraclius, the brother, who lived 3 years, Vitalis, the brother, who lived 5 years, those who read this, be healthy’. There are seven PN recorded in the inscription: Artemidora, Viventia, Nepotianus, Victor, Iuliana, Heraclius, and Vitalis and a son (filius) with unspecified name:. It could be that there was a family funerary chamber in which the members had been interred. The age of the children, two, three and five years, as well as their interment together would suggest a sudden death, either as a result of an epidemic disease or some other violent event. Viventia, her mother Artemidora and her little brother, probably too little to be mentioned by name, were the only ones from the family who survived. Artemidora (’Aρτεμιδώρα)44 and Heraclius (‘Hρακλ±ς) are Greek PN (Pape, Benseler 1911, 147; LPGN I, II, IIA. s.v; Hornblower, Matthews 2000, 58, 59, 66, 136; OPEL I1 177; II277). Heraclius is also recorded at Halmyris/Salmorus under a slightly corrupted form: (H)Aracla (no. 38). The other PNs are Roman in origin. Viventia is commonly a PN of later date (Kajanto 1997, 107; OPEL IV 178). It seems rare in the Balkan provinces (ILIug 2369, Salona). Nepotianus, Artemidora’s husband, was a principalis probably in the administrative service at Halmyris/Salmorus, or in the army. The PN is also later in date (OPEL III 98; Solin, Salomies 1988, 363). It appears at Junuschilar, in Thrace, where a circitor bore this name (CIL III 12444; Minkova 2000, 219). The PN is more frequent in western provinces (Alföldy 1969, 251). Whether he died together with his children or on other occasion is not known. However, the family tree can be restored rather easily at the date when the epitaph was erected: Nepotianus (36) – Artemidora | ? (son) ; Viventia; Vitalis (5); Heraclius (3); Iuliana (3); Victor (2)

29 Tombstone; fragmentary; sandstone; found in 1985. Dimensions: 78 x 63 x 7 cm; the letters are 8 cm in height. The stone seems to have been cut in four. It served as a support for the base of a column in Edifice 1 of the fort. The preserved fragment is the upper right quarter of the entire tombstone. Its right part is strongly eroded. It was used as a base for the drum of a column in Domus 1 area. Six lines are preserved: l.1: only the letter D is preserved. It was certainly followed by M which disappeared in the cutting. l.2: P is slightly destroyed to its upper right part; P+I in ligature; an R, as the last preserved letter of the line is clearly readable. l.3: IMI; the right half of the M is slightly eroded. The reading of the group IMI leaves no doubts; l.4: ANN. The right oblique line of the A is longer than the rest of the letter. l.5: AELIV. l.6: RATIA. The horizontal bar of the T is not completely engraved. Only the right half is visible (ICEM Tulcea inv. no.48666) (fig. 72-73). Date: mid/second half of the 2nd century CE. Zahariade 2009, 118-119 no. 8 fig. 7; cf. Suceveanu, Zahariade, Topoleanu, Poenaru Bordea 2003, 70 fig. 34 foto in situ) 44

The name appears in Dacia Superior (IDR III/1, 161) and Lower Moesia (CIL III 13739) in an earlier period.

51

Halmyris II

D(is) [M(anibus)] Papir[ius ?---------] imi [---vix(it)----- ] ann[is-------------- ] 5 Aeliu[s------------- ] Rati̩[ria?--------- ] Papirius is most likely to be restored on l.2. The name is of old Italic origin (Schulze 1991, 86, 131) and frequent especially in mid and south Italy (Mocsy 1970, 214; OPEL III 123; Solin, Salomies 1988, 137). A Papirius Mes[ius (?)] is recorded on the Troesmis legionary laterculum of 134 (ISM V 137 VII 3). Another Papirius Valens, a tubicen in the legion I Italica, is recorded on a second half of the 2nd century CE inscription at Lom (CIL III 14409; AE 1902, 130; Alexandrescu 2010, 250 no. 28; cf. infra cat. no. 6). The PN appears also in the Greek onomastics (Pape, Benseler 1911, 1129-1130; cf. cat. no. 6). l. 2: IMI could come from a cognomen e.g. [Pr]imi[tivus], or [Max]imi[nus]; l. 6 poses a problem of reading; after R comes either A or N. If we accept RATIA that refers to the well-known colonia in Moesia Superior, RATIARIA; alternatively a group of letters such as ...] RNIA, would suggest either a fem. cognomen e.g. [Calpu] rnia, or masc. correspondent [Calpu]rnia[nus]. However, the second letter after R is rather an A with the exact the same characteristics as A from AELIV[s…] on l. 5. The reading RATIA[RIA] is in that case preferable. If so, it might be that Aelius on this inscription could have originated from Ratiaria, a homeland well represented in other collective inscriptions (e.g. ISM II 53).

30 Tombstone; fragmentary; yellow limestone; found in 2002 walled in the structure of the N bastion of the western gate. Dimensions: 55 x 45 x 18 cm; the letters are 8-10 cm in height. The stone is badly damaged on the right side and nothing is preserved from the common floral motif (vine rod, grapes and leaves), although the dividing line between the field of inscription and the border indicate an initial intention to create decoration. Three lines are preserved. l. 1: the bottom parts of E and L which are very likely followed by IVS l. 2: easily readable VRNINV; N + V in ligature in which V is rendered as an U. l. 3: the right part of a V; an X seems excluded; the following letters are clearly readable IT AVET; T and A are divided by a narrow space, enough to make a distinction between the two letters; E + T in ligature. From a fourth line only a tiny upper part of a possible I is preserved (ICEM Tulcea) (fig. 74). Date: mid/second half of the 2nd century CE. Zahariade 2009, 119 no. fig. 8.

52

Inscriptions on stone [ -------------] [Ҥ]ҽশӏus [Sat]urninu[s milita]‫ܤ‬it a(nnis) V et 5 [--------i(?)----] ‘[...]Aelius Saturninus served five years and [....]’. Aelius Saturninus died after five years of active service in the army. The name of Italic origin (Schulze 1001, 467) is attested for the first time at Halmyris/Salmorus. As PN it is widely spread in almost all the provinces of the Roman Empire (OPEL IV52-53; Solin, Salomies 1988, 397). It appears also in the Troesmis laterculum of legio V Macedonica, in 134 (ISM V 137 IV 8; 22-24) and in many other inscriptions in Lower Moesia (ISM V 10, 149, 187, 188, 298; Minkova 2000, 247-248).

31 Tombstone; fragmentary; grayish, limestone broken in four smaller parts; found in 2004 in the debris of the western gate. The four fragments join together; general dimensions: 61 x 36 x 4 cm; the letters are 6-8 cm in height. (ICEM Tulcea) (fig. 75). Date: mid/second half of the 2nd century CE. Zahariade 2009, 119-120 no. 10 fig. 9.

Frg. 1: 38 x 30 x ca. 35 cm; the letters are 7 cm in height. Three lines are preserved: l.1 Only the lower parts of the letters are readable. E N E M E R E l. 2: E T F I L I O S I S. E falls mostly in the break of the stone, but the two horizontal bars are enough preserved to read an E. The reading of the rest of the line poses no problems. The last S is slightly broken to its curvature, but is easily readable. l. 3: I X I T A N X. The lower parts of all the letters on this line fall in the fracture of the stone. Frg. 2: 26 x 26 x ca. 35 cm; the letters are 7 cm in height. Three lines are preserved: l. 1: T I E. The first letter must be a T whose horizontal bar is missing; I is complete. The lower part of an E is the only solution for reading this letter. l. 2. N I V. N and I are clear. There is an oblique bar of a letter which cannot be anything else but a V. l. 3: P(?) or R (?) E. Only the loop of an R or B is preserved. The upper part of the next letter reveals an E, which is most likely. Frg. 3: 10 x 10 x ca. 3.0 cm; fragmentary letters. The fragment matches exactly between fragments 1 and 2. A small fragment of the lower part of V, followed by the lower half of an I, and a fragmentary lower oblique bar of X that would match the V on the second and I X on the first fragment. Frg. 4: EA(?) or EN(?). (Fig. 30). 53

Halmyris II The assemblage of the four fragments resulted in five lines of the same inscription with the following reading: [-----------------------] [b́]۬́ ۨ́‫[́܀‬n] ‫ܒ‬i ́t filio Sis[o]ni vixit ̩n(nis) X[..?] ‫…[)?( ̀ۿ‬..] 5 ̨̀ […] or ̀۫ […] ‘[...]well deserved it and to Siso’s son who lived ten(?) years [-----]’. The preserved text would point to the final lines of an inscription. The beginning of the dedication falls in the break and is lost. The only readable name is Siso (Dat.–Sisoni). The text specifies only that he had a son who also received the dedication. Siso is a rare PN (cf. OPEL IV 85). It might be close to Sisius/Sisio with a derivation Sisidius, both attested in Italy (CIL VI 26606a; Schulze 1991, 94). A Sise is known at Oescus (Gigen) (ILB 68), likely as a military; an Aelius Sissa is recorded at Securisca (Cherkovitsa) (ILB 133). The name is apparently masculine, rather than feminine. The name is of Thracian origin (Gerov 1952-1953, 44; Dechev 1976, 449-450; Minkova 2000, 225).

32 Tombstone; fragmentary; broken in two big fragments; cherty sandstone; found in 1992 walled in the S side of the western gate. Dimensions: 116 x 83 x 19 cm; the letters are 6-7 cm in height. The inscription field is 61cm in width; straight, well cut letters. The stone was cut vertically in order to be accommodated into the masonry. The cut edge appears chiseled by the late 3rd century builders. The upper right part is completely destroyed; the upper left part is missing; some of the letters are completely illegible because of erosion. The ca. 6 cm deepened field of inscription is sided by a 15 cm wide border surrounded by a vine stalk decoration with leaves and grapes. The letters and the border have noticeable traces of lead minium. l. 1: the lower right part of a letter is visible before PIT, very likely an A considering the oblique remaining fragment of a dash; the upper left part of the P is broken; only the left part of the top horizontal dash of the T is preserved; the reading is very likely: [CA]PIT[O]; l. 2: S is faded but is easily recognizable; the lower part of a letter is preserved only through the trace left by the chisel, possibly the letter A; reading: [A] NVS; l. 3: the letters ORM are clear; there is a trace of I, or T, or F, or any other letter with a vertical bar before O, as the tiny fragment of a sole of a letter shows; the letter I seems more likely. l. 4: the letter X is broken to the right, but it does not affect an easy reading: SEX (TUS); l. 5. QVIN. T, which is very likely, seems to have disappeared in the erosion; reading: QVIN [TUS]; l. 6: the stone is broken under this line and splits the letters I and B; from I following P only the insertion of the chisel is preserved; reading: FILI P[ATRI] l. 7: only the letter F is preserved; the letter C disappeared because of the erosion but is still slightly perceptible; lecture: F(aciendum)[C(uravit)] (ICEM Tulcea) (fig. 78). Date: late 2nd –early 3rd century CE. Zahariade 2009, 112 no. 5 pl. I fig. 5.

54

Inscriptions on stone [----] [Ca]pit[o------------] [---- ̩]nus [--------------] [----]orm [------------------] [----] us Sex[(tus)(?)------] 5 [----] Quin[tus(?)----------] [----] fili p[atri] f(aciendum) [c(uraverunt)(?)] ‘[....] Capito [....] anus, [---] orm [...] [...] us Sextus, [...] Quintus(?), the sons took care to set (this gravestone) for the (their) father’. Capito is an old cognomen, in the Italic environment (Schulze 1991, 315; OPEL II 33; Solin, Salomies 1988, 308), while Sextus and Quintus are common praenomina. l. 3 the restoration [stipend]ior(u)m, is quite unlikely as far as, given the neat aspect of the inscription, the lapicid could have commit such mistake in case of a key word in the text. As it seems, Sextus and Quintus were the Capito’s sons. Sextus and Quintus are praenomina which entails tria nomina and therefore Roman citizenship. The late date is due to f(aciendum) c(uraverunt).

33 Tombstone; lower part; spongolite; found in 1992 walled in the structure of the southern side of the western gate overlaying no. 32. The tombstone seems to have been cut in two or more parts. This fragment seems to have tight connection with the monument cat. no. XX. The upper part is lost; the preserved part, broken in two, was placed in the masonry with the edge facing to the exterior. The field of inscription is 24 cm in width; the decoration features a vine creeping stalks with grapes and leaves. Under the text of the inscription a krateros with reflected rim; on each side there are two leaved twigs and two springing stalks. In the middle there are two lotus buds. Two snakes on either side drink water out of the vase. The field inscription is 74 cm wide. Dimensions: 121 x 67 x 20 cm; the letters are 9-11 cm in height (ICEM Tulcea) (fig. 81). Date: late 2nd – early 3rd century CE. Zahariade 2009, 111-112 no. 4 pl. 1 fig. 4.

[----------------------------] mat‫ ͓܀‬b(ene) m(erenti) f(aciendum) c(uravit/uraverunt) ‘(----)to mother because she well deserved that, took care to set (this gravestone)’ l. 1: the break of the stone falls exactly on the middle line of A. The upper parts of R and I are also broken; T+R in ligature l. 2: haederae distinguentes before F, between F and C, and after C, which is slightly broken at the upper and lower part. The massiveness and ornamentation of the fragment indicates a considerable size of the tombstone set by the descendants of the woman, with a more than satisfactory financial situation.

55

Halmyris II

34 Tombstone; fragmentary; yellowish limestone; found in the debris of the W gate; only a thin layer of the stone was preserved containing inscribed letters; the massive body of the inscription is lost; preserved dimensions: 31 x 17.5 x 3 cm; the letters are 6 cm in height. Three lines with fragmentary letters are preserved. l. 1: ঵ӎ l. 2: [A] NNIS; The letter A falls in the break of the stone but the lower part of the right oblique bar is preserved that makes the restitution easy enough; both letters NN are damaged at the upper parts by the break of the stone. The letters IS are very well preserved. l. 3: apparently three letters are preserved: I V C (ICEM Tulcea) (fig. 87) [----------] ͓ۜ [------vix(it) ̩]nnis [------] [------] ͒‫[܇ܣ‬--------------] ‘(....) li (....) lived ....years (.....) IVS (....)’

35 Tombstone(?); fragmentary; yellowish limestone; found in 1986 (Ƒ L 9); dimensions: 26 x 15 x 18 cm; the letters are 7 cm in height. The letters, I and R, are partially preserved on the fragment but clearly readable; the right oblique stroke, very likely from the letter M is preserved. I is complete; half of the loop of the letter R falls in the break of the stone. (ICEM Tulcea) (fig. 88). [...]ুӎ৙ [...]

56

III INSCRIPTIONS ON BUILDING MATERIAL AND POTTERY 1. Bricks and Tiles (TEGULAE ET IMBRICES) 36 Building brick (imbrex); three fragments; the first two fragments were found in 1991 in Ƒ J 4 8, (2.20 m), in the rubble from the collapse of the walls of western gate; the third fragment was found in 1994 in Ƒ I 4 17. The brick is written on both sides; on face I the letters are cut in raw paste; on face II the letters are carved after burn. The pieces match perfectly along the breaks. Complete dimensions of the joint pieces: 27 x 27 x 5.5 cm; the letters are 1.8 – 2.2 cm in height. Most of the brick is preserved. The brick cracked already in Antiquity. Its margins appear broken and worn out as a result of a long weathering (ICEM Tulcea) (fig. 116-117) Date: late 3rd – early 4th century CE. Suceveanu, Zahariade, Poenaru Bordea, Topoleanu 2003, 125-126 no. 21 fig. 59.

General observations: letters E and S are crescent-like form. The bigger upper fragment preserves the original edges on the length and width, and the complete thickness; the writing is correct, intelligible; the letters are accurately traced and pose no problem in spite of hand-writing manner. Face I. Fragment 1. l. 1: A, from ǺĮȜ੼ȡȚȠȢ, has a short prolongation up left; the name Valerius (BAȁEȇIOC) is completly preserved. The next word on the same line seems highly probable also a PN possibly [ǺĮȜİȡ]ȓȞȠȢ. The last part of the PN is written on l 2; l. 2: INOC as the continuation of the PN from l. 1 is clear. The last letter is very likely a C, from KONC; l. 3: ijȡȐIJİȡ for lat. frater; the last letter is likely a Ȇ; l. 4: most of the crescent-like ࣅ is clear; the next letter falls in the break of the brick, but the prolongation is preserved and matches with a slight stroke on the fragment 2; it looks likely a ȇ. Fragment 2. l. 1 (4): M, rendered as ȝ in cursive writing; an Ȧ instead of ȝ is excluded. The letter is cut in two by the break between fragment 2 and 3; l. 3(6): cursive ȣ; l. 4 (7): before A appears the oblique trace of a letter, as if it is an Y; The last three and a half letters of l. 5(8): MȞOC belong to this fragment, but the left slash of M falls in fragment 3. Ȟ is cursively written and is placed on the top right of M.

57

Halmyris II Fragment 3. l. 1 (8): left lower part of an O; another letter certainly follows, but it falls in the break and cannot be observed. The following letter is likely a Ȇ, for the lower part shows two vertical lines written in the same manner as the Ȇ on the l. 2(5) of the fragment 2; I falls in the break, but is easily readable; As shown above, the reading of the last three and a half letters of the line belongs to fragment 2; l. 2 (9): there is a letter at the beginning of the line which cannot be identified; the lower part of O falls in the break of the fragment; the last letter of the line is likely an N; l. 3(10): the beginning of the line falls in the break; the first fragment of a letter seems rather a ȁ than an A; Y rendered as a cursive Ȟ; the last letter could be an ȁ or rather an A; l. 4 (11): the only three preserved letters are NON; l. 5(12): an ࣅ is the only preserved letter. Face II. As a general observation, the letters were written after the burning process was completed. With few exceptions all the letters are capitals. Fragment 1 l. 1. Only three letters are preserved: ǿȅC l. 2. E is rendered in a regular form. Ȧ is cursive, with the right upper part falling in the break. Next letter is a possible and probable N of which only lower part survived. The last letter on the line would be logically an H. l. 3. ȝ and Ȧ are cursive; B is clumsily rendered; the last letter on the line seems an ࣅ. The matching of the fragments 1 and 2 of the brick creates four legible lines. Fragment II l.1 + Fragment I l.4: BAȁ are hardly legible because of the deterioration of the brick surface. The next letter falls in the break, but given the next part of the word is must certainly be an E; A is slightly broken on the left side; there is a deep hollow in the brick at the end of the line. K is very likely in this place. Fragment II l.2 + Fragment I l.5: H is half destroyed; N and O falls in the break between the two fragments, but both are legible; the upper parts of O and P are damaged by the hollow of the previous line. Fragment II line 3 + Fragment I line 6: O is half preserved and is clumsily traced; a B is clearly visible next to the break of the brick; it is written exactly in the same manner as the one on line 3 of the fragment I; the next letter falls completely in the break and is not legible, maybe an I; Ȧ is cursive; the last letter on the line is half broken, but seems likely a Ĭ, although an ࣅ is also possible. Fragment II l. 4 +Fragment I l. 7: the first letter should be an ȁ with the left oblique stroke missing; between a P and the next letter P the serious damage of the brick makes illegible at least four letters; the last preserved letter on the line is a cursive Ȧ. Fragment III l. 1(8): the first letter of the line seems to be an ࣅ, followed by a C; the upper part of the next I falls in the break between the fragments II and III. The rest of the line is completely lost. l. 2(9): the first letter seems a T; the last letter of the line falls completely in the break of the fragment and although there is a slight trace it is not legible. 58

Inscriptions on building material and pottery l. 3(10): the first letter of the line is hardly decipherable; there is only one oblique stroke from a letter, possible an ȁ; K has the lower oblique slash much shortened and superficially deepened. a P or rather B is legible but the letter is partially affected by a hallow in the brick; the last letter falls in the break of the brick and seems likely a K, rather than P. l. 4(11): the reading of the line is clear; the last letter, O falls half in the break of the brick; it might be followed by a Y because of a visible enough slight trace of an oblique bar. l 5(12): the only possible letters are A and N. The reading of the rest of the line remains unknown. The reading of the face I and II: I BAȁǼȇǿȅC [-----------INOCKON[CTANC---] ĭȇǹȉࣅȇȅȆ [---------] CࣅKOȊNࣅȇȝH [-------]ȅȊ[-----]AȆȇEKO [-----------------] ȣCǻࣅKࣅ [---------------------] ATȦ [-----] O [------] ȆȁȅȊȇIȝȞOC 10 [--------] OȊCࣅNTࣅȇN [---------] [-----] ȁȝOȊCࣅȁ [---------------] [---------Ȋ?] NON [----------------] [--------]ࣅ [--------------------------] II [------] IOC [---------] 15 [------C?] ȁEīIȦNH [-----]ȝAIȦBࣅ [-----] BAȁ[E]PIA ǻIO[K]ȁ HTIANOYCOCTO[Ȇ] [---] NǻIAB[I]NTIǻȦE 20 [---] ANEP [-----------ࣅ?]PȦ [-----]ECIBON [--------------] [------] TITHCȆP[Ȧ ?------] [------A]KࣅBࣅNࣅĭAK[----] [-----] OITࣅCALOY[--------] 25 [-----] AN[---------------------] Some palaeographic observations: The face II looks written clumsily by another hand; ȝ and Ȧ are always in cursive writing; The letter A is rendered in three ways: a regular form; a prolongation of the right oblique bar; on fragments 3 and 4 A has a sharp angle-like horizontal stroke; ǻ has always the right stroke elongated; Y is sometimes rendered as V; in one case it is written cursively, as Ȟ (frg. II l. 3). The reading was improved due to a thorough revision of J. Karavas:

59

Halmyris II Face I BĮȜȑȡȚȠȢ [ǺĮȜİȡ] ȓȞȠȢ ȀંȞı[IJĮȞȢ] ijȡȐIJİȡ ંʌ[ȐȗȦ or ȐȗİȚ] ȈțȠ઄Ȟ(įȠȞ) ਬȡȝૌ 5 [Ƞȣ--------] ਕʌȡİț[-----------] ȣȢ į੻ țİ [-----------] ĮIJȦ [-------] o [-----] ʌȜȠȣȡȚȝȞȠȢ [---]ȠȣıİȞ IJİȡȞ[----] 10 [Į or Ȝ]ȝȠȣıİȜ [----------] [---ȣ?] ȞȠȞ [----------------] [----] İ[----------------------] Face II [-------ǺĮȜȑȡ]ȚȠȢ [ǺĮȜİ?][ȡȓȞȠ]Ȣ ȜİȖȚઆȞȘ(Ȣ) 15 [ʌȡİȓ]ȝĮ(Ȣ) ’IȦȕ(ȓĮ)Ȣ ǺĮȜ[ȑ]ȡȚĮ(Ȟ) ǻȚȠ[țȜ]ȘIJȚȐȞȠȣ ȠıIJȠʌ[ȠȚ]ȩȞ įȚĮȕȓȞIJȚ įȦș(ȒıİȚȞ) [-------] ਕȞİʌ[------]İȡȦ [-------] İıȚ ȕȠȞ[-----] ȕȠ [-------]IJȚ IJોȢ ʌȡ[Ȧ?----] 20 Įțİ ȕİȞİijĮț [-----------] [---]ȠȚ IJİıĮȜȠȣ [--------] [----] ĮȞ[-----------------] Face I: ‘Valerius Valerinus Constans, brother(-in- arms) recommends Secundus (the son of) Hermes [...]’ Face II: ‘Valerius Valerinus, from the legion I Iovia, urges Valeria (the daughter of) Diocletianus, who works bone objects, to give to that who pierces [...]’. As easily noticeable, only a few words and sentences can be understood. The fragmentary state of the brick which causes much syncope, breaks, and lack of fluency in the reading of the words and sentences obstructs considerably a comprehensive understanding of the text. However, some elements remain clearly highlighted: the text is a littera commendaticia, a letter of recommendation which shows that an officer of the legion I Iovia, Valerius Valerinus Constans, recommends a certain Secundus, the son of Hermes for something which remains yet unknown. It could be a recommendation done to his superiors to accept Secundus in the army; although probable, this stance remains uncertain; Halmyris/Salmorus fort was allegedly garrisoned at that date by a detachment of legio I Iovia Scythica a new Tetrarchic legion created in ca. 286-293 and billeted at Noviodunum (Isaccea) after it held position on the western front of the province of Scythia at Troesmis (Itin. Ant. 225. 2); the mention of the legion is a solid terminus post quem for the date of the writing of the recommendation. The role of Valeria, the daughter of Diocletianus, who seems to have owned a bone workshop at Halmyris/ Salmorus, remains unclear in these circumstances, unless she was Secundus’ mother and had a certain influence.

60

Inscriptions on building material and pottery

37 Building brick (imbrex); fragment; paste of yellowish colour, well burned, without major traces of gravel or sand. Dimensions: 12 x 6.5 x 3 cm; found in 1993 in the debris of the NE gate; the letters are 1.5-2.5 cm in height, irregular in form and incised into the raw paste. The fragment represents the left upper part of a brick. The edge is well outlined. Five lines were preserved. l. 1. The first letter cannot be read; only an oblique slash is visible; P appears clearly outlined; the short oblique mark of a possible A falls into the break of the brick; separation dots between the first letter, P and A; l. 2. S is bigger (2.7 cm) than the other two following letters, IN; l. 3. N has a horizontal stroke on the top of the N; it seems a ligature N + T; also there is an oblique bar at the bottom of N, which could result in an A. In that case, three letters A+N+T are in ligature; a possible X which fell in the break l. 4. the first letter seems a handwritten uncial a. l. 5. an I is most likely (ICEM Tulcea) (fig. 118). Date: 4th century CE (?). Zahariade 2009,121 no. 17.

[?] P [Ҥ] SIN [-------] ANTE [X----?] ಒ 5 I No coherent reading is possible for the moment.

38 Building brick (imbrex); fragment; gravel intrusions; found in 1999, in area E, Ƒ 5; reused in a later building. Dimensions: 13.5 x 12 x 4.3 cm; the letters are 1-1.5 cm in height, written in the raw paste (ICEM Tulcea) (fig. 119). Date: 2nd -4th century CE Zahariade 2009, 121 no. 18 fig. 10.

APAK/ ਞȡȐțȜ(ોȢ) The two letters Į are uncials. The dots are obliquely set between A and P, possible a writer’s sign; irregular letters. Possible lecture also: ‘ǹȡȐțȜ(Į). An ‘ǾȡĮțȜ઼Ȣ is known at Histria (ISM I 201 B 18) and another at Callatis ਺ȡĮțȜİȚ[---] (ISM III 35 A 37); Potaissa: ਺ȡȐțȜĮ (ILD 529). The spelling with ਞ instead of ਺: ਞȡȐțȜોȢ contr. ਺ȡȐțȜોȢ (Att.), ਺ȡȐțȜİȢ (Acc.) sends to the Doric form of the PN (Pape, Benseler 1911, 462: ਺ȡĮțȜ઼Ȣ; LPGN II s.v; Hornblower, Matthews 2000, 58).

39 Building brick (imbrex); complete; found in the collapsed rubble near the interior face of the defence wall, on the southern wing of the western gate. Dimensions: 34. 5 x 27 x 5 cm. The brick is 61

Halmyris II well burnt; the paste is compact and has a dark reddish colour with visible, very fine gravel and sand. The oblique cress-crossed three finger prints divide the brick surface in four triangles of which only the upper (a), the left (b) and lower(c) contain Greek letters. They were written with a stylus after the finger prints had been already traced. Surface a. Letters: K (height: 2 cm); Ȇ+X in ligature (height: 3 cm); X overlaps Ȇ which means that it was incised shortly later; several incisions with a stylus to the right of the group ȆX. Surface b. Two lines: l. 1(above): a group of letters: NYTK or NTYK (height: 3cm). N + Y + T + K in ligature; the top of Y is written above T; underneath an M. l. 2 (bottom): the letters: NK (height: 2.3 cm); N + K in ligature; repeated incisions with a stylus, possible as exercise before the writing. Surface c. The letters ȆȇȆI; I +Ȇ in ligature. I is elongated and higher than the other two letters. The group of the letters could be also read ȆPȆ, but is less likely. On the upper right part of the group a smaller cursive Ȟ or rather ȣ is easily visible; the letter was written after the finger prints had been traced. That results in a group of five letters: ȆȇIȆȞ. Multiple vertical pointed incisions under the letters in three places. Surface d. Traces of a stylus exercise (ICEM Tulcea) (fig. 120). Date: 4th century CE. Zahariade 2009,122 no. 20 fig. 11.

40 Building brick (imbrex); fragment; found in 1994 next to Ƒ I 3. The color of the paste is dark reddish with visible fine trces of gravel and sand. Dimensions: 16 x 11 x 5cm. The incisions, written with a stylus, are illegible. It could be an attempt of figuring a human portrait (ICEM Tulcea) (fig. 121). Date: 4th century CE. Zahariade 2009,122 no. 21.

41 Building brick (imbrex); fragment; found in 1994 in the collapsed rubble inside the edifice called Thermae I. The colour of the paste is brownish-reddish. The brick is well burnt. Dimensions: 29 x 25 x 5cm; the letters are 3.5cm in height. Oblique three fingered prints. Two letters at the bottom part of the piece, apparently Ĭ and a hand written overturned ʌ, slightly tilted to the right (ICEM Tulcea) (fig. 122). Date: 4th -6th century CE. Zahariade 2009,122 no. 22 fig. 12.

Ĭʌ

42 Building brick (imbrex); fragment; found in the rubble inside the edifice Thermae I. Dimensions: 27 x 18 x 5 cm. The paste is well burnt. Cress-crossed finger prints. The only preserved letter appears to have been incised in the raw paste. The letter is cut by an oblique line (ICEM Tulcea) (fig. 123). 62

Inscriptions on building material and pottery Date: 4th century CE. Zahariade 2009, 122 no. 23.

M

43 Building brick (imbrex); fragment; found in 2006 in the debris of the defence stone wall of the fort, in A1 at -1.79 m. The colour is yellowish, as a consequence of an incomplete or low temperature burning. The clay composition is compact, without visible traces of sand or gravel. The brick bears four cress-crossed finger prints. Dimensions: 31 x 25 x 5. 5 cm. The brick must have been 34 cm in length. The letter is 3.8 cm in height; it was imprinted on the brick after the burning and is slightly deteriorated (ICEM Tulcea) (fig. 124). Date: 4th century CE. M

44 Building brick (imbrex); fragment; found in 2008 by L. Mureúan in the civil settlement during the diggings for the building of an experimental Roman pottery kiln in Ƒ 4, 720/320. The paste is reddish, well burnt, and compact, with slight traces of fine gravel. Dimensions: 10 x 30 x 5 cm; the letters are 3.5 cm in height. The brick bears two cress-crossed finger prints. The letters were carved in the brick in a post-burning process; the letter C has an elongated form, and its lower part ends in an angle; wider space between C and X. (ICEM Tulcea) (fig. 125). Date: 6th century. CE. ICX ’I(Ș)ı(Ƞ૨Ȣ) X(ȡȚıIJંȢ)

45 Building brick (imbrex); fragment; found in 1993 during the survey of the ‘Dealul CetăĠii’ hill, to the south. The paste is dark greyish, with cavities from the incomplete or poorly burning. Dimensions: 14 x 17 x 5 cm. The stamp is fragmentary. The dimensions of the preserved part of the cartouche are: 7 x 4 cm; the letters are 3 cm in height; reversed writing. (ICEM Tulcea) (fig. 126). Date: 4th century CE. Zahariade 2009, 123 no. 24 fig. 13.

LE[g](ionis) I [Ioviae Scy(thicae) ?] Legio I Iovia Scythica dispatched a detachment to Halmyris as suggested by a littera commendaticia (cat. no. 35 a-b and cat. no. 46).

46 Roofing tile (tegula); small fragment; found in 2009 in the harbour area, in the S 1 Ƒ1, at -0.21m. The paste is compact, dark greyish, and shows slight traces of fire. Dimensions: 8 x 6 x 2 cm; the

63

Halmyris II only preserved traces is of a Y of which only the oblique upper rod is visible; reversed writing. (ICEM Tulcea) (fig. 127). Date: late 3rd - 4th century CE [LEG (ionis) I IOVIAE SC]Ӷ (thicae)

47 Roofing tile (tegula); fragment; the paste is reddish, extremely compact, with traces of fine gravel and sand. Dimensions: 18 x 11 x 2.5 cm. Two visible letters 4 cm (I); 3 cm (Y) in height are preserved. They were carved in the paste after the burning of the piece. Presumably, there is a third letter after Y, possibly an I (?), but it is hardly readable (ICEM Tulcea) (fig. 128). Date: 4th -6th century CE. IY

2. Pottery (VASA ET LUCERNAE) 48 Amphora handle; fragment; stamp within rectangular cartouche. Rhodian (?). Dimensions: length=11cm; width=3.7 cm; diameter: 3.8 cm; found in the Episcopal basilica in Ƒ3, at – 1.62m; rectangular cartouche: 4.8 x 1.5 cm; the letters are 0.5cm in height (ICEM Tulcea, inv. no. 371a) (fig. 129). Date: 3rd century BCE. ȂȠȣıĮ૙ȠȢ The PN is Greek (Pape, Benseler 1911, 953; LGPN I, II, IIA s.v.). It appears in inscriptions in a multitude of variants in different parts of the Greek World: ȂȠȣıĮ૙Ȣ (SEG 38, 1998, 1147); ȂȠȣı੺ȡȚȠȞ (SEG 38, 1988, 1107; 45, 1995, 2278); ȂȠȣıĮȡȠ૨Ȣ (SEG 44, 1994, 1146); ȂȠȣıĮȢ (40, 1990, 1268 C. 17); ȂȠȣı੼ȠȢ (SEG 37, 1987, 1271; 44, 1994, 1365). The present case seems likely a producer name.

49 Amphora rim and neck; fragment. Heraclea; found in extramuran area, C2. Dr=8.5cm. (ICEM Tulcea, inv. 40259) (fig. 130). Date: first half of the 3rd century BCE. OpaiĠ 1991,133 no. 4 pl. 1, 4 (40 259).

ǾȇǹȀ ਺ȡȐț(ȜોȢ) or ਺ȡȐț(ȜİȢ)

50 Amphora handle; stamp within rectangular cartouche. Chersonesus; found in S I Ƒ 46-47, - 2.90m. (ICEM Tulcea, inv. 30178). 64

Inscriptions on building material and pottery Date: 275-215 BCE. OpaiĠ 1991,133-134 no. 5 pl. 47, 5.

ȃĮȞȫȞ[Ƞȣ] ਕıIJȣȞȠ[ȝȠȣ?] ‘(It belongs to) Nanonos, magistrate’.

51 Amphora handle and rim; circular stamp with the pomegranate flower in the middle. Rhodos; found in S II Ƒ 120; -2m. Dr=13 cm; Dh= 4/3.1. (ICEM Tulcea, inv. 30179) (fig. 131). Date: ca. 188-186 BCE. OpaiĠ 1991, 134 no. 6 pl. 47, 6.

ਥʌ੿ ȈȣȝȝȐțȠȣ ਝȖȡȚĮȞȓȠȣ ‘(It has been made) during (the office of ) Symmachos (the son of) Agrianos’.

52 Amphora handle and rim; stamp within rectangular cartouche: 2.5/1.5 cm. Rhodos; found in S II Ƒ 15. Dr=11cm; Dh= 3,6/3 cm. (ICEM Tulcea, inv. 38399) (fig. 132). Date: 150-120 BCE. OpaiĠ 1991, 134 no 7 pl. 1. 7.

ਥʌ੿ ਝȡȚıIJȠȞ ȕȡȠIJȓįĮ ਝȖȡȚĮȞȓȠȣ ‘(It has been made) during (the office of) Ariston the progeny of Agrianos’.

53 Amphora handle; stamp within rectangular cartouche: 4 x 1.5 cm. Rhodos; found passim. (ICEM Tulcea, inv. 38400). Date: ca. 150 BCE. OpaiĠ 1991, 134 no. 8 pl. 47, 8.

ਥʌ੿ ȆĮȣıĮȞȓĮ ੥ĮțȚȞșȓȠȣ ‘(it has been made) during (the office of) Pausanias (the son of) Yakinthos’ 65

Halmyris II

54 Amphora handle; symbol: dolphin represented in a vertical position. Thassos (fig. 133). Date: 3rd century BCE. Bujor 1957, 248 pl. I 2; 1958, 134.

ĬȐıȚȦȞ ȉȘȜ[ȑȝĮȤȠȢ] ‘Telemachos from Thassos (or the Thassian)’.

55 Amphora with rim, both handles and neck; fragment. Thassos (fig. 134). Date: 3rd century BCE. Bujor 1958, 133 fig. 6. 2.

ȈȫIJȘȡȠȢ ਦʌૅǹȡȚıIJȠț[ȜોȢ] ȈȩIJĮ ‘Soteros (made this?) during (the magistrature?) of Aristocleus Sota’

56 Kantharos. Red paste covered with black firnis; found in 1956 in the Getic necropolis no. II. On one side a scratched inscription. Date: 3rd century BCE. Bujor 1957, 375; 1958, 134 fig. 6. 7.

ǹੁȖ઄ʌIJȚȠȢ ȝȘIJȡȓ ‘(Dedicated) to the Egyptian mother’. The inscription suggests the presence of some imported Greco-Egyptian artefacts or even craftsmen who produced these categories of vases at Halmyris.

57 Amphora rim and both handles; stamp within rectangular cartouche: 3.5 x 1.4cm; symbol: Helios’ head. Rhodos; found in 1983 in the Getic necropolis, M1 . Dr=9cm. (ICEM Tulcea, inv. 36951). Date: second decade of the 2nd century BCE. Simion 1995, 271 no. 1 fig. 8a-b.

Handle 1 (fig. 135): ਥʌ੿ ȉȚȝĮıĮȖȩȡĮ 66

Inscriptions on building material and pottery ‘(It has been made) during (the office of ?) Timasagoras. Handle 2: ੥ĮțȚȞșȓȠȣ ȂĮȡıȪĮ ‘Marsia (the son of) Yakinthios’.

58 Amphora rim and handle; fragment; stamp within rectangular cartouche: 4 x 1.6cm; symbol: eight rays star. Rhodos; found in 1983 in the Getic necropolis, M1. (ICEM Tulcea, inv. 36.979) (fig. 136). Date: second decade of the 2nd century BCE. Simion 1995, 271 no. 2 fig. 8c.

ਥʌ੿ ਝȖİȝȐȤȠȣ ‘(It has been made) during (the office of ) Agemachos.

59 Amphora rim and handle; fragment; round stamp: 3 x 2.8 cm; symbol: pomegranate surrounded by a circle. Rhodos; found in 1983 in the Getic necropolis, M1. (ICEM Tulcea, inv. 36.996). Date: second decade of the 2nd century BCE. Simion 1995, 271 no. 3 fig. 8d.

ਥʌ੿ ਝȖİȝȐȤȠȣ ǻ[....] ‘(It has been made) during (the office of ) Agemachos D [...]’

60 Amphora handle; fragment; stamp within rectangular cartouche: 4.7 x 1.4 cm. Rhodos; found in 1983 in the Getic necropolis, M1. (ICEM Tulcea, inv. 36967) (fig. 137). Date: second decade of the 2nd century BCE. Simion 1995, 271 no. 4 fig. 8e.

ȀĮȡȞȑȠȣ ਥʌ੿ ਝੁȞȒIJȠȡȠȢ ‘(It belongs to) Karneos, during (the office? of ) Ainetoros’.

67

Halmyris II

61 Amphora rim and handle; fragment; round stamp: 3 x 3.1 cm; symbol: pomegranate with the image and writing badly preserved. Rhodos; found in 1983 in the Getic necropolis, M1. (ICEM Tulcea, inv. 36.984). Date: second decade of the 2nd century BCE. Simion 1995, 271 no. 5.

ਥ[ʌ੿] ਝੁȞȒIJȠȡȠȢ ਝ[Ȗ]ȡȚĮȞȓȠ[ȣ] ‘(It has been made) during (the office? of ) Ainetoros, (son of) Agrianos’.

62 Amphora handle; fragment; stamp within rectangular cartouche: 3. 8 x 1.7 cm. Rhodos; found in the Getic necropolis, M1. (ICEM Tulcea, inv. 36.964) (fig. 138). Date: second decade of the 2nd century BCE. Simion 1995, 272 no. 6 fig. 8 f.

ਥ[ʌ੿] ਝੁȞȒIJȠȡȠȢ ȆİįĮȖİȚIJȞȪȠȣ ‘It has been made during (the office? of ) Ainetoros, (son of) Pedageitnyos’.

63 Amphora handle; fragment; round stamp: 2.2 x 2.3 cm; symbol: pomegranate with leaves. Rhodos; found in the Getic necropolis, M1. (ICEM Tulcea, inv. 36.972). Date: second decade of the 2nd century BCE. Simion 1995, 272 no. 7.

ਥʌ੿ ਝੁȞȒIJȠȡȠȢ ‘(It has been made) during (the office? of ) Ainetoros’.

64 Amphora handle and neck; fragments stamp within rectangular cartouche: 3.6 x 1.5 cm. Rhodos; found in the Getic necropolis, M1. (ICEM Tulcea, Inv. 36.997) (fig. 139). Date: second decade of the 2nd century BCE. Simion 1995, 272 no.8 fig. 8 g.

ਥʌ੿ ਝੁȞȒIJȠȡȠȢ ǻ[Ț]ȠıșȑȠȣ 68

Inscriptions on building material and pottery ‘(It has been made) during (the office? of ) Ainetoros (the son of) Diostheos’.

65 Amphora neck; fragment; stamp within rectangular cartouche: 4.2 x 0.8 cm. Rhodos; found in the Getic necropolis, M1. (ICEM Tulcea, inv. 36991). Date: second decade of the 2nd century BCE. Simion 1995, 272 no. 9.

ਥʌ੿ [ǻȘȝȠțȡȐIJİ]ȣȢ or [ǻĮȝȠțȜો]ȣȢ(?) ‘(It has been made) during (the office? of ) Democrates or Damokles

66 Amphora handle and neck; fragment; stamp within rectangular cartouche: 3.5 x 1.3 cm. Rhodos; found in the Getic necropolis, M1. (ICEM Tulcea, inv. 36966) (fig. 140). Date: second decade of the 2nd century BCE. Simion 1995, 272 no. 10 fig. 8 h.

ਥʌ੿ ੂİȡ੼ȦȢ ਝȖİȝȐȤȠȣ ‘(It has been made) during the priesthood of Agemahos’.

67 Amphora handle; fragment; Rhodos; stamp within rectangular cartouche: 3.7 x 1.7 cm; found in the Getic necropolis, M1. (ICEM Tulcea, inv. 36970) (fig. 141). Date: second decade of the 2nd century BCE. Simion 1995, 272 no. 11 fig. 8 i.

ਥʌ੿ ȀȜİȦȞȪȝȠȣ ੥ĮțȚȞșȓȠȣ ‘(It has been made) during (the office? of ) Kleonimos (the son of) Yakinthos’.

68 Amphora handle; fragment; Rhodos; stamp within rectangular cartouche: 3.5 x 1.5cm; found in the Getic necropolis, M1.( ICEM Tulcea, inv. 36989) (fig. 142). Date: second decade of the 2nd century BCE. Simion 1995, 273 no. 12 fig. 8 j.

ਥʌ੿ ȀȡĮIJȓįĮ ǻĮȜȓ[Ƞ]ȣ 69

Halmyris II ‘(It has been made) during (the office? of ) Kratidas (the son of) Dalios’.

69 Amphora handle; fragment; stamp within rectangular cartouche: 3.6 x 1.5 cm. Rhodos; found in the Getic necropolis, M1. (ICEM Tulcea, inv. 36968). Date: second decade of the 2nd century BCE. Simion 1995, 273 no. 13.

ਥʌ੿ ȀȡĮIJȓįĮ ȆĮȞȐȝȠȣ ‘(It has been made) during (the office? of ) Kratidas (the son of) Panamos’.

70 Amphora handle; fragment; stamp within rectangular cartouche: 3.5 x 1.1 cm. Rhodos; found in the Getic necropolis, M1. (ICEM Tulcea, inv. 36981) (fig. 143). Date: second decade of the 2nd century BCE. Simion 1995, 273 no. 14 fig. 9 a.

ਥʌ੿ ĬȑıIJȠȡȠȢ ȆĮȞȐȝȠȣ ‘(It has been made) during (the office? of ) Thestoros (the son of) Panamos’

71 Amphora handle; fragment; stamp within rectangular cartouche: 3.5 x 1.1 cm. Rhodos; found in the Getic necropolis, M1. (ICEM Tulcea, inv. 36976). Date: second decade of the 2nd century BCE. Simion 1995, 273 no. 15.

ਥʌ੿ ȈȦıIJȡȐIJȠȢ ȆĮȞ[ȐȝȠȣ] ‘(It has been made) during (the office? of ) Sostratos (the son of) Panamos’

72 Amphora handle with neck and rim; fragment; round stamp; symbol: up left pomegranate flower with leaves. Rhodos; found in the Getic necropolis, M1. (ICEM Tulcea, inv. 36987). Date: second decade of the 2nd century BCE. Simion 1995, 273 no. 16.

70

Inscriptions on building material and pottery ਥʌ੿ [ੂİȡ]੼ȦȢ ȉȚȝĮıĮȖȩȡĮ ‘(It has been made) during the priesthood of Timasagora’

73 Amphora handle; fragment; stamp within rectangular cartouche: 3.7 x 1.6 cm. Rhodos; found in the Getic necropolis, M1. (ICEM Tulcea, inv. 36961). Date: second decade of the 2nd century BCE. Simion 1995, 273 no. 17. 73, 2.

ਥʌ੿ ੊Șȡȫ[ȞȣȝȠȢ] ਝȖȡȚĮȞȓȠȣ ‘(It has been made) during the office of Hieronymus (the son of) Agrianos’.

74 Amphora handle; fragment; stamp within rectangular cartouche: 1.5 x 2.5/3.3 cm. Symbol: up left eight rays star. Rhodos; found in the Getic necropolis, M1. (ICEM Tulcea, inv. 36971). Date: second decade of the 2nd century BCE. Simion 1995, 273 no. 18.

ਥʌ[੿ ...] [ȉ]ȚȝĮı[ĮȖȩȡĮ] ‘(It has been made) during (the priesthood of ?)Timasagoras’.

75 Amphora handle with rim and neck; fragment; round stamp: 3.3 cm; symbol: pomegranate flower. Rhodos; found in the Getic necropolis, M1. (ICEM Tulcea, inv. 36978). Date: second decade of the 2nd century BCE. Simion 1995, 274 no. 19.

ਬȡȝĮ[ȓȠȣ] ? ‘(It belongs to) Ermaios’

76 Amphora with rim, neck, and handles; fragment; ovoidal stamp: 3 x 2.6 cm; symbol: pomegranate flower with leaves. Rhodos; found in the Getic necropolis, M1. (ICEM Tulcea, inv. 36959) (fig. 144). Date: second decade of the 2nd century BCE. Simion 1995, 274 no. 20 fig. 9 b.

71

Halmyris II ਝȞIJȚȖȩȞȠȣ ȆȐȞĮȝȠȢ ‘(It has been made) during (the service of ?) Antigonos (the son of) Panamos.’

77 Amphora handle; stamp within rectangular cartouche: 3.9 x 1.6 cm. Rhodos; found in the Getic necropolis, M1. (ICEM Tulcea, Inv. 36960) (fig. 145). Date: second decade of the 2nd century BCE. Simion 1995, 274 no. 21 fig. 9 d.

ਝȖĮșȠțȜİ૨Ȣ

78 Amphora handle; stamp within rectangular cartouche: 3.6-3.7 x 1.5 cm; symbol: four six rays stars in the corners; unidentifiable symbol up right. Rhodos; found in the Getic necropolis, M1. (ICEM Tulcea, inv. 36969) (fig. 146). Date: second decade of the 2nd century BCE. Simion 1995, 274 no. 22 fig. 9 c.

ਝȡȚıIJȠț[ȡȐIJ]İȣȢ

79 Amphora handle with part of rim and neck; fragment; stamp within rectangular cartouche: 3.6 x 1.5 cm; symbol: four seven rays stars in the corners Rhodos; found in the Getic necropolis M1. (ICEM Tulcea, inv. 36990) (fig. 147). Date: second decade of the 2nd century BCE. Simion 1995, 274 no. 23 fig. 9 e.

ਝȡȚıIJȠț[ȡȐIJ]İȣȢ

80 Amphora handle; fragment; stamp within rectangular cartouche: 4 x 1.3 cm; symbol: up left five rays star. Rhodos; found in the Getic necropolis, M1. (ICEM Tulcea, inv. 36975) (fig. 148). Date: second decade of the 2nd century BCE. Simion 1995, 274 no. 24 fig. 9f.

Ȉȝ[ȚȞșȓ] Ƞȣ ਝȡȚıIJ[İ]ȓįĮ ‘(It belongs to) Sminthios (the son of) Aristides’.

72

Inscriptions on building material and pottery

81 Amphora handle; fragment; stamp within rectangular cartouche: 4.1 x 1.0 cm. Rhodos; found the Getic necropolis, M1. (ICEM Tulcea, inv. 36974) (fig. 149). Date: second decade of the 2nd century BCE. Simion 1995, 274 no. 25 fig. 9 g.

ǻĮȜȓȠȣ ਝȡȚ[ıIJİȓįĮ] ‘(It belongs to) Dalios (the son of) Aristides’.

82 Amphora handle; fragment; round stamp diam: 2.9 cm; symbol: pomegranate flower. Rhodos; found in the Getic necropolis, M1. (ICEM Tulcea, inv. 36.983) (fig. 150). Date: second decade of the 2nd century BCE. Simion 1995, 275 no. 26 fig. 9 h.

ǻĮȝȠțȡȐIJİȣȢ

83 Amphora handle; fragment; round stamp: 3 x 2.9 cm. Symbol: pomegranate flower. Rhodos; found in M1. (ICEM Tulcea, inv. 36993) (fig. 151). Date: second decade of the 2nd century BCE. Simion 1995, 275 no. 27 fig. 10 a.

ǻĮȝȠțȡȐIJİȣȢ

84 Amphora handle; fragment; round stamp: 2.8 x 1.0 cm; symbol: pomegranate flower. Rhodos; found in the Getic necropolis M1. (ICEM Tulcea, inv. 36965) (fig. 152). Date: second decade of the 2nd century BCE. Simion 1995, 275 no. 28.

ǻĮȝȠțȡȐIJİȣȢ

85 Amphora handle; fragment; stamp within rectangular cartouche: 3.6 x 1.6 cm. Rhodos; found in the Getic necropolis, M1. (ICEM Tulcea, inv. 36988); (fig. 153). Date: second decade of the 2nd century BCE. Simion 1995, 275 no. 29 fig. 10 b.

ǻȠȡȠșȑȠȣ 73

Halmyris II

86 Amphora handle with neck and rim; fragment; round stamp: 2.4/ 2.5 x 2.7 cm; symbol pomegranate flower with leaves. Rhodos; found in the Getic necropolis, M1. (ICEM Tulcea, inv. 36992). Date: second decade of the 2nd century BCE. Simion 1995, 275 no. 30.

[Ȁ]ȜİȚ[įȐȝȠȣ ?] ȕȡȠIJȓįĮ ‘(It belongs to) the progeny of Kleidamos’.

87 Amphora handle; fragment; stamp within rectangular cartouche; 3.8 x 1.5 cm; symbol: eight rays star. Rhodos; found in the Getic necropolis, M1. (ICEM Tulcea inv. 36962). Date: second decade of the 2nd century BCE. Simion 1995, 275 no. 31.

੥[ĮțȚȞș]IJȓȠȣ ? ‘(It belongs to) Yakinthios’.

88 Amphora handle with neck and rim; fragment; stamp within rectangular cartouche: 4.8 x 1.5 cm. Rhodos; found in the Getic necropolis, M1. (ICEM Tulcea, inv. 36977) (fig. 154). Date: second decade of the 2nd century BCE. Simion 1995, 275 no. 32 fig. 10c.

ĭȚȜĮȚȞȓȠȣ

89 Amphora handle; fragment; stamp within rectangular cartouche: 6.3 x 1.3 cm. Rhodos; found in the Getic necropolis, M1. (ICEM Tulcea, inv. 36985) (fig. 155). Date: second decade of the 2nd century BCE. Simion 1995, 275 no. 33 fig. 10 d.

ȂĮȡ[ı]ȪĮ ȆĮȞȐȝȠȣ ‘(It belongs to) Marsyas (the son of) Panamos’.

90 Amphora handle; fragment; stamp within rectangular cartouche: 3.4 x 1.5 cm; symbol: torch Rhodos; found in the Getic necropolis, M1. (ICEM Tulcea, inv. 36994) (fig. 156). 74

Inscriptions on building material and pottery Date: second decade of the 2nd century BCE. Simion 1995, 275 no. 34 fig. 10 e.

ȈȦțȡȐIJİȣȢ

91 Amphora handle; fragment; stamp within rectangular cartouche: ? x 1.2 cm. Rhodos; found in the Getic necropolis, M1. (ICEM Tulcea, inv. 36986). Date: second decade of the 2nd century BCE. Simion 1995, 275 no. 35.

[ǹȡȚıIJȠțȡ]ȐIJİȣȢ or [ȈȦțȡ]ȐIJİȣȢ

92 Amphora handle; fragment; stamp within rectangular cartouche: 3.6 x 1.4 cm. Rhodos; found in the Getic necropolis, M1. (ICEM Tulcea, inv. 36980). Date: second decade of the 2nd century BCE. Simion 1995, 275 no. 36.

[-------------] [--------]-ȐȠȣ [---------]Ƞȣ

93 Amphora handle; fragment; stamp within rectangular cartouche: 1.3 x 0.4 cm. Rhodos; found in the Getic necropolis, M1. (ICEM Tulcea, inv. 36963). Date: second decade of the 2nd century BCE. Simion 1995, 275 no. 37.

[----------------]ȖȠ[---] [----------------]ȖȠ[---]

94 Amphora handle; fragment; stamp within rectangular cartouche: 3.8 x 1.6 cm. Rhodos; found in M1. (ICEM Tulcea, inv. 36982). Date: second decade of the 2nd century BCE. Simion 1995, 275 no. 38.

[----------------------] [----------------------] ʌȡȐȣ ?

75

Halmyris II

95 Amphora handle with neck and rim; fragment; stamp within rectangular cartouche: 3.8 x 1.3 cm; symbol: up left six rays star. Rhodos; found in the Getic necropolis, M1. (ICEM Tulcea, inv. 36973). Date: second decade of the 2nd century BCE. Simion 1995, 275 no. 39.

ਥʌ੿ [----] ȡ [-----] ȉȠȝȠ [----]Ƞȣ ‘(It has been made) during (the office of) Tomo[---]s’

96 Amphora handle with neck and rim; fragment; stamp within rectangular cartouche: ? x 1.3 cm; symbol: down corner five rays star. Rhodos; found in the Getic necropolis, M1. (ICEM Tulcea inv. 36995). Date: second decade of the 2nd century BCE. Simion 1995, 275 no. 40.

ǻ[..............] ǻ[...............]

97 Amphora with both handles; upper part; stamp within rectangular cartouche: 4 x 1.5 cm; symbol: illegible. Rhodos; found in the Getic necropolis, M2. (ICEM Tulcea, inv. 37.082. Date: second decade of the 2nd century BCE. Simion 1995, 277 no. 1 fig. 11 a.

ਥʌ੿ ǻĮȝȠșİȝȓȠȢ ‘(It has been made) during (the office of) Damothemios’

98 Amphora with handles, neck, and rim; upper part; double stamps each within rectangular cartouches: a. 3.9 x 1.4cm; b. 4 x 1.4 cm. Symbol: illegible. Rhodos; found in the Getic necropolis, M2. (ICEM Tulcea, inv. 37081)( fig. 157-158). Date: second decade of the 2nd century BCE. Simion 1995, 278 no. 2 fig. 11 b-c.

a. ਥʌ੿ ĬİȣijȐȡȞİȣȢ ĬİıȝȠijȠȡȓȠȣ b. ȈȦțȡȐIJȘȢ ‘(It has been made) during (the office of) Theufarneos (the son of) Thesmoforios’

76

Inscriptions on building material and pottery

99 Amphora with handles, neck, and rim; upper part; double stamps each within rectangular cartouches: a. 3.5 x 1.1cm; b. 3.3 x 1 cm; symbol: illegible. Rhodos; found in the Getic necropolis M2. (ICEM Tulcea, inv. 37084) (fig. 159-160). Date: second decade of the 2nd century BCE. Simion 1995, 278 no. 3 fig. 11 d-e.

a. b.

ਥʌ੿ ੊ĮıȚțȡĮIJİȣȢ [ȆĮ]ȞĮȝȠȣ ǻȓȠȣ

‘(It has been made) during (the office of) Iasikrates ( the sone of) Panamos’

100 One handle amphora; upper part; stamp within rectangular cartouche: 3.8 x 1.5 cm. Rhodos; found in the Getic necropolis, M2. (ICEM Tulcea, inv. 37083) (fig. 161). Date: second decade of the 2nd century BCE. Simion 1995, 278 no. 4 fig. 11 f.

ਥʌ੿ ȀȜİȚIJȠȝĮȤȠȣ ਝ[...]Ƞȣ ‘(It has been made) during (the office of) A[----] ( the sone of) Kleitomachos’

101 Amphora handle with neck and rim; fragment; stamp within rectangular cartouche: 3.7 x 1.5 cm. Rhodos; found in the Getic necropolis, M2. (ICEM Tulcea, inv. 37086) (fig. 162). Date: second decade of the 2nd century BCE. Simion 1995, 278 no. 5 fig. 11 g.

ਝȡȚıIJȓȦȞȠȢ

102 Amphora handle with neck and rim; fragment; circular stamp; symbol: pomegranate flower; Rhodos; found in the Getic necropolis M2. (ICEM Tulcea, inv. 37085). Date: second decade of the 2nd century BCE. Simion 1995, 279 no. 6.

[ਝȓȞȑĮ] ਝȖȡȚĮȞȓȠȣ

77

Halmyris II ‘(It belongs to) Aineas (the son of) Agrianos’

103 Amphora handle, with neck and rim; fragment; circular stamp; symbol: pomegranate flower. Rhodos; found in the Getic necropolis, M2. (ICEM, Tulcea, inv. 37087). Date: second decade of the 2nd century BCE. Simion 1995, 279 no. 7.

[----] ȣȢ

104 Amphora handle with neck and rim; fragment; stamp within rectangular cartouche: 1.5 x 1.2 cm. Rhodos; found in the Getic necropolis, M2. (ICEM Tulcea, inv. 37088). Date: second decade of the 2nd century BCE. Simion 1995, 279 no. 8.

[-----]IIO

105 Amphora; fragment; found in Ƒ BC; -1.60-1.80 m on L. 10 (ICEM Tulcea) (fig. 203). Date: 4th century CE. Red dippinti on four lines: l. 1: the last ȋ+ǹ in ligature: ȋǹ or ǹȋ; more likely a X+A. l. 2: the first two letters Ȁĭ are capitals, the last three are cursive with Į written in uncial: ಒȞࣂ. l. 3: the last four legible letters seems more probably an ending in [---] ȝoȡȚ‫ ר‬rather than [----] ȝĮȡަĮ. 1.4: illegible letters; the last letter seems a Ȥ Kĭ Xǹ KĭąȞࣂ [?] ȝoȡȚࣂ [-----------]Ȥ

106 Fragment of a bottom part of an Attic flat plate with rolled rim, found in Ƒ C2 (1986); the fragment was mixed in the mass of the black soil brought in from afar in order to consolidate the foundations of the early phase of the northern gate. The paste is pink-citron in colour and polished to brownishblackish with metallic reflexes; a central stud in the middle of the round bottom; diameter: 8.3 cm. A graffito is inscribed on the external face of the bottom of the plate (ICEM Tulcea, inv. 40272) (fig. 163). Date: 3rd - 2nd century BCE. Suceveanu, Angelescu 1988, 146-150 no. 2 fig. 2; Suceveanu, Zahariade, Topoleanu, Poenaru Bordea 2003, 124-125 no. 20.

78

Inscriptions on building material and pottery ਝȝĮȚȠȣ IJȡȚȕĮ૙ȠȞ Ȉ઀ȝȘ į੻ ਥʌȡ઀ĮIJȠ Į੝IJં ‘The tribaion of Amaios; (it is) Sime who acquired it’. The text is explicit. It shows that Síme, as the particle į੻ shows, bought the vase from Amaios, who could have been in all likeliness the possessor and vendor of the plate at Halmyris. The inscription could have been written when the transaction was made. ਝȝĮȓȠȢ, fem. ਝȝĮȓĮ is a Greek PN, as the root ਚȝષ- indicates (cf. ਝȝĮȚંțȡȚIJȠȢ - Pape-Benseler 1911, 69; ਡȝĮȧȢ - LGPN I s..v). ȈȓȝȘ is also Greek fem. PN (Pape, Benseler 1911, 1392); A Síme is the daughter of Apaturios at Athens (IG II/III2 8941). ȈȓȝȘ could have been a local Greek woman, likely in the emporium where the transaction was made.1 The date of the pottery shard, late 3rd – early 2nd century BCE., and the Greek names of both vendor (Amaios) and acquirer (Síme) suggest the presence of a significant Greek economic activity in the Halmyris area.

107 Amphora; fragment; found at the North gate on L. 7 (ICEM Tulcea, inv. H 527)( fig. 164). Date: 4th century CE. Topoleanu 2000, 144 no. 368 pl. XLVI fig. 368.

Cross-like graffito on the handle: Ő; graffito on the shoulder: XXI.

108 Amphora; fragment; found in ƑP 19, -1.40m; L 9 (ICEM Tulcea, inv. H 803)( fig. 165). Date: first half of the 5th century CE. Topoleanu 2000, 159 no. 417 pl. LIII fig. 417.

Graffito on the shoulder: AKY- ǹ[ȝȒȞ] Ȁ઄[ȡȚİ ǺȠ੾ șȘ(?)]

109 Amphora; fragment; found in Ƒ IJ 14; L10 (ICEM Tulcea, inv. 546)( fig. 166). Date: 6th century CE. Topoleanu 2000, 152 no. 397 pl. LIII fig. 397.

Graffito on the shoulder: ZȦ.

1 For this form of the name see also: e.g. SEG XXIX 1011.15; XXXVI 361; XXXVII 1294 C. 2.17; 1308; XXXVIII 1098, 1198, 1456; XXXIX 1277; XL 1280, 1329A, 1345, 1348; XLIV 1132, 1716.

79

Halmyris II

110 Amphora; fragment; found at the North gate in Ƒ L 7 (ICEM Tulcea, inv. H 527)( fig. 167). Date: 4th century CE. Topoleanu 2000, 144 no. 368 pl. LIII fig. 368.

Graffito on the shoulder and handle: CTAXN Ő. T seems cut by a horizontal line.

111 Amphora LR 2; fragment; found in Ƒ Į 2; L 10 (ICEM Tulcea, inv. H 805) (fig. 168). Date: 6th century CE. Topoleanu 2000, 160 no. 419 pl. LIII fig. 419.

Graffito on the shoulder: M [sextarii] - 40 sextarii=21, 477 l. After M there is a break which could have been another letter; in that case the vessel would have had a bigger capacity.

112 Amphora LR 2; fragment; found in Ƒ U 18, -0.90m/-1.10m; L 10 (ICEM Tulcea,inv. H 804) (fig. 169). Date: 6th century CE. Topoleanu 2000, 160 no. 418 pl. LIII fig. 418.

Graffito on the shoulder: NZ [sextarii] - 57 sextarii=30, 982 l.

113 Amphora LR 2; fragment; found in S II, Ƒ 28; L 10 (ICEM Tulcea, inv. H 41150) (fig. 170). Date: 6th century CE. OpaiĠ 1991, 152 no. 149 pl. 25; Topoleanu 2000, 160 no. 420 pl. LIII fig. 420.

Graffito on the shoulder: N [sextarii] - 50 sextarii=27,18 l.

114 Amphora LR 2; fragment; found in SI, Ƒ10, -0.90; L 11 (ICEM Tulcea, inv. 41151) (fig. 171). Date: 6th century CE. OpaiĠ 1991, 152 no. 150 pl. 25; Topoleanu 2000, 160 no. 421 pl. LIII fig. 421.

Graffito on the shoulder: KB [sextarii]- 22 sextarii=11,959 l.

115 Amphora; completely restored; found in Ƒ X 20; L 10 (ICEM Tulcea, inv. 40688) Dg: 13. 4 cm; Dm: 44.8 cm; l: 66 cm (fig. 172). Date: 6th century CE.

80

Inscriptions on building material and pottery Topoleanu 2000, 133 no. 325 pl. LIII fig 325.

Graffito on the shoulder: ZOTI Zoti, ǽȩIJȚ is a Greek PN. Names comparable: ZȫIJȘ (LPGN I s.v.), ǽȦIJ઼Ȣ (LPGN II, II A s.v.). He must have been either the potter, or the owner of the amphora or workshop.

116 Amphora; fragment; found in S I, Ƒ 60; L 9 (ICEM Tulcea, inv. 41214) (fig. 173). Date: 6th century CE. OpaiĠ 1991, 152 no. 153 pl. 25; Topoleanu 2000, 160 no. 422 pl. LIII fig. 422.

Graffito on the shoulder: KOY [ȡȝȚ?]. If so, țȠ૨ȡȝȚ is a sort of beer made in Egypt, Spain, and Britain of barley and honey (Diosc. 2. 110) and also the variant țȩȡȝĮ (Ath. 152 C).

117 Amphora LR 2; fragment; found in S I, Ƒ 60; L 7 (ICEM Tulcea, inv. 40837) (fig. 174). Date: 6th century CE. OpaiĠ 1991, 152 no. 151 pl. 25; Topoleanu 2000, 160 no. 423 pl. LIII fig. 423.

Graffito on the shoulder: K A M [sextarii]-[…] sextarii=?

118 Amphora; fragment; found in; S I, Ƒ 72; - 0.82m; L 11 (ICEM Tulcea, inv. 42213) (fig. 175). Date: 6th century. OpaiĠ 1991, 152 no. 152 pl. 25; Topoleanu 2000, 160 no. 424 pl. LIII fig. 424.

Graffito on the shoulder: ȀȆǹ(?).

119 Amphora (rim and handles) LR 2; fragments; found in; S II; Ƒ 110; -2.10m. L. 7 (ICEM Tulcea, inv. 40835) (fig. 176). Date: 450-600 CE. OpaiĠ 1991, 140 no. 55 pl. 8; Topoleanu 2000, 161 no. 425 pl. LIII fig. 425.

Red dipinto on the neck: a cross: Ő ȋ[ȡȚıIJઁȞ] Ȃ[ĮȡȓĮ] ī[İȞȞ઼]=Marry gives birth to Christ; the capacity of the vessel is recorded twice and also the destination of it: X [sextarii] ȂĬ[਩]Ȝ[ĮȚȠȞ] (?)49 sextarii of oil. The invocation XȂī is well known on amphorae and other recipients. It is attested at Histria, Altinum, Sucidava and, in general, in a 5th -6th century CE archaeological context (IGLR no. 139144, 187, 316-324, 344, 349; Whitehouse 1985, 190-191; Uscătescu, Barón 1992, 157 fig. 20/148).

81

Halmyris II

120 Amphora LR 1; fragment; found in S II, Ƒ 42; L 8 (ICEM Tulcea, inv. 40686) (fig. 177). Date: 5th-6th century CE. OpaiĠ 1991, 152 no. 145 pl. 24; Topoleanu 2000, 161 no. 426 pl. LIII fig. 426.

Red dipinto on the neck. Monogrammatic cross: Ő Ȁ[઄ȡȚİ](?) -‘God’, or K (sextarii)= 20 sextarii=1,0871 l.

121 Amphora LR 1; fragment; found in Ƒ U 42; -2.40 m; L 8 (ICEM Tulcea, inv. H 806) (fig. 178). Date: 5th-6th century CE. Topoleanu 2000, 161 no 427 pl. LIII fig. 427.

Red dipinto on the neck. K[઄ȡȚİ](?)-‘God’, or K (sextarii) = 20 sextarii=10871 l.

122 Amphora LR 1; fragment; of; found in Ƒ U 19; -0.75 m; L 12 (ICEM Tulcea, inv. H 807) (fig. 179). Date: 5th-6th century CE. Topoleanu 2000, 161 no. 428 pl. LIII fig. 428.

Red dipinto on the neck. Monogrammatic cross: Ő.

123 Amphora LR 1; fragment; found in S II, Ƒ 60; L 11 (ICEM Tulcea, inv. 40412) (fig. 180). Date: 6th century CE. OpaiĠ 1991, 146 no. 103. pl. 17; Topoleanu 2000, 161 no. 429 pl. LIII fig. 429.

Red dipinto on the neck ȋȁī Ȇȡ[İıȕȣIJȑȡȠȣ]-33 sextarii…(belonging to) the priest. The term Ȇȡİıȕ઄IJİȡȠȢ associated with the capacity of amphoras are also known at Tomis (IGLR 67) and Sucidava (IGLR 330 b 1; 392) in 5th -6th century CE. It is a second time when a priest is recorded at Halmyris. The priest (presbyter) Bonosus is mentioned in late 3rd century after the martyrdom of Epictetus and Astion (Acta SS II Iulii IV 47) had been consumed.

124 Amphora LR 2; fragment; found in S I, Ƒ 60; L. 8 (ICEM Tulcea, inv. 41152)( fig. 181). Date: 6th century CE. OpaiĠ 1991, 151 no. 143. pl. 24; Topoleanu 2000, 161 no. 430 pl. LIII fig. 430.

Double red dipinto on the neck: ȋȄș (sextarii) –69 sextarii =37,508 l. ȋȄș (sextarii) –69 sextarii =37,508 l.

82

Inscriptions on building material and pottery

125 Amphora (rim, handles); Böttger type II-2; fragments; found in S I; Ƒ 60; L. 8 (ICEM Tulcea, inv. 29791) (fig. 182). Date: 6th century CE. OpaiĠ 1991, 151 no. 133. pl. 22; Topoleanu 2000, 161 no. 362 pl. LIII fig. 362.

Red dipinto on the shoulder: ǿǽȋ(sextarii) -16 sextarii=8,697 l.

126 Amphora LR 1; fragment; found in Ƒ U 20; -2. 40 m; L. 8 (ICEM Tulcea, inv. H 808) (fig. 183). Date: 6th century CE. Topoleanu 2000, 161 no. 431 pl. LIV fig. 431.

Red dipinto on the neck: half of the letter Ĭ is preserved. The inscription had one more letter which fell in the missing part. The vase had a bigger capacity than showed by the fragmentary dipinto: Ĭ (sextarii) - 9 sextarii=8,697 l.

127 Amphora LR 2; fragment; found in Ƒ V 17;-1. 15m; L. 10 (ICEM Tulcea, inv. H 809) (fig. 184). Date: 6th century CE. Topoleanu 2000, 161 no. 432 pl. LIV fig. 432.

Red dipinto on the shoulder: N (sextarii) - 50 sextarii=27,115 l.

128 Amphora LR 2; fragment; found in Ƒ a 2; L. 10 (ICEM Tulcea, inv. H 810) (fig. 185). Date: 6th century CE. Topoleanu 2000, 161 no. 433 pl. LIV fig. 433.

Red dipinto on the neck; probably the letters N and Ĭ, written five times: ȃĬ(sextarii)-59 sextarii=32, 072 l.

129 Amphora LR 2; fragment; found in S I, Ƒ 17; L. 10 (ICEM Tulcea, inv. 29733) (fig. 186). Date: 6th century CE. OpaiĠ 1991, 151 no. 142 pl. 24; Topoleanu 2000, 161 no. 434 pl. LIV fig. 434.

Red dipinto on the shoulder: ȃĬ (sextarii)-59 sextarii=32,072 l.

130 Amphora LR 2; rim with handle; found in Ƒ T 19 -0.40m; L 13 (ICEM Tulcea, inv. H 508) (fig. 187). Date: 6th century CE. 83

Halmyris II Topoleanu 2000, 162 no. 330 pl. LIV fig. 330.

ȃī (sextarii)-53 sextarii=28,81 l.

131 Amphora; fragment; found passim (ICEM Tulcea, inv. 41211) (fig. 188). Date: 6th century CE. OpaiĠ 1991, 152 no. 146 pl. 24; Topoleanu 2000, 162 no. 435 pl. LIV fig. 435.

Red dipinto on the neck: Ȅȇǹ (sextarii)-101 sextarii=54, 903 l.

132 Amphora; fragment; found in S II Ƒ 41 (ICEM Tulcea, inv. 41212) (fig. 189). Date: 6th century CE. OpaiĠ 1991, 152 no. 148 pl. 24; Topoleanu 2000, 162 no. 436 pl. LIV fig. 436.

Red dipinto on the neck: ǿĬ (sextarii)-19 sextarii=10,328 l.

133 Amphora LR 1; fragment; found in Ƒ X19; -1.60 m-2.30 m; L 8 (ICEM Tulcea, inv. H 606) (fig. 190). Date: 6th century CE. Topoleanu 2000, 162 no. 437 pl. LIV fig. 437.

Red dipinto; illegible.

134 Amphora LR 1; fragment; found in Ƒ V19; -2.25 m; L 8 (ICEM Tulcea, inv. H 601) (fig. 191). Date: 6th century CE. Topoleanu 2000, 162 no. 438 pl. LIV fig. 438.

Red dipinto; illegible.

135 Amphora LR 1; fragment; found in S II, Ƒ 76; L 11 (ICEM Tulcea, inv. 38663) (fig. 192). Date: 6th century CE. OpaiĠ 1991, 152 no. 144 pl. 24; Topoleanu 2000, 162 no. 439 pl. LIV fig. 439.

Red dipinto; illegible.

84

Inscriptions on building material and pottery

136 Amphora LR 1; fragment; found at western gate, north bastion; L 12 (ICEM Tulcea, inv. H 602) (fig. 193). Date: 6th century CE. Topoleanu 2000, 162 no. 777 pl. LIV fig. 440.

Red dipinto; illegible

137 Amphora LR 1; fragment; found in S II, Ƒ 41; L12 (ICEM Tulcea, inv. 41210) (fig. 194). Date: 6th century. OpaiĠ 1991, 152 no. 147 pl. 24; Topoleanu 2000, 162 no. 441 pl. LIV fig. 441.

Black dipinto; illegible

138 Amphora LR 2; fragment; found in Ƒ T19; -0.85 m; L 11 (ICEM Tulcea, inv. H 408) (fig. 195). Date: 6th century CE. Topoleanu 2000, 162 no. 442 pl. LIV fig. 442.

Waved red dipinto, illegible

139 Amphora (rim, handles); fragments; diameter: 9.8 cm; found in Ƒ T 19; -0.40 m; L 13 (ICEM Tulcea, inv. H 508) (fig. 196). Date: 6th century CE. Topoleanu 2000, 133 no. 330, pl. LIV fig. 330.

Red dipinto.

140 Oil lamp; fragment; found in; Ƒ H 20; -0.50m; L 12 (ICEM Tulcea, inv. 42673) (fig. 197). Date: 6th century-early 7th century CE. Topoleanu 2000, 188 no. 484 pl. LX fig. 484.

Letter Ȧ on the bottom.

141 Oil lamp; found in S I, Ƒ 52; -2.10m; L 5 (ICEM Tulcea, inv. 28537) (fig. 198). 85

Halmyris II Date: second half of the 3rd century CE. Topoleanu 2000, 196 no. 505 pl. LXII fig. 505.

Letter Ȇ on the bottom.

142 Oil lamp; found in S II, Ƒ 1-10 passim; L 5 (ICEM Tulcea, inv. 42680) (fig. 199). Date: 4th century CE. Topoleanu 2000, 197-198 no. 508 pl. LXIII fig. 508.

Letter P + E in vertical ligature on the bottom.

143 Oil-lamp; fragment; found in Ƒ N 16, 16-17, -0.60m; N 12; preserved length: 9.2cm; height: 4.8cm (ICEM Tulcea, inv. 44089) (fig. 200). Date: 6th century CE. Topoleanu 2000, 185 no. 470 pl. LVIII fig. 470.

On the margins the inscription: ȀȁȀȅ/ȀȊȇǿǹȀȅ; P inversed; neat writing; letters in relief.

144 Vessel lid; fragment; reddish paste; found in 2006 in Ƒ M 14, -0.39 m. Dimensions: 19.5 x 6 x 1.5 cm. A small fragment of the handle is preserved on the upper face, in the middle. The inscription is set circularly around the handle; the letters, written in relief, are 2.5 cm in height. Four letters are preserved, of which only two in the middle are legible (ICEM Tulcea) (fig. 201). Date: 5th - 6th century CE. […] H C […] [Ȁ(઄ȡȚİ) ȕȠ੾ș]Ș C[...] ‘God help’ Vessel lids are widely spread among the pottery artefacts. In the 5th -6th century the lids served as supports for a wide variety of inscriptions bearing wishing, encouragements, or invocations of Christian character. Similar formulas are noticeable in case of lids found at Ulmetum (Pantelimonu de Sus) (IGLR 214, 215) and Histria (IGLR 120).

145 Bowl (?); fragment; the paste is dark red in colour. The fragment was found in 2002 in the presbyterium area, in Ƒ C 6. Dimensions: 2 x 1.5 x 0.3 cm. The small fragment exhibits the upper part of the vertical and the horizontal arms of an incised Latin type cross which places the letters in two fields: M on the left side and Ĭ on the right. The bowl seems to have been used in the church service as results from the refinement and quality of the paste (ICEM Tulcea) (fig. 202).

86

Inscriptions on building material and pottery Date: 5th -6th century CE. M(੾IJȘȡ) Ĭ(İȠૣ) The name of the Virgin is most often rendered on amphorae and jugs. Such an invocation appears as a graffito on an amphora at Sucidava (5th -6th century CE) (IGLR 329, but sometimes the words are inversed (IGLR 330, 383).

146 Amphora (?); fragment; found in 2006 in T12 a 1. Dimensions: 8.5 x 6.7 cm. (ICEM Tulcea, inv. no. 10453) (fig. 204). Red dipinto.Three letters are visible and traces of an unidentifiable fourth which appear in the break of the fragment. Date: 6th century CE. KȠȞ [---]

147 Amphora; fragment; found in 2005, in Ƒ L8. Dimensions: 6.4 x 4.1 cm. Unidentifiable letters, or a specific potter sign. Possibly o (omega) + ʌ in ligature (ICEM Tulcea, inv. 10452) (fig. 205). Date: 6th century CE.

148 Amphora; fragment; found in 2006, in Ƒ N2. Dimensions: 11. 5 x 16. 2 cm (ICEM Tulcea, inv. 10443) (fig. 206). Graffito with incised letters PP after the burning crossing the striations. The first P is bigger (ca. 8 cm) than the second fragmentary letter. Another small scratch before the first P of an unidentifiable letter is visible, but not identifiable. Date: 6th century CE. [---] PP

87

Halmyris II

88

IV SIGNA ON STONES AND BUILDING MATERIAL Cristina-Georgeta Alexandrescu Stone monuments Almost all the stone monuments presented in this volume share the common feature of being found in secondary utilization as building material. Therefore the usual analysis of shapes and eventual typologies are in many cases not directly possible. Reusing older stone monuments as building material for the Late Roman city or fortification walls is a common practice on the territory of the Lower Moesia (for example Ulmetum, Sacidava, Histria, Capidava, Ibida, Troesmis etc.) and in almost all Roman provinces.45 The case of Halmyris is particular for the little we know at this moment from the early Roman city and the surrounding settlements. The stone in which the early votive and funerary monuments were carved was considered suitable for the purpose of building the fundaments of the walls of the Late Roman stronghold. The events of the Late Roman times and never the less the weathering conditions made in several occasions even reparation works necessary. Till now the spolia from Halmyris were of special interest for the inscriptions they bear. This addendum to the epigraphic corpus of the site (from the systematic excavations and accidental discoveries till 2010) aims to complete the documentation with comments on the recognizable type of monument as well as by adding some anepigraphic monuments.46 Further the used stone material was of interest. It was possible to investigate a number of 14 monuments included in this volume.47 The results and the comment on the sources of raw material are to be found in the contribution of A. Baltres. In the following we include short comments on the stones bearing inscription and therefore already generally presented in the part II of this volume, starting with votive and continuing with funerary monuments. The catalogue numbering continues with the fragmentary monuments without preserved inscription. Votive monuments The votive altars, through their inscription of great importance for the history of the city and of the province, can not be really evaluated in regard to their shape. Generally for Moesia inferior the category of altars has not been studied in regard to the shape, accessories or decoration.48 45

For random examples: Vulpe, Barnea 1968; Scorpan 1980; Pârvan 1916; IMS III/2, 13-15. In the storage room of the site there were further six small fragments recognizable through the vine leaves/grapes motif they bear as parts of the border of funerary gravestone. Those are not included in this corpus for their finding spot and conditions could not be sufficiently clarified. 47 Cat. no. 5, 6, 8, 9, 10, 18, 19, 21, 25, 28, 29, 32, 33 and 151. – For an overview on the local stone materials used for the Roman sculpture and relief within Dobrogea see Covacef 2002, 270-295. 48 For an overview on the problematic of this shape of monument (votive, funeral or honorary), the methodology of the study and the situation in Dacia see Ciongradi 2007, 60-62. For the funerary altars in Moesia inferior see the short considerations in Conrad 2004, 21-22 and pl. 8. 46

89

Halmyris II Only the fragments cat. no. 5 and cat. no. 9 preserve partially the decoration of the capital of the altar. For cat. no. 7 and cat. no. 8 the capital and the base of the altar have been chopped off and the altar itself cut into two or three pieces. Obvious is however the fact that the original shape of both altars was the one with profiled capital and base. For the fragment cat. no. 149 is not possible to decide if it had a votive, honorary or funerary destination. 5 (fig. 20-24) Votive altar for Hercules (National Museum of Military History, Bucharest, inv. no. 53159). Date: early 2nd century CE (epigraphy) Arheomedia-db/ID5010.

The altar has been damaged in order to be reused as building material. The lower part (base) as well as the front size of the gable and the entire left side of the altar have been broken off. The preserved dimensions of the monument are: h max. 96 cm; height of the capital (measured on the right side) 35 cm; width of the shaft 48 cm; max. preserved width of the capital 53 cm; the preserved depth of the capital is only 38 cm, chopped off in order to correspond to the original depth of the shaft of 36 cm. Only the remains of the upper right side and of the bottom offer details on the original very elaborated shape of the monument. The capital of the altar projects out above the shaft starting with a row of eight (preserved) dentils, followed by a sequence of mouldings, comprising a cyma reversa, a doucine and a round listel, ending with a 8 cm high band. The focus is round, about 41 cm in diameter, with a 4-5 cm wide rim and a deepened inner part for the fire. It rises up about 7 cm between the plastic decorated pulvini, from which only the right one is partially preserved. This shows a decoration similar to the one of an Ionic capital (with balteus, schematic sculpted vegetal motifs and a probable volute on the front side, of about 8 cm in diameter). The remains of the left pulvino give the impression that it was originally not finalized, for the decoration of the balteus is not made. The back side of the altar was left undecorated. Therefore the altar must have been originally on display in front of a wall or similar structure. Analogies for the decoration of the capital are to be found outside the province, like in Pannonia or in North-Italy.49 9 (fig. 28) Votive altar (ICEM Tulcea, inv. no. 41340). Date: 200 CE (names of the consuls). Arheomedia-db/ID5028.

Fragmentary votive altar of the vicus classicorum with a pine cone on the front, between the acroteria decorated with acanthus leafs. The band under the capital is bearing an ivy-leaves and tendrils motif. The pine cone is usually a funerary symbol (Conrad 2004, 94), being depicted on gables of altars and gravestones, in the middle. However the symbol is attested on votive altars as well50.

49 50

Szabó, Kovács (eds.) 2009, no 64. M. Mirkovic, Bene¿ciarii consularis in Sirmium, Chiron 24, 1994, 345-404, no. 1; Szabó, Kovács (eds.) 2009 nos. 99 and 338; IDR III/3, no. 86.

90

Signa on stones and building material 149 (figs. 89-91) Fragment of an altar (Murighiol, storage). Found in the debris of the Western gate, near the southern round wing at -2.85 - 2.90 m. It was apparently walled into the superstructure of the late 3rd -early 4th century gate, as spolium. Dimensions: 50-72 cm x 62 (upper part)-46 (shaft) x 34-30 (bottom of the fragment) cm. Date: 2nd century CE. Arheomedia-db/ID5018.

Fragment of an altar, cut on the vertical from the middle part of the monument. The side is decorated with a leaves crown with teniae. In the middle is a flower with four petals. The autopsy of the better preserved top as well as one of the sides of the fragment could not be realized due to the storage conditions at the time of documentation. The right orientation of the fragment is also difficult for the depicted crown on the side has analogies both with the teniae oriented upward and downwards. The elaborated profile inclines the balance towards the identification of the fragment as part of the top part of the altar. The crown with a flower in the middle is a frequent ornament for gravestones and sarcophagi in Moesia inferior.51 One funerary altar in Pompei is decorated with a similar kind of crown with the teniae at the top.52 The funerary altar of the veteran Ulpius Latinus, ex signifero, reused in the Late Roman wall of Histria (Alexandrescu Vianu 2000, cat. no. 237, pl. 91) bears on three sides different kinds of leaves crowns, with teniae at the bottom, without flower in the middle. Funerary monuments Till now the funerary monuments of the province of Moesia inferior build the focus of many general and special studies.53 The identification of the original shape of the gravestone recovered in a precarious state of preservation is however in many cases difficult or even impossible, due to the fact that the slabs have been prepared to be reused as building material. This is the case, for instance, for the fragment cat. no. 29. The size of the evened part of the border indicates one of the elaborated kinds of gravestone. For the gravestones cat. no. 22 and cat. no. 26 we can rely only on their large dimensions in order to make assumptions on the initial monument54. The width of 85 cm in case of the not entirely preserved cat no. 22 allows assuming a height of about or over 2 m, which seems to be a common feature for the 2nd century CE gravestones from Halmyris. As far as the fragmentary state of preservation of the presented stone monuments allow observations, can be concluded that the stone material used was local sedimentary rock from the quarries around Babadag (see below the contribution of A. Baltres in this volume and fig. 217) and that the population from Halmyris allowed to commission quite skilled artists, even if the funerary monuments belong to a rather simple category compared to other provinces and the possible more elaborate funerary constructions55.

51

Conrad 2004, 93-94. – Also on the sarcophagus of Alexandros from Noviodunum, now in Tulcea, ICEM inv. 2138 (ARHEOMEDIA-db/ID5005). H. von Hesberg, Römische Grabbauten (Darmstadt 1992) fig. 199. For an overview see Conrad 2004, 6-3. 54 The autopsy of cat. no. 26 brought the following observations, useful for the recognition of the former shape of the gravestone. The inscription field is about 1-2 cm deepened. The borders width is of 18 (on the left) and 20 cm (on the right) side. Above the inscription there are 54-55 cm, while to the bottom, from the inscription field, are 83 cm. 55 The gravestones seem to have been a usual choice for the members of the so-called middle-class in the Roman provinces – see Conrad 2004, 101109; E. Pochmarski, Porträtstelen in Noricum. Ausdruck des Repräsentationsstrebens städtischer Eliten?, in: E. Walde, B. Kainrath (eds.), Die Selbstdarstellung der römischen Gesellschaft in den Provinzen im Spiegel der Steindenkmäler, IX. Internatioales Kolloquium über Probleme des provinzialrömischen Kunstschaffens, Innsbruck 2005 (Innsbruck 2007), 381-392. 52 53

91

Halmyris II 150 (figs. 92-101) Pyramidal shaped coping from a funerary monument (ICEM Tulcea, inv. no. 48663). Found in 1994, Ƒ E1, Edifice II, - 0.80 m in a secondary position, collapsed from the southern wall of room B of the edifice repaired in late 4th - early 5th century, where it was reused. Dimensions: the preserved height varies between 61 and 71 cm. The width of the front side is 42 cm at the bottom and 31 cm at the top. The depth of the monument is 30 cm at the bottom and 28.5 cm at the top, where the monument is broken. The piece is damaged on the upper part, which is broken. Date: probably 2nd century CE. Arheomedia-db/ID5016.

The pyramidal shaped coping has three sides decorated with a relief depicting a crater with a rich combination of interwoven grapevine tendrils, leaves and bunches of grapes coming out of it. The backside is coarsely dressed. The bottom side of the monuments does not present any kind of fixation device. The decoration consisting of a similar motif on all sides presents no border. On the front side the relief starts 15 cm above the lower end, while on the laterals it starts 35 cm above it. The execution of the relief on the three sides is different. The most elaborate is the front side, where the vessel presents decorations on the junction line between lip and body and between the body and leg of the crater.56 From each of the handles hangs one oversized ivy-leaf. Two vine tendrils rise up in symmetrical movement, while in the vessel, between the tendrils, a frontal depicted leaf can be seen. The tendrils join in the middle and settle a level. Inwards grapes and curling tendril are hanging over the vessel, while outwards a vine leaf can be seen. The higher level presents larger leafs. The less deep carved relief on the sides shows only the first level of tendrils above the crater due to the position on the shaft of the cover. While the crater and the ivy-leafs are fitted into the smaller space, the vine leafs on the tendril seem to have been narrowed. The monument is broken on that level. The pyramidal shaped coping elements for funerary monuments are present in the region57 but not very well attested as, for instance, in Dacia.58 Their shape and decoration seems to confine to small dimensions and vegetal repertoire. The position within the funerary precinct or as top of an altar can not be clarified based on the present evidence.

Gravestones with profiled border Several of the very fragmentary preserved gravestones belong, as expected, to the type of gravestones with profiled border (Conrad 2004, type I and II -‚Profilgerahmte Grabstelen’). Among them cat. no. 18, cat. no. 26 (considered by Conrad as belonging to his type IV!), cat. no. 27 and cat. no. 32. The assignment to the more refined subcategories is in most cases difficult, for the defining parts are missing.

56

This detail reassembles the depiction of crater decorated with strigiles – eg on a relief from the aedes fabrum on the forum of Ulpia Traiana Sarmizegetusa in Dacia: A. Diaconescu, E. Bota, Le Forum de Trajan à Sarmizegetusa. Architecture et sculpture (Cluj-Napoca 2009) 263-264, Sc 49, pl. 106/4. 57 Fragmentary pyramidal cover, found in the tumular necropolis of Noviodunum - ICEM inv. no. 24537 (Baumann 1984, 215, no. 9, fig. 21; ARHEOMEDIA-db/ID5020). The decoration of ivy leaves on two parallel tendrils dresses all three preserved sides; the back side(?) is chopped off. 58 H. Daicoviciu, Coronamentele in formă de trunchi de piramidă arcuită pe teritoriul provinciei Dacia, Apulum 7/1, 1968, 333-352; Ciongradi 2007, 87-89.

92

Signa on stones and building material 20 (fig. 45-50) Stela of Aelius Valens, with a funerary banquet scene (ICEM inv. no. 41344/2328) Dimensions: Preserved height about 155-160 cm; fragment 1 – 90-95 x 85 x 17 cm; fragment 2 – 65 x 61 x 16 cm. The borders and the surface have been very affected by the preparation for reuse. Date: 2nd century CE. Arheomedia-db/ID5012.

The field with representation is positioned in a deep niche on the upper part of the monument, while the lower part bears a framed, deepened, field of inscription. The decoration of the wide borders and of the register below the field with depiction has been strongly chopped off, might have been the usual vine and grape motif. The scene of the funerary banquet, fitting into the whole field of representation, is less skillfully executed but follows a complex schema, with rich details. The bearded deceased lies on his left side, on a kliné, on a thick mattress leaning against a high, S-shaped, back curved side at the upper extremity of the piece of furniture. The legs of the kliné have protuberances; the deceased lies with his head propped directly on the upper edge of the bed. He is leaning on a pillow.59set under his head. His right hand is bent at right angle, touching the mattress. He holds bread or a fruit in his left hand. The legs are stretched out at full length; the feet are not covered. On the right side of the bed seats a woman, half turned to the viewer, on a chair with a high flipside, slightly curved at the upper extremity; her legs rest on a rectangular stool. Both chair and stool are above the level where the legs of the kliné stand. The woman is wearing a tunica and a mantle with sophisticated folds. She has a hair style intended to be à la Faustina minor. On the left side of the bed stands a man dressed in a chiton. On his left shoulder he seems to carry a towel, while in his left hand he holds an unidentifiable item. He is oversized and not undersized compared to the deceased and his wife, as usual for the servants in the banquet scenes. It is therefore not unlikely to represent the also deceased son, mentioned in the inscription. The table (mensa tripes) in front of the bed is of round shape with straight legs ending in hooves60; fruits (or plates or bread?) on the table. The date of the monument is rather difficult to settle. The epigraphic details suggest the hadrianic period as a terminus post quem. The stylistic criteria (like the hair style of the woman) indicate a latter period. Due to the poor quality of the relief and the state of preservation it is safe to propose the end of the second and begin of the third centuries CE. The scene of the funerary banquet, one of the most popular themes for the representation on funerary relief61, is rather rare in the Northern Moesia inferior, far from the productions centers in Histria and Tomis. Only two further fragmentary gravestones can be mentioned, both preserved in the collection of the museum in Tulcea.62 Cat. no. 20 is presenting some individual features among the other monuments. The schema with the women seated at the right of the kliné is attested only on singular monuments in Ulmetum and Sacidava, but also in Histria63. However the fact that the women on the monument in Halmyris is not wearing the veil over her head is not usual.

59

See Covacef 2002, 205-206. On the mobilier on the gravestones from Moesia inferior see Covacef 2002, 204-213. Conrad 2004, 57 ff. 62 Fragmentary gravestone reused in a church in Tulcea, as building material - ICEM inv. no. 2152 (Baumann 1984, 215-216, no. 11, fig. 23; ARHEOMEDIA-db/ID5021); Fragmentary gravestone probably from Noviodunum – ICEM inv. no. 2283 (Baumann 1984, 216, no. 13, fig. 25; ARHEOMEDIA-db/ID5022). 63 Conrad 2004, cat. no. 260 (Ulmetum), 284(Sacidava); Alexandrescu Vianu 2000, cat. no. 212 (Histria). 60 61

93

Halmyris II 21 (figs. 51-59) The gravestone of Flavia Titia belongs to type Ia/1 in Conrad’s typology. Date: middle - second half of the 2nd century CE. Arheomedia-db/ID5013.

The monument has two registers: the upper one is divided into three fields by two lateral oblique bars, making up a triangular gable with ornaments of ivy branches on both sides. Inside the gable are a corona and a pine cone above it (fig. 53). A tenia binds the crown at its base. Two symmetrical ivy branches spring from the upper side of the crown. The field of inscription is deepened and framed. The lower part of the block is decorated with a schematic depicted crater of nearly globular shape,64 with two vine branches with leaves and grape clusters winding along the frame of the field with the inscription. While passing from the sides to the horizontal part of the frame, the branches become curled and hold ivy leafs. They end as tendrils in a point corresponding to the tenia of the crown in the gable. The monument presents rests of its initially coloured decoration (see below). A dark red colour can be observed on the ivy and vine branches (but not on the grapes or on the leaves), on the crown in the gable, on the border lines of the front and in the letters of the inscription (fig. 56 and 58). Further the crown preserves some white preparation stratum (fig. 57), while the background of the gable presents brownish-rusty looking surfaces (fig. 54, 55 and 59), especially on the right side (see below). 28 (fig. 71) Gravestone for a family. Date: 4th century CE (epigraphical criteria and onomastic). Arheomedia-db/ID5014.

The type is attested for the province and for Halmyris in earlier periods as well (Conrad 2004, 47 – type IIa), being one of the most used, with rich variations. The vegetal ivy tendril and leaves motif is starting from two leaves crowns in the capital and is flowing on each border. The center of the front is occupied by a two-handled vessel, schematically executed. The precarious state of preservation does not allow further observation on the ornamentation of the monument. The monument gives the impression of having been bought from a preexistent stock of gravestones and had the text carved in the empty spaces: both the field of inscription and the niche usually used for a representation. It is however no practice of the late period for a further, early, example is known from Oescus (Conrad 2004, cat. no. 450). Gravestones with the borders decorated with ivy tendril and leaves, either surrounding all the fields or separating the field of inscription from the field/fields with depiction, are known in Moesia inferior, in Histria, Capidava and Ulmetum (Bordenache 1965). Of great interest is a group of three gravestones from Ulmetum, two of them commissioned by the same man, Attas, son of Posses. The gravestone he made for his son was found already by Pârvan,65 while the monument for his wife, Mama, was found at Dulgheru, near Ulmetum, about 50 years later.66 The same type of gravestone was chosen, the final execution and ornamentation was different and also the position of depictions. On both monuments the motif of the riding hero/ hunting hero is 64

See also the vessel on cat. no 33 and on a gravestone from Troesmis (MNA inv. no. L 66 – ARHEOMEDIA-db/ID5023; Conrad 2004, cat. no. 226). ARHEOMEDIA-db/ID5025; Conrad 2004, cat. no. 256, pl. 89/2; ISM V, no. 78. 66 ARHEOMEDIA-db/ID5026; Conrad 2004, cat. no. 240, pl. 98/1; ISM V, no. 128. 65

94

Signa on stones and building material represented, in the main field for the son, in the field of inscription for the wife, while the main field is occupied by the scene of the funerary banquet. Both gravestones commissioned by Attas are bearing Greek inscriptions. The third monument from Ulmetum, the one for Ithazis Dada, seems to be the product of the same workshop as the stela of Mama. Both monuments are of similar height and using similar decoration motifs, even if the execution of the details and the tectonic of the monument differ. G. Bordenache observed the discrepancy between the execution of the monuments and their decoration and the clumsy execution of the inscriptions and stated this as a characteristic of the productions of the 2nd century gravestones in Moesia inferior (Bordenache 1965, 264). 32 (figs. 76-78) Fragment from the lower part of a gravestone of large dimensions, with a profiled and deepened field of inscription, with borders decorated with vine branches. This monuments, despite its precarious state of preservation and fragmentation caused by the preparation for the reuse, presented at the autopsy from 2007 rests of pink and blue colour on the borders and red colour on the grapes (fig. 77). 33 (figs.79-86. 113) Fragment from the lower part of a gravestone of large dimensions, made of local spongolite. The field of inscription is framed and slightly deepened (probably Conrad type IIb/2). Date: end of the 2nd – 3rd century CE. Arheomedia-db/ID5015.

The preserved fragment measured (august 2007) a maximal height of 82 cm, a width of 123 cm and a depth of maximum 22 cm (at the borders, 17 cm in the field of inscription). The degradation of the monument continued in the meanwhile. For the time being the fragment broke longitudinally into two fragments, while the block continues to split out. In the depth there is an advanced process of splitting parallel with the stratification of the stone. An idea of the quick damaging is given by the comparison of the different detail pictures taken in different periods after the discovery (Figs. 79, 80 and 81). The possible connections with cat. no. 151 suggested by stylistic observations can complete the information on the type of gravestone (Conrad type II.b2). The preserved lines of the inscription do not speak against the hypothesis that the cat. no. 33 and 151 belonged to the same monument.67 Even the slightly different dimensions in the width of the block, as in the execution of the ornament of the border (wider on the left side) are more or less usual for large monuments of this type.68 The inclusion of additional representation in the field of inscription is characteristic for the type IIb/2. The motif of the kantharos with flowers and rich ivy tendrils is positioned under the lines of inscription. An interesting addition are two snakes directed to the center, to the mouth of the kantharos, as preparing to drink from it, a quite frequent motif in the funeral iconography, but singular in the region of provenience of this monument.69 The heads of the snakes present eyes and a kind of crest, like the snakes applied on the so-called “vessels with snakes”.70 At the time of discovery of the fragment, ivy leaves were to bee seen within the lines of the 67 Analyzing the Figs. 80 and 81 the lines could read …]/matri b(ene) m(erenti)/ f(aciendum) c(uravit) – see above the epigraphic catalogue. Also the cat. no. 21 is the gravestone of the mother commissioned by the son. 68 For comparation see the gravestone from Troesmis, MNA L 66, now in the lapidarium of the National Museum of Romanian History (inv. no 18847) in Bucharest (ISM V, no. 184; ARHEOMEDIA-db/ID5023). This gravestone is cut also in stone of local provenience – coarse grained Cenomanian sandstone, according to the determination of A. Baltres – different however from the one of the Halmyris examples. 69 See C.-G. Alexandrescu, Schlangentöpfe im sepulkralen Kontext, in: C. Cosma (ed.), Funerary offerings and votive depositions in Europe’s 1st millenium AD. Cultural artefacts and local identities (Cluj-Napoca 2007) 49-66, especially 53 and pl. 7. 70 P. Eschbaumer, V. Gassner, S. Jilek, M. Kandler, G. Kremer, M. Pfisterer, S. Radbauer, H. Winter, Der Kultbezirk des Iuppiter Optimus Maximus Heliopolitanus in den östlichen Canabae von Carnuntum. Carnuntum Jahrbuch 2003, 117-167, especially 160 with fig. 23; J. Klein, Verzierte Thongefässe aus dem Rheinland, Jahrbuch des Vereins von Alterthumsfreunden im Rheinlande, 84, 1886, 109-119, especially 117 and pl. IV.

95

Halmyris II inscription, some as hederae distinguentes other as leaves fallen over the stone, as shown on the picture from that time (fig. 83). The relief was however quite flat, and the splitting of the stone surface made the details disappear. 151 (figs. 102-113) Upper part of a gravestone made of cherty sandstone, with the portrait of a woman in the niche. Found during the 2000 campaign in the southern part of the West gate (fig. 9), in the layer below cat. no. 32, next to cat no. 19. Dimensions: maximum height about 72 cm; approximate width 124 cm; maximum preserved depth 20 cm. On the circumstances of recovery and the restoration of the fragment see the contribution of I.I. Zahariade in this volume. Date: 2nd century CE. Arheomedia-db/ID5017.

In a slightly deepened aedicula architecture, with a three fasces archivolt supported by two columns ending in simple abacus and plinth, is depicted the bust portrait of a women. The abacus line is inclined, following the lines of the fasces. On the background, in the intercolumnium, to the right of the woman, is a woven basket with flowers or balls of wool and a big flower with three fleshy wide petals and stem, while to her left, above a similar flower, a round mirror is depicted, with frame and handle71. The woman is depicted frontally, with very schematically executed almond shaped eyes. The eyebrows are made in curved long lines and on the forehead a deep wrinkle is recognizable, despite the destruction of the surface. She has three lines on her neck, observable only from a certain angle. She is wearing a chop on her head and a veil of thick fabric over it, falling in uneven but many folds, ending above her shoulders. The tunic and mantle are only schematically suggested. It is not clear if one of the lines isn’t eventually meant as a necklace. The hair style is not recognizable. Only a very flat curl is to be seen on each cheek. The ears are small and depicted on the background, to the right and the left of the face, under the veil. All this indicates the deceased to have been a married, not very young, woman. One women portrait on the 1st century CE funerary relief from Szentendre/ Ulcisia Castra (Pannonia), now in the museum in Aquincum, offers a good analogy for the ‚veil’ of thick fabric72 (figs. 114-115). She is wearing a scarf tightly bent over the head, resembling a hat, over which is worn a veil of thick fabric. The lady on the Halmyris monument however has a kind of chop made of fur under the veil. The veil itself is also of thick fabric and falls in uneven folds down to her shoulder. It remains unclear due to the clumsy execution if the artist meant to depict big brooches on the shoulder or the shoulder only. However the execution of the details may have succeeded, it is obvious that the depicted woman is one of the very few examples of depicted ‚regional’ dress in Moesia inferior, and so far the only one in the Northern region of the province. The identification as Norico-Pannonian or even Celtic is rather impossible due to the lake of epigraphic information and analogies for the region of provenience. The clumsy execution of the relief allows however to remark the skills of the artist. The basket and the flowers present as many details as possible, the elements of the portrait, even if obviously not completely understood, are depicted. The execution of architectural details does not leave the 71

On the rare depictions of personal items on gravestones from Moesia inferior see Conrad 2004, 98. A. R. Facsady, La représentation de la femme sur les stèles funéraires romaines du musée d’Aquincum (Budapest), in: Gaggadis-Robin et al. (eds.) 2009, 683-691, especially 686. 72

96

Signa on stones and building material impression that the artist was very familiar with them. The proportions and the placement on the surface are also clumsy, but fitted within the available space. On the other hand the execution of the decoration of the border makes a different impression, being traced and carved with a sure hand, obviously more familiar to this kind of motif. Significant is also the orientation of the vine tendril/grape motif, the grapes being always to the interior, towards the main figure/inscription. The restitution of the original shape of the monument makes plausible the same category of gravestones as the one of the fragment cat. no. 33. The borders with ornamentation of vine tendrils, grape and leaves continues on the upper part of the gravestone and can be assumed to have had bordered the field of inscription. The top part of the monument can not be reconstituted. Due to the large dimensions of the block it is plausible that the difference observed by the geological determination (spongolite for no. 33/cherty sandstone for no 151) to be the real composition of the original block, cut in the quarry in this lower level of Turonian rock (see below the contribution of A. Baltres). One of the closest analogies for the shape of monument is the gravestone of Ulpius Domentianus, miles of the legio IIII Flavia, found in Montana (Conrad 2004, cat. no. 497), even if the dimensions are different (151 x 65 x 16 cm). Based only on stylistic criteria and analogies the date of the gravestone of the lady of Halmyris seems plausible to be within the second century. If the hypothesis (fig. 213) of the fragments cat. no. 33 and 151 belonging to the same monument is confirmed this date would be verified by the epigraphy too. ‚Aedicula’-Gravestones This type of gravestone was recently studied by S. Conrad in his monograph dedicated to the gravestones from Moesia inferior. It is important to point out the observation that several of the fragmentary preserved monuments show details that enable the identification of the original shape within this category, as for instance the gravestone of Othis (fig. 43), reused in the Justinian wall of the Ibida fortress.73 However the attention focused on inscriptions mainly did not provide details of the monument. This way the type of the monument remained unrecognized. On its right side the actual block presents the remains of fillet of the column shaft, the astragal of the Corinthian capital and rests of acanthus leaves (fig. 44). The field of inscription was framed and slightly deepened. 19 (fig. 38-42) Gravestone of M. Ulpius Marcellinus and his wife, Claudia Bersilla Dimensions: 76 x 106 x 23.5 (on the right)/ 22 (on the left side, cut for the reutilisation). Date: first half of the 2nd century CE. Arheomedia-db/ID5011.

Despite the damages suffered by the monument it can be recognized that the type of the monument was the one of an ‚aedicula’-stele. Especially the right part of the fragments preserves the valuable information for the reconstruction of the shape (within the type VI of Conrad). The fragment is to be positioned in the lower part of the upper half of the gravestone. The architrave with three fasces and the Corinthian capitals are recognizable. The right capital had an abacus and is composed of two folia of acanthus leaves and an astragal. The lobes and the foliole are schematically carved. The column shaft ends in a small fillet. 73

ICEM Tulcea inv. no. 1819, dated in the first half of the 3rd century CE - Baumann 1984, no. 12, fig. 71; Conrad 2004, nr. 237; ARHEOMEDIAdb/ID5006.

97

Halmyris II The capital on the left should have had a similar structure, is now almost completely chopped out. The astragal of the capital on the left and the column fillet can be observed (fig. 41). The field of inscription does not have a profiled frame. 25 (fig. 63-66) Stela of Memmia Marcia; type VIa -,Aedicula-Stele mit Rundgiebel/ Grundform’ after Conrad (Conrad 2004). Arheomedia-db/ID5001.

This best preserved gravestone of ‚aedicula’-type from Halmyris presents many skillfully worked details, from the proportions of the component parts of the monuments to the execution of the decoration, like the leaves and the two columns with so-called pseudo-Corinthian capitals. The monument of rectangular shape is composed of the arched gable and the intercolumnium. The upper corners of the block are filled out with a depiction of downwards oriented dolphins; only the right corner is preserved. The gable has a niche with vegetal ornamentation (laurel crown with a ribbon ending in ivy leafs at the bottom, with an acanthus with four massive leafs; on each side of the crown is one flower with three wide fleshy petals) and is separated from the rectangular field with inscription by an architrave with two fasces. The intercolumnium of the aedicula builds the lower part of the monument, having on the sides two Corinthian columns with elaborated pseudo-Corinthian capital and basis, and in the middle the field with the inscription with profiled border. The capitals are accurately carved, presenting abacus (with two register), calathos, and volutes with defined final scroll moulding and a only one row of acanthus leaves, positioned on the diagonals of the abacus, with detailed carved lobe and foliole. The shaft of the column presents a fillet like a band, on which the capital lays, and ends in a similar band, discharging on the base of the column. The base presents a square plinth, a simple torus with the shape of an ellipse arc and a cylindrical baguette.74 Similar pseudo-Corinthian capitals are well attested in Moesia inferior, in Histria, Tomis and Tropaeum Traiani, but also in the regions to the south of the Danube.75 The shape of the gravestone has very good analogies in the Roman provinces like Moesia and Pannonia but also in Dacia, like the monument from Ampelum/ Zlatna (IDR III/3, no. 344; Arheomedia-db/ID5009). The use of colour on provincial Roman monuments. Preliminary investigations on the remains of colour on the monument cat. no. 21 How did a monument looked like in the moment of its displaying is a much disputed and discussed matter in the archaeological literature.76 New research projects focused on the investigation of the remains of polychromy are ongoing in France, Denmark, Germany, Italy and Romania, taking into consideration monuments made of other kinds of stone (limestone and sandstone) but marble. For the so-called „Roman provincial art” the subject is of great interest,77 not only for the 74

For this type of base see Mărgineanu-Cârstoiu 1979, 130-133. Histria: M. Mărgineanu-Cârstoiu, Histria XII. L’architecture gréco-romaine. Membra disiecta (Bucarest 2007), 245-255 (VIII.B.). – Tomis: M. Mărgineanu-Cârstoiu, Némésis et la coudée. Un édicule votif de Tomis, Caiete ARA. Arhitectură. Restaurare. Arheologie, 2, 2011, 53-68, especially 59 and fig. 3 and 4. – Tropaeum Traiani: Mărgineanu-Cârstoiu 1979, 139, no. 5.6.1., fig. 128. 76 The topic is of great interest for the research – for an overview see Liverani (ed.) 2004. The auxiliary sciences developed a real special field of research for the investigation of ancient pigments, colours, techniques etc. – S. Augusti, I colori pompeiani (Rome 1967); V. Brinkmann, Colori e tecnica pittorica, in: Liverani (ed.) 2004, 315-324; D. Cottica/ G.A. Mazzocchin, Pots with coloured powders from the Forum of Pompeii, in: K.T. Birό, V. Szilágyi, A. Kreiter (eds.), Vessels inside and outside.Proceedings of the 7th European Meeting on Ancient Ceramics (EMAC) 24-27 October 2007, Hungarian National Museum, Budapest, Hungary (Budapest 2007) 151-159. 77 Only as example we mention monuments from the Roman provinces: Germania - G. Bauchhenss, Nicht nur Weiß, Antike Skulptur war bunt bemalt, in: H.-J. Schalles, S. Willer (eds.), Marcus Caelius, Tod in der Varusschlacht, Austellungskatalog Xanten (Darmstadt 2009) 130-135; H.-G. 75

98

Signa on stones and building material archaeologists but also for the museums having such pieces in their collections and needing the know-how in dealing with them and providing a proper storage and display environment. Of interest is also not only if the Romans did colour their monuments but also for what purpose. One of the usual explanations, especially for monuments made of other material than marble, is that they used a cheaper material and made it look like a more expensive one. For marble the painted decoration might had replaced the sculpture, while the painted sculpture fulfilled the effects of light and shadow and provided a wonderful impression of life and movement. In the Moesia inferior there are several examples mentioned in the literature to have had traces of colour.78 The most common, as everywhere within the Roman Empire, is that the lettering was picked out in red paint.79 This is generally/ conventionally still called ‚lead minium’, but it is an iron oxide red pigment. Among the inscriptions presented in this volume traces of red colour are still visible on cat. nos. 18, 21, 22 and 32 as well as on the gravestone from Ibida (fig. 43). The gravestone of Flavia Titia from Halmyris (cat. no. 21) offered the opportunity to include the subject into discussion. For the time being the study of monuments presenting traces of colour is in progress, within the gravestone cat. no. 21, and the possible investigations are not closed. However the technical possibilities available at the time of this publication were limited. We found it important to stress out the problematic and the necessities it brings up, especially due to the fact that on the fragment cat. no. 32, which in summer 2007 presented also rests of colour, due to the improper storage, the surface almost disappeared through weathering. Very important is also the observation that the colour was applied only on certain parts.80 On cat. no. 21 the grapes and leaves are not coloured, in the lines of the inscription only every second row is painted in red. In case of cat. no. 32, the grapes are coloured. The aim of the physico-chemical analyses81 was the definition by analytical approach of the precise nature of the retrieved colourings. The 14 measurement points on cat. no 21 confirmed the presence of a red pigment based on iron oxide (on the branches, on the borderline, on the crown in the gable and in the letters of the rows 1, 2, 4 and 6 of the inscription) and a brownish-yellow pigment on the background of the gable, also on iron oxide base. The reuse of the stone in the Late Roman wall of the fortress and the poor state of preservation of the surface of the stone limit the possibility to find more details regarding the former decoration of the monument. The funerary monuments from Halmyris allow some considerations regarding the production of the local workshops in the northern and northwestern part of the province Moesia inferior. It is obvious that the local stone sources were well known and that the masons and specialized workshops for sculpture were very active at least in the period of the 2nd – 4th centuries CE (Conrad 2004, 8-9). The population from Halmyris commissioned big gravestones and votive altars with customized ornamentation and portraits. In regard to their dimensions, the better preserved stelai make possible the comparison to the largest in the province. It is to distinguish among the tall gravestones with a height of over 2.20 m, two groups: the first one with a width of less then 1 m, and the second one with a width of over 1 m. Based on the catalogue of Conrad, the second group Hartke, L. Heinen, M. Romussi, Umgang mit bemalten Steinoberflächen, in: Th. Otten (ed.), Fundgeschichten – Archäologie in Nordrhein-Westfalen (Köln 2010), 350-352. Several votive altars and statues in the collections of the Museum Carnuntinum (Austria) – F. Humer, G. Kremer (eds.), Götterbilder – Menschenbilder. Religion und Kulte in Carnuntum (Wien 2011), cat. nos. 64, 68, 69, 71, 270, 272, 301, 302, 308, 605, 613, 618 etc. – The ongoing project ARHEOMEDIA (www.arheomedia.ro) investigates also the monuments with traces of colour or even polychromy on the territory of today’s Romania. 78 Conrad 2004, 100 – the information there seems however not to have been verified, for several monuments do not present (any longer) the traces (Conrad 2004, cat. no. 147 an 154). 79 The paint in the letters has to be considered cautiously, for there was a practice in the Medieval and modern times to refresh the paint, for exhibition purposes – e.g. J. Close-Brooks, The Bridgeness distance slab, Proceedings of the Society of Antiquaries of Scotland, 111, 1981, 519-521. 80 A different opinion has J. Ronke, Polychrome Provinz. Zu einem kleinformatigen Weihrelief aus Güglingen-Frauenzimmern, in: Gaggadis-Robin et al. (eds.) 2009, 625-630. 81 The analyses have been conducted in 2011 by dr. O.-H. Barbu from the National Center for Physico-chemical and biological investigations at the National Museum of History of Romania in Bucharest. Following methods have been used: XRF fluorescence (Innov-X Systems, Alpha Series) and FTIR (with spectometer FTIR Bruker Tensor 27). It is necessary to correlate the results with other investigations like SEM/EDX and X-ray microdiffraction.

99

Halmyris II concentrates in the region south of the Danube82, while the first one is well represented in the centers from Sacidava, Tropaeum Traiani, Troesmis and Halmyris83. The cat. no. 33 and cat. no. 151 belong to the second group with a width of 123-125 cm, having good analogies also in their tectonic in the southern part of the province. The study on proportions and tectonic of the gravestones is still ongoing and needs a more accurate documentation of each of the better preserved monuments. The iconography of the Halmyris monuments is usual for the region but executed with particularities that enables us to postulate the existence of a workshop in this area of the province, with artists able to execute well proportioned shapes like cat. no. 25 and adapt to the requests of the obviously quite demanding customers, if we consider the portrait of the woman on cat. no. 151.

Building material with decoration The building material, especially the tiles and bricks, used to be marked by the producer (private person or a tilery of a military unit – see for instance IDR II, no. 107). They made additional notes related to production (like the date of putting on drying), delivery or a bill.84 Besides this usual marking, the Roman building material as well as sherds was preferred for sketches made by incision in the surface, before or after the firing. Some of the incisions are simple random lines or curves, other are clumsy executed sketches, while other are more complicated compositions or even written documents (see above cat. no. 36) or writing exercises. Quite often there are games incised, like ludus latrunculorum or the one called “nine men’s morris”.85 If the incisions on the building material were meant to fulfill more precise functions and replace more expensive materials86 has to be analyzed from case to case, and not generalized. Among the finds from Halmyris, four fragments are to be presented here. All of them can be included in the category of random incisions in building material before firing, made most likely by workers at the tilery. 152 (fig. 207) Brick with triangles or possibly a net incised ante cocturam. Fragmentary. Found at Murighiol in 2006, Ƒ P 14 (32), - 0,80cm. Dimensions: 10 x 8 x 3.5 cm. A similar looking net is incised on one brick from Felix Romuliana (Christodoulou 2006, no. 1). 153 (fig. 208) Brick with a boat incised ante cocturam. Fragmentary. Found at Murighiol in 1987, S 1 Ƒ 4, -2,76m at the Western gate. Dimensions of the fragment: 12.2 x 10 x 6.5-7 cm. The shape is very schematic drawn. Visible are one masthead, the hull and elements of the rigging. It seams to be one simple sailboat. Due to the schematic execution is difficult to find analogies for the depiction. This kind of sketch of 82

Conrad 2004, cat. nos. 316, 318, 332-334. Conrad 2004, cat. nos. 215, 216, 225, 228, 266, 269, 270, 284, 287, but also cat. no. 173 from Tomis. 84 One example from Wettswill, near Zürich - M.A. Speidel, Ein römischer Ziegel mit Ritzinschrift aus dem Ziegelbrennofen Josenmatt bei Wettswil, Berichte der Kantonsarchäologie Zürich, 13, 1996, 193-198. 85 One example from the military camp from BistreĠ (Dolj County) is on display in the National Military Museum in Bucharest. 86 See some examples at Christodoulou 2006, 80-81. 83

100

Signa on stones and building material boats and ships are not rare on sherds or bricks/tiles. In order to intend identification one should look however at depictions on relief, mosaics or wall-painting.87 154 (fig. 209) Brick with a vegetable motive incised ante cocturam. Fragmentary. Found at Murighiol in 2007, tower 2, Ƒ A, -3.54m. Dimensions: 34 x 19-12 x 4.8-3.5 cm. Two petals alternate with two leaves presenting a middle ridge. There seems to have been an additional, thin, leaf (?) and also a second flower from which only the end of one of the petals is preserved. 155 (fig. 210) Brick with swastika and curve lines. Fragmentary. Found at Murighiol in 2007, tower 2, Ƒ A, -3.54m. Dimensions: 34 x 27 x 4.5 cm. The swastika is enclosed in a rectangular cartouche. The curve lines seem to have been intended to be concentrically, but at a closer look, they do not close to a circle, even if poorly executed. For the outer two lines the observation can not be verified for the brick is broken. The inner shapes (nearly rectangular with rounded corners) can not be identified. The first impression is however the resemblance to a labyrinth. 156 (fig. 211-212) Brick with hunting scene incised ante cocturam. Fragmentary, only the margin on the left side is preserved. Found at Murighiol in campaign 2007, Ƒ T 8 (61), -1.56 m, near to the fortress wall. Dimensions: 30 x 24 x 5.7 cm. A human figure, naked or with naked bust, is depicted in three quarters view to its left, holding in his right hand a tool like a fork with upwards turned ends, while the left hand seems to hold a twig. The head was on the broken part of the brick, but it seams to have had long hair with curled ends. Behind him, at his right, a river or a blood line flowing from a wound (?) or just a whip, fixed to the belt(?). On the right side of the brick, in front of the men, coming from the right and with the head turned back to the right, is a deer, with a kind of spear in the muzzle. On the deer the eye, antlers, tail and the darker spots on the fur on its back are depicted schematically but with sure stroke of the drawing tool. Over the deer are at least two further figures. The one to the right seems to be a hunted hare. To the left, and continuing on the broken part, is a kind of thunder or ponytail next to a head of an animal(?). Between the men and the deer is a round object, without any additional elements. It can be a ball, an egg or a huge ring. An interpretation of the scene is quite difficult for the proportions and the orientation of the figures vary. For instance is not clear if it is meant as a hunt scene in the arena or in the woods (which is more probable), if the sinuous lines on the left intend to be eventually a kind of net, if the so-called hare might not be a dog, chasing a second prey and so on. The unclear shape at the upper rand of 87

A similar shape is to be seen on one famous Hellenistic graffito from Nymphaion (ancient Kertch) in front of the warship named Isis - O. Höckmann, Naval and Other Graffiti from Nymphaion, An International Journal of Comparative Studies in History and Archaeology V, 4 (Leiden – Boston – Köln 1999) 303–356, especially 323-324, cat. no N3, fig. 4 and 6/1 – the author considers the 2 ships not to be of the same date, the N3 being added later to the picture. – Another option might be the category of naves actuariae, like the one on one mosaic in Ostia, transporting amphorae – O. Bounegru, Naves actuariae – Seeschiffe für den Amphorentransport in römischer Zeit? Peuce S.N. 6, 2008, 277-282, fig. 3.

101

Halmyris II the fragment could be some vegetal elements (plant, bush or tree). The possible analogies for single figures are not so helpful for the entire composition. The object hold by the human figure resembles the so-called “Hebegabel” in use for the hunt of small prey like hare and fox in order to immobilize the animal88 and having the same shape of the end elements. On some beakers with decoration in barbotine technique depicting deer hunt scenes, produced in the 2nd century CE in the vicus of the camp from Sorviodurum (Straubing), the deers are chased by dogs towards the net, while the hunter, wearing a special dress and holding two of the dogs on a strip, follows the group.89 The environment is represented by a plant near to the net. The workshop in the Raetian center seems to have adapted the decoration to the available space (for higher beakers on 23 rows, for narrow shapes on a single row) and separate the hunting scenes through vegetal elements. Also on bricks are attested scenes related to hunt or largely to venatio. On one example from Felix Romuliana, only the deer and the net are to be seen.90 As the piece is fragmentary, it is possible that further figures were on the missing part. Still the composition was quite simple, reduced to the main elements: prey and net. Such selective compositions could have been seen on vessels (ceramic or glass) rather than on mosaics or wall painting, where the schemas are usually more complex. A free invented composition by the author of the incision can also not be excluded. For the brick from Felix Romuliana the author of the publication considers the model of the ‘small hunt’ from Piazza Armerina as a probable source of inspiration.91 A 4th century glass bowl produced in Cologne, engraved with a hunting scene, found in the Roman house at Wint Hill, Banwell (Somerset) is showing a hare being driven into a net by a horseman and two hounds (fig. 215).92 The same hunting schema is used for other prey, like deer or wild boar, and constitutes a popular theme on late 3rd-4th century sarcophagi (fig. 216).93 On a mosaic floor from Zliten, the East side (fig. 213)94 is depicted a venatio and within a wild donkey, fallen and wounded, having in mouth a spear (fig. 214), resembling in its body expression the deer figure on the brick from Halmyris. The inspiration source for the ‘artist’ of the Halmyris brick is difficult to point out. It is possible to think at a mosaic, wall-painting but a small size object like glass or ceramic bowl or plate seems more probable.95 The thematic was very popular in the Roman time. It is likely to have here a free invented composition with significant figures selected, presenting not the actual hunt but its final moments.

88

J.G. Krünitz, Ökonomische Encyklopädie (Berlin 1773-1848), s.v. Hebegabel, fig. 837 [online edition http://www.kruenitz1.uni-trier.de]. J. Prammer, Jagdszenen aus Sorviodurum – Zwei römische Töpferbetriebe in Straubing. Das archäologische Jahr in Bayern 2006, 83-86, fig. 107. 90 Christodoulou 2006, 77-78, fig. 1 and pl. 1. 91 Christodoulou 2006, 78. 92 Oxford, Ashmolean Museum of Art and Archaeology, Inv. 1957. 168. D: 19.3 cm. 93 Sarcophagus with hunting scenes in Rome, Musei Capitolini, Centrale Montemartini inv. no. 837 – Andreae 1980, cat. no. 112; fragment the lid of a sarcophagus in Rome, Palazzo Merolli – Andreae 1980, cat. no. 129; sarcophagus and lid found in a mausoleum in Trinquetaille, now in the museum in Arles (inv. PAP.74.00.3.) – V. Gaggadis-Robin, Les Sarcophages païens du Musée de l’Arles antique (Arles 2005), cat. no. 26. 94 S. Aurigemma, I mosaici di Zliten (Roma, Milano 1926). 95 For a discussion on this problematic, especially for the Late Roman period, see for instance B. Caron, A Roman Figure-Engraves Glass Bowl, Metropolitan Museum Journal, 28, 1993, 47-55. - The known depictions of hunt within Moesia inferior are not relevant for the composition under study – see for instance the gravestones from Ulmetum with the depiction of the hunting hero (see above footnotes 65 and 66). 89

102

V THE RESTORATION OF THE HALMYRIS FUNERARY MONUMENT (cat. no. 151) Ileana-Ildiko Zahariade Circumstances of discovery The research of the West gate held a major place within the Halmyris project between 1987 and 1992, 2002 and 2006. During the excavations, some 2nd-3rd century CE large funerary monuments were noticed as having been reused as spolia in the structure of the late 3rd and early 4th century CE masonry of the second gateway (supra cat. nos. 32-33) They were certainly drawn from the necropolis of the settlement, which could have been seriously affected on that occasion (Suceveanu, Zahariade, Topoleanu, Poenaru Bordea. 2003, 27-42). During the conservation and partial restoration of the southern side of the western gate, among other epigraphic fragments, a significant number of exfoliated, weathered yellowish limestone fragments were found in situ, walled at the base of the south doorway wall (fig. 9). The stone composition indicates its extraction from the Babadag quarry, intensely used in Antiquity as source of building material. An on spot preview of the artistic elements displayed on the fragments showed that they belong to a funerary monument very likely datable to the 2nd century CE. The recovered fragments represent the upper part of a funerary stele of significant size, cut by the late 3rd century CE builders in order to be reused and walled as a construction block in the new masonry of the gate. The recuperated fragments, looking highly weathered when first found, sum up 127 pieces. Although very much eroded, a rough on spot joining of the fragments yielded clear evidence of a feminine personage accompanied by her specific attributes on such a type of monuments.

Short description of the monument The woman, with a rich and elaborate hair-dress is shown wearing personal jewelries: earrings, necklace and clothing outfits: a slight décolletage which leaves unveiled most of her neck, a toque, possibly made of fur, a veil which covers her head and shoulders. The specific accessories for this type of monument are the mirror, placed to the left side and basketwork with woolen thread balls to her right. Two tri-petal rosettes flank the woman’s figure on either side. The stepped arched niche, made of concentric semi-circles suggesting an in-depth position of the personage is preserved only in a fragmentary state. The traditional rod vines frame with clusters of grapes side the woman, although significant parts are missing. Also, it is easily noticeable how the protruding woman’s nose and a part of her face had been intentionally chopped by the builders in order to create a smooth surface fitted for the walling in. 103

Halmyris II The restoration and conservation Phase I - the preliminary arrangement The excessive fragmentary state of the monument required a thorough and careful gathering of a considerable number of fragments certain or supposed to have belonged to the gravestone. The peculiarity of the Babadag limestone is that the process of exfoliation produces slivers of different sizes, while the weathering crumbles them sometimes to small pieces in such a manner that they become literarily unrecognizable and useless for any attempt to recompose the stone. The first step was therefore the identification of some sizable and clearly recognizable fragments which showed parts of human intervention and left no doubt as to their place in the artistic composition. Three groups of thin and noticeably fragmentary pieces of stone have been initially selected and qualified to be supposedly reunited in some substantial and identifiable bigger fragments of the gravestone (fig. 109, a-c) The leading idea was on one hand to recompose the picture from the interior to the exterior, and on the other to work simultaneously to the already existing groups of fragments and make additions anytime some other available stones showed characteristics to fit in the puzzle. Some tens of mid-sized, small, and often minuscule fragments with clear and recognizable traces of decoration were added around or inserted in the selected groups of stones. The mutilated face of the personage, the fragments of the willow twig basket, and pieces of a mirror were reunited in a first phase. Fragments of two rosettes and some of the lady’s outfits, among which most interesting are the fur cap and the veil, have been also found and added. The columns, sided by vine rods, leaves, and grapes were other important groups of stone fragments attached later to the central composition (fig. 110, a-d). Elmer’s glue was used in the first phase of the assemblage, due particularly to its reversibility which could have enabled, if necessary, the swapping of the fragments in case of misplacement or incongruity. The harshness of the stone, as well as the successive strata applied to the back of the monument in order to consolidate it, created considerable difficulties in joining together the four fragments, when the first phase was almost to be finalized. The solution was the change the order of reunion of some parts to facilitate an easier sliding of the fragments in the rearrangement of their natural position. For the second phase, the envisaged fragments have been soaked and padded along the edges of the breakings, then immersed in soft water, and finally washed under a strong water jet. The fragments were put on natural dry at the room temperature, on a filter paper. The disjoined fragments were renumbered. The new retouched assemblage resulted in the monument showed in fig. 111 with the following dimensions: height = max. 150 cm; width = max.131 cm; thickness = variably from 0.5 to 20 cm. Phase II –the final assemblage The reassembling of the monument was carried out using an epoxidic resin, adequate for the gluing of limestone fragments, AralditeAW 100 mixed with Hardener HV953U. In fact, the operation was resumed with the necessary corrections made in the first phase. After the second assemblage, the monument presented empty spaces, both in depth and at surface. The thickness of the monument, without considering the sculptured surface, varies from 0.5 to 20 cm, due to the exposure to the elements in the place where the initial block was set. The freezingthawing cycle caused the exfoliation and complete weathering of the detached fragments. 104

The restoration of the Halmyris funerary monument The considerable weight and the pressing made necessary to increase the resistance of the joint pieces, both the interior and on the surface. Therefore empty spaces and labyrinths were filled with Araldite AW 100 mixed with limestone powder. The combination resin + powder was obtained along several attempts to mix them in order to avoid the phenomenon of glassy glitter. The first rough interventions were done on the dorsal part of the monument, while at the sculptured surface an optimum mixture of material has been applied (fig. 112) The funerary monument was thus displayed on a proper clamp with the express specification for a closed space and to avoid moisture.

105

Halmyris II

106

VI CONSIDERATIONS ON THE LITHIC MATERIAL USED FOR STONE MONUMENTS FOUND IN HALMYRIS, WITH A SURVEY ON A SPECIFIC ROCK TYPE FROM NORTH DOBROGEA Albert Baltres Archaeological excavations in sites within the territory of today’s Dobrogea involved the systematic recovery of stone monuments and, among others, documentation on the raw material sources and quarrying sites. The opportunity for approaching this subject arose from an earlier study on the Sacred Area of Histria, and, during a more recent survey, of some edifices and monuments unearthed in Halmyris and in other places in North Dobrogea, as Troesmis, Noviodunum and Enisala. In all these sites was largely utilized a sedimentary rock with the macroscopic appearance of rough, well cemented, yellowish-brown (tan, faded brown, light brown) sandstone. The widespread use of this rock, with his faint color, is well attested being probably appreciated as a perfect material for architecture and sculpture, so that geological identification and tracing to source will help explain ancient economic interactions. The first evidence of use of this rock dates back to Greek times, in Histria, and quarrying of this stone had a second period of strong development in Roman times. An extensive use of this rock is documented in the Sacred Area of Histria96 where most important monuments, dated between the third quarter of 6th century and 3rd century BC, were erected.97 Among these are the Temple of Zeus and Temple of Aphrodite (figs. 225 and 226) (both in 6th century BC), the Propylon and Temple of Theos Megas (both in 3rd century BC)98 and some other Archaic to Hellenistic architectural pieces as Ionic and Doric capitals and column and pilaster bases,99 altars,100 a stela101 and bases for statues102 and stelai.103 Even the sacrificial block (Ș)104 dated late 7th or 6th century BC, was cut in the same rock type. In the Roman times this rock was mainly used in 2nd century CE in manufacturing large architectural elements for important public buildings in Histria. For example the Ionic-style architrave bearing a bilingual text (Greek and Latin) with remains of red paint in the letters, dated 155 CE,105, belonging to an edifice façade measuring 6.5 m in length (fig. 220). Further in reuse and cut in the same material are miliaria and column shafts, but also numerous gravestones with Latin text, initially on display in the rural territory of Histria, dated in the 2nd and 3rd century CE. Most of 96

Baltres 2005, 453-462. P. Alexandrescu, Insemnări arheologice. Noi cercetări úi ipoteze cu privire la topografia úi urbanismul Histriei. Pontica, 33-34, 2000-2001, 179-198; Alexandrescu 2005, 51-156. 98 Baltres 2005, 454 (Temple of Zeus, cat. no P1); 456 (Temple of Aphrodite, cat. no P6); 455 (Propylon, cat. no P4; Temple of Theos Megas, cat. no P5). 99 Ionic capitals: Baltres 2005, 456 (cat. no P8); 457 (cat. no P9; cat. no P10). - Doric capital: Baltres 2005, 456 (cat. no P7). - Corona piece: Baltres 2005, 457 (cat. no P11). - Column base in Ionic style: Baltres 2005, 457 (cat. no P12). - Base of a pilaster: Baltres 2005, 459 (cat. no P23). 100 Baltres 2005, 457, cat. no P14, Monument F (altar?); 458, cat. no P16, Monument H (Archaic and Classic altar). 101 Baltres 2005, 461, cat. no P39, fragment of a stela with dedication (ISM I, no 103). 102 Baltres 2005, 459, cat. no P22, Base of a statue, ȕ; 460, cat. no P29, Base of a statue, Ȝ and cat. no P30, Base of a statue, ȣ. 103 Baltres 2005, cat. nos P19, P25, P26, P31, P33, P34 and P36. 104 Baltres 2005, 460, cat. no P27. 105 Pârvan 1916, 612, cat. no 22; Florescu 1954, 85. 97

107

Halmyris II these monuments were reused in the 4th century as building stones for erecting the late Roman wall (figs. 218-220). A number of epigraphic monuments in the Histria Museum106 were also carved in the same rock. In the northern part of Dobrogea this rock was employed in Roman times for building materials for strongholds, but was mainly used for manufacturing monuments like sarcophagi, gravestones, votive altars. It was identified in some sites as Troesmis and Noviodunum, Halmyris, sporadically in Dinogetia, Aegyssus, Ibida and in few other places. Very few squared blocks were found by Dinogetia: some of these near the tower no. 13 and in the inner wall of the 4th century CE gate. In Troesmis this rock was employed at least for building the walls and towers of the eastern fortress. The preserved remains of the outer parts of two towers and the curtain between these consist of few rows of carefully shaped, large blocks (1-2 m long and 0.3-0.4 m high), with flat or profiled surfaces. An exquisitely carved piece, recovered from the eastern fortress of Troesmis, is a Corinthian capital dated in 3rd century CE (fig. 227). 107 In the tumular necropolis and in the nearby territory of Noviodunum were uncovered, until now, eight sarcophagi of 2nd century CE,108 carved in the same tan rock. Most of these funeral monuments are roughly worked and anepigraphic. Only the sarcophagus of Ulpia Iulia,109 left rubbed smooth and engraved, allows a reliable attribution to a rich private person, mirroring their social status. A pyramidal shaped coping made of this kind of stone,110 formerly adorning a funeral monument, has also been found in the tumular necropolis of Noviodunum. Three incomplete rows of large, squared and carefully fitted blocks (ashlar) are standing in situ as remains of the northern gateway in the wall surrounding Halmyris (fig. 221). All these blocks were cut in the well-known yellowish-brown rock, with streaky-laminated internal structure which is better shown in the weathered side of the uppermost stone. In the same site were unearthed a series of votive (cat. nos. 6, 9 and 10) and funeral (cat. nos. 18, 19, 21, 25, 28, 29, 32, 33, 151) monuments carved in materials resembling the above mentioned. The two, impressive, tall, stelai (cat. nos. 21 and 25), and perhaps a third, incomplete stela (cat. no. 33) were carved, each, in a flat, broad and fairly thick and heavy slab of rock, cut from a few decimeter-thick bed. Comparable, tall, handsome stelai111 were found in Southern Dobrogea. Seven such funerary monuments dedicated to officers of the Roman military units in Sacidava were unearthed. In contrast with those of Halmyris, the stelai from Sacidava were carved in a very different stone, namely white Sarmatian limestone with Nubecularia. With a large areal extension in South Dobrogea, this rock was largely utilized also in Tomis for sacred monuments as sarcophagi and stelai. These limestones occur as centimeter- to meter-thick, flat beds, forming prominent steps, with leveled rock surfaces, suitable for quarrying by cutting in the technique named à la trace. A high wall enclosing the fortress of Enisala was erected in the 13th or 14th century CE The stone masonry was here built in significant proportion (21% on the whole; 45.4% in the polygonal guard tower and 24.7% in curtain #1) of relatively small, subrectangular blocks of cherty limestones and cherty sandstones with whole fossil silicisponge bodies, as well as streaky-laminated spongolites and sandstones.112 It is interesting to note a close link between the nearby source of material and the 106

ISM I, no 129 (inv. 209); 293 (inv. 148); 300 (inv. 87); 319 (inv. 255); 320 (inv. 282); 405 (inv. 183); 420 (inv. 149). Baumann 1984, 218, cat. no 8, fig. 33 (ICEM inv. no 2163). 108 Simion 2008: cat. no 2, fig. 2 (ICEM inv. 2139); cat. no 3, fig. 4 (ICEM inv. 2140); cat. no 4, fig. 4 (ICEM inv. 2141); cat. no 5, fig. 5 (ICEM inv. 43027); cat. no 6, fig. 6 (inv. 48404); cat. no 7, fig. 6 (ICEM inv. 48405); cat. no 8, figs. 7 and 8 (ICEM inv. 48406); cat. no 9, fig. 9 (ICEM inv. 2143). 109 Simion 2008, cat. no 8, figs. 7 and 8 (ICEM inv. 48406). 110 Baumann 1984, 215, no 9, fig. 21 (ICEM inv. 24537). 111 Scorpan 1977a. 112 A. Baltres, Cercetări privind rocile utilizate la construirea cetăĠii medievale de la Enisala, Peuce S.N. 2011 (in press). 107

108

Considerations on the lithic material used for stone monuments found in Halmyris blocks of masonry from Enisala because the unique occurrence of whole fossil silicisponge bodies known so far is here, in the neighborhood. Physical properties of the used lithic material Briefly, the lithic material of the monuments selected for this study can be described as follows: yellowish-brown (tan, drab) rock resembling sandstone, which "consist of three endmember components: carbonate bioclasts, siliceous sponge spicules, and quartz sand grains that form a gradation relative to the amount of each of them. The resulting rock vary from nearly pure limestones, to cherty, spiculitic or sandy limestones, spiculitic sandstones and, sometimes, spongolites".113 These sedimentary rocks belong to the Turonian section of the geological record of North Dobrogea and are of marine origin. Having in mind the aim of this study we will emphasize here only the suitable criteria for achieving a reliable identification of a definite stone type (Turonian rocks typically occuring only in North Dobrogea). To identify stones of sedimentary origin used in ancient monuments, geology helps by describing texture, color, clastic and bioclastic components, cements, sedimentary structures, weathering. For identification of rock types in artifacts, macroscopic or low-level microscopic examination (by hand lens) and comparison with known sources are sufficient for an experienced student. The identification of some rock varieties that cannot be macroscopically recognized is based on standard microscopic procedures revealing discriminative compositional ranges with important diagnostic significance. Texture Although the basic composition of a sedimentary rock can vary little, the grain size may vary greatly. Texture describes primarily the size distribution of the grains in a rock. Fine texture refers to a rock with abundant grains less than 0.25 mm in diameter (fine and very fine sand), whereas medium- to coarse-textured are the rocks composed of grains ranging in size between 0.25 and 2 mm (medium to very coarse sand). Coarse rocks show rough surfaces, in contrast with fine-grained rocks having relatively smooth surfaces. Color In the case of the Turonian rocks their overall color is yellowish-brown, imparted by fine specks of finely disseminated, brown, opaque stain of organic origin, called kerogen (fig. 224). Sometimes the organic stain, coating mineral grains and filling pores, is so abundant that in thin sections other components are almost obscured. This stain is the cause of the yellowish-brown colour of the Turonian rocks in North Dobrogea. Clastic components In sandstones the clastic components are essentially quartz sand grains which can be angular to slightly rounded, as a result of shorter or longer transport distance before deposition. Sorting of grains by size is also an effect of more or less powerful transport media, usually aquatic. Bioclastic components Biotic remains of marine origin are of two types: a) Finely comminuted carbonate bioclasts derived from echinoderms (sea urchins), foraminifera and coccoliths (calcareous plates of golden algae). These bioclastic components appear more abundant in limestones and in lesser amounts in sandy limestones. b) Fine, siliceous sponge spicules (fig. 224), often replaced diagenetically by calcite or chalcedony, are very abundant in spongolites but occur sporadically in spiculitic sandstones. Whole bodies of encrusting, pustular silicisponges, included in cherty limestones and sandstones, are the 113

Baltres 2005, 453.

109

Halmyris II unique larger fossil remains recognized both in outcrop and in the building stones of the fortress by Enisala. Cements The hardness of a rock is determined by cement type and amount. A porous rock is less cohesive being non uniform, weakly cemented and is less resistant to loading and weathering. In our case, the Turonian rocks were cemented by two cement types: carbonate cement (calcite) and microcrystalline quartz cement (chert). Calcite cement causes weaker bonds than quartz cement, the two minerals having different strength and solubilities. The first cement type is present in limestones and in some sandstones, whereas quartz cement is widespread in spiculitic sandstones and spongolites, occurring in minute patches and giving the rough appearance of the rock. Carbonate precipitation takes place from natural solutions percolating the pore spaces of the sediments. For the second cement type the source of quartz is of biogenous origin, being a diagenetic product. Because silica is highly mobile during early diagenesis, a process of dissolution-precipitation destroys the sponge spicules in sediments, converting the biogenous, amorphous silica phase (opal) of these to microcrystalline quartz aggregates (chert), strongly cementing the sediment and turning it into a hard rock. Where this cement is abundant, as in the initially pure spiculitic interbeds, replacive, banded and nodular chert stands prominent. Chert concretions and centimeter-thick bands of chert are standing out lighter against the darker mass of the host. Non-uniform cementing of different laminae or other structures in a bed are the prerequisite for selective weathering of the rock, resulting recessive and projecting parts (fig. 222). Structure Bedding is the most characteristic feature of the sedimentary rocks. The bedded deposits occur in centimeter- to meter-thick layers bound by relatively flat surfaces which are true sedimentation dicontinuities. Various sedimentary structures can be seen on bedding plane or in cross-sections on it. On bedding planes occur sometimes vermiculate traces produced by organisms dwelling on the sea floor. The most common feature of the Turonian rocks is the occurrence of a planar banding producing a faint internal lamination in cross-sections on the bedding planes (fig. 223), better shown on weathered surfaces. Alternating, finer and coarser grained bands or faint color differences, coincident with the horizontal rock layering, are highlighting the streaky-laminated internal structure of a bed. Internal lamination is obscured usually in meter-thick, massive beds. Not uncommon in the Turonian rocks is an apparent lack of homogeneity caused by burrowing animals, as worms, in soft sediments deposited on the sea floor. Distinct cylindrical galleries, sometimes branching (Thalassinoides), backfilled with contrasting sediment, or intricate disturbances were produced in search for food or shelter. Their color and grain size is different from the host rock. These structures are named bioturbations (fig. 228). On a fragmentary gravestone from Ibida114 (fig. 43) can be observed traces of bioturbation, as faint, cylindrical infillings in burrowing galleries. Weathering Weather affect in various ways the exposed rock surfaces in archaeological sites as well in outcrops. Weaker lithic materials, due selective cement dissolution or primarily non uniform cementation of some parts of a bed, are foliated, undergoing parting along lamination planes or are breaking easily into flakes (flaking). Especially the building blocks set on edge (stratification upright, orthostatic) are splitting parallel with the primary rock stratification (fig. 220, block to right), as an effect of direct exposure to weathering by water drained through bedding discontinuities. Banded rocks containing better cemented laminae and lenses are weathering with prominent horizontal chert strips (fig. 222). 114

Baumann 1984, 226, cat. no 12, fig. 71 (ICEM inv. 1819).

110

Considerations on the lithic material used for stone monuments found in Halmyris Usually, strong weathering is favorized by lack of homogeneity in the rock, as caused by bioturbation, which undermines the resistance to exposure. Bioturbation structures, better cemented, are projecting from a more recessive, eroded matrix. Deeply weathered rocks are finally broken down, crumbling into dust. Some apparently homogeneous blocks, set on bedding plane, show many vertical, parallel or anastomosing cleavages which causes the rock to disintegrate splintery, releasing centimeter-sized scales. The cleavages were hidden defects which undermined the rock in time. A sort of weathering that changes color of rocks is caused by human activity. Staining red by fire changes the originally yellowish-brown appearance of the rock by patches of red color, resulted by oxidation of iron contained in the rock, by heat. In some instances weathering is produced under lichen veneer, in moist and shaded places of repositories or outcrops. Other biota as fungi and algae are acting more insidious, operating in a slow manner to destroy vulnerable rocks. Rock sources The rocks with characteristics matching well those of the material utilized in ancient monuments and buildings, here described, were provided by a large supply district coincident with a geomorphic unit called Babadag Plateau. From here important volumes of stone were carried to many destinations, indicating an extended use in most of the North Dobrogean sites, but reaching southward to Histria. The Babadag Plateau, stretched between Razelm Lake (Cape Dolojman) in the East, and Danube River (near Traian village) in the West, consists of a series of low-lying, gently sloping hills ranging in altitude between zero and 325 meters. Here are cropping out surface layers of a gently folded syncline formed after Upper Cretaceous, the axis of which runs in a West-East direction. The dip of the beds varies between 5 and 15 degrees. The yellowish-brown rocks filling up this syncline, belonging to Dolojman Formation, ranges in age between Lower and Upper Turonian. Dolojman Formation consists of a lower member, 20-100 m thick (Jidini Member) characterized by a large content of sandstones and spongolites, and an upper member, 50-200 m thick (Harada Member) dominated by sandy limestones and limestones115 (fig. 217). Lateral and vertical facies variations are common in the sedimentary successions of both members, so that there are also variations in quality even within one single outcrop. It seems that the lower member of Dolojman Formation was preferred for extracting material employed in architecture and sculpture because availability and efficient quarrying were favorable to the distribution of the products (raw blocks or half-fabricates). A large variety of products, also different in size, of building material for foundations and architectural elements of the superstructure of temples and other public buildings (architraves, column bases, shafts and capitals, facing stones) and for other purposes as honorific monuments, funeral stelai, sarcophagi, altars, miliaria were manufactured using this material as support. This material seems to occupy a large market share, especially under Roman rule. Two main specific requirements were critical in the selection of these rocks for specific purposes: hardness and the possibility to cut large pieces of stone. Hardness is reflecting the degree of cementation and thus, the resistance to weathering. The medium grained sandstones containing sponge spicules, as well as the fine, originally spiculitic sediments, are now well cemented so that weathering left a tough hard rock in outcrops. Weathering aspect is a useful criteria in the differentiation of lithic materials from specific locations because not all rocks are amenable for carving monuments. The yellowish-brown rocks with a faint internal lamination, shown in cross sections on the bedding planes, were sought by stonecutters as being of uniform quality, hard and resistant to weathering, and strong enough to carry weight. Sometimes these rocks 115

L. Szasz, Ion Jana, Crétecé supérieur du Bassin de Babadag (Roumanie). Biostratigraphie intégrée (ammonites, inocérames, foraminifères planctoniques). Mémoires de l'Institut de Géologie et de Géophysique, 33, 1988, 91-149, especially 105-113.

111

Halmyris II contain aligned lens-shaped or banded chert concretions, more resistant to weathering, but less suitable for carving objects which need smooth, clean, unstained surfaces. Rock varieties with internal structures produced by burrowing biota (bioturbations) were chosen for building or carving by less inspired ancient stoneworkers, because these are more vulnerable to effects of weathering, being inconsistently cemented. Probably that inexperienced stoneworkers choose foliated rocks which might cause parting or cracking under stress or break easily in flakes by weathering. The hardness of a rock can be weakened also by hidden defects (cleavage) produced by tectonic stresses, as in the case of numerous blocks of the Propylon from Histria. The second critical factor in choosing rocks is the lateral and vertical uniformity in physical properties, suitable for obtaining large pieces of stone for different purposes. Usually, the yellowish-brown, Turonian rocks occur in centimeter- to meter-thick beds, with the mention that the later occur rarely. Decimeter-thick strata, by their tabular nature, were suitable for carving large stelai and pieces of entablature, whereas meter-thick, massive strata were selected for cutting raw blocks for carving massive objects as sarcophagi or so. For example, for the sarcophagi of Noviodunum the beds from which the raw material was cut were at least 0.65 to 0.85 meter thick. This means a massive bed, probably one meter thick, or more. In the stone revetment of the Temple of Theos Megas from Histria was mounted a very large block measuring 2 x 1.7 x 0.5 m. In some quarries of the source area the tabular nature of the few decimeter-thick beds (0.2-0.3 m) may have been a decisive factor in selection of these beds for manufacturing pieces of entablature and large stelai, as well as column shafts and blocks for masonry. The stelai from Halmyris (cat. nos. 21, 28, 32, 151) are up to 20 cm thick. One stela (cat. no. 25) is slightly thicker (25 cm). The rusticated masonry in the Temple of Aphrodite by Histria (figs. 225 and 226) was erected with carefully squared blocks, all 0.22 m thick.116 For stelai the tabular slabs were cut from the bed at dimensions right for the purpose as concerns length and width: the largest stela from Halmyris (cat. no. 25) is 2.56 m high and 0.9 m wide, but other such pieces are shorter. The maximum dimension of the blocks extracted in a quarry was controlled by the thickness of the beds. Only some, rare quarrying areas, with massive, thick beds could provide larger blocks for carving such bulky elements as sarcophagi, thus being most highly valued. Such sites are known nowadays in two quarries: Codru quarry, near Babadag (fig. 229) and Baúchioi quarry, south-west of the N. Bălcescu village, both in Tulcea District. We can imagine the effort was spent for extracting huge stone slabs in a quarry in the ancient times, only by simply calculating the volume and weight of the raw material extracted for some of the pieces involved in this study. For example, the largest gravestone from Halmyris (cat. no. 25) is measuring today 0.576 cubic meters and 1.44 tons in weight. But much larger is a sarcophagus. The raw block for the largest piece of this type from Noviodunum117 occupied a space of 2.48 cubic meters and a mass of 6.2 tons by weight. The next one118 was less heavy (5.45 tons), and the smallest119 only 2.3 tons. We can think that in ancient times some rocks were more highly appraised than others, and that specialized quarries and stonemasons were highly selective in their choice of stone. Limited areas of land along hills were probably destined for quarrying of specific materials, caused by variation of quality within the Dolojman Formation. Specific outcrops were heavily exploited by an efficient quarrying activity and distribution, for the high economic value of the material. The highly organized system involved also the facilities of the Roman road network. It is expected that ancient quarries, productive until 4th century CE, have long since disappeared from the landscape. These were buried some years after abandonment. On the other hand, modern extraction in the largest known quarries destroyed all or about all traces of ancient exploitation. An effort for identifying ancient quarrying sites is based on recognizing in the field the stepped 116

Baltres 2005, 456, cat. no P6. Simion 2008, cat. no 3, fig. 4 (ICEM inv. 2140). Simion 2008, cat. no 2, fig. 2 (ICEM inv. 2139). 119 Simion 2008, cat. no 9, fig. 9 (ICEM inv. 2143). 117 118

112

Considerations on the lithic material used for stone monuments found in Halmyris extraction sites, cutting signs, tool marks, tools and other archaeological deposits as tested boulders and production debris.

113

  Bibliography     Alexandrescu 2005

Alexandrescu P. et alii, Histria VII. La zone sacrée. Bucarest, Paris.

Alexandrescu Vianu 2000

Alexandrescu Vianu, M., Histria IX. Les statues et les reliefs en pierre. Bucarest. Paris.

Alföldy 1969

Alföldy, G., Die Personnenamen in den römischer Provinz Dalmatia. Heidelberg.

Andreae 1980

B. Andreae, Sarkophage mit Darstellungen aus dem Menschenleben. Die römischen Jagdsarkophage, ASR 1, 2. Berlin.

Arheomedia-db/ID

C.-G. Alexandrescu et al., Arheomedia-database of ancient stone monuments with representation found in Romania, constantly updated www.arheomedia.ro/monuments/.

Aricescu 1973

Aricescu, A., Adnotări epigrafice, SCIV 24, 1, 111-119.

Aricescu 1977

1

Aricescu, A., Armata în Dobrogea romană. Bucureúti.

Aricescu 1977

2

Aricescu, A., În legătură cu zonele de acĠiune ale legiunilor moesice pe teritoriul Dobrogei, Pontica 10, 179-190.

Arnaud 1989 Avram 2007

Baltres 2005 Bărbulescu 2001

Arnaud, P., Une deuxième lecture du "bouclier" de Doura-Europos in: Comptes-rendus des séances de l année - Académie des inscriptions et Belles-Lettres, 133, 2, 373-389. Avram, A., Les cives Romani consistentes de Scythie Mineure. État de la question, in: Étrangers dans la cité romaine. Actes du colloque du Valenciennes (14-15 Octobre 2005). «“Habiter une autre patrie”: des incolae de la République aux fédérés du Bas-Empire», Rennes, 91-109. Baltres, A., Lithic materials. In: Alexandrescu 2005, 453-462 with pl. 76.1-2. Bărbulescu, M., ViaĠa rurală în Dobrogea romană (sec. I-III p. Chr.). ConstanĠa

Barnea 1972

Barnea, I., RelaĠiile provinciei Scythia Minor cu Asia Mică, Siria úi Egiptul, Pontica 5, 251- 265.

Barnea 1989

Barnea, Al., Cronica cercetărilor arheologice în România, SCIVA 40, 3, 296.

Barnea 1990

Barnea, Al., Cronica cercetărilor arheologice în România, SCIVA 41, 317-318.

Barnea 1991

Barnea, Al. Cronica cercetărilor arheologice în România, SCIVA 42, 3-4, 257.

Barnea 1992

Barnea, Al. Cronica cercetărilor arheologice în România, SCIVA 43, 4, 435.

Barnea, Zahariade 1994

Barnea, Al., Zahariade M., Cronica cercetărilor arheologice. Campania 1993, Satu Mare 24 no. 47.

Barnea, Zahariade 2005

Barnea, Al., Zahariade M., Cronica cercetărilor arheologice din România. Campania 2004, Mangalia, 155.

Barnea, ùtefan 1974

Barnea, I., ùtefan, Gh., Le limes Scythicus des origines à la fin de l’antiquité’, Actes du IXème Congrès international des études sur les frontières romaines, Mamaia 1972. Bucureúti, Köln, Wien.

Baumann 1984

Baumann, V.H., Piese sculpturale úi epigrafice în colecĠia Muzeului de Istorie úi Arheologie din Tulcea, Peuce 9, 1984, 207-233. 597-630.

Beshevliev 1964

Beshevliev, V., Spätgriechische und Spätlateinische Inschriften aus Bulgarien. Berlin. 1

Beshevliev 1970

Beshevliev, V., Zur Deutung der Kastellnamen in Prokops Werk, “De Aedificiis”. Amsterdam.

Beshevliev 19702

Beshevliev, V., Untersuchungen uber die Personnennamen bei den Thrakern. Amsterdam.

Beshevliev 1974

Beshevliev, V., Extrema Minoris Scythiae, in: In Memoriam Constantini Daicoviciu. Cluj. 139-141

114

Bordenache 1965

Bordenache, G., Temi e motivi della plastica funeraria di eta Romana nella Moesia inferior, Dacia N.S. 9, 1965, 253-281.

Bounegru 1986

Bounegru, O., Über die «cives Romani consistentes» von Skythia Minor, Münsterische Beiträge zu antiken Handelsgeschichte 5, 1, 59-73.

Bratu 1992

Bratu, I., Lokale Orstnamen in den auf dem gebiet Rumäniens gefundenen Inschriften. Bochum.

Brătescu 1922

Brătescu,C., Delta Dunărei. Geneza úi evoluĠia sa morfologică úi cronologică, Buletinul SocietăĠii Regale Române de Geografie, 41, 3-39.

Brătescu 1928

Brătescu,C., Pamântul Dobrogei, in: Dobrogea. Cincizeci de ani de viaĠă românească, Analele Dobrogei IX 1, 3-66.

Brătianu 1935

Brătianu, G. I., Recherches sur Vicina et Cetatea Albă. Bucharest.

Breier 1976

Breier, A., Lacurile de pe litoralul românesc al Mării Negre. Studiu hidrografic. Bucureúti.

Brennan 1984

Brennan, P., Diocletian and the Goths, Phoenix 38, 142-146.

Bujor 1954

Bujor, Ex., Note epigrafice, SCIV 5, 3-4, 599-602.

Bujor 1955

Bujor, Ex., Săpăturile de salvare de la Murighiol (r. Tulcea, reg. ConstanĠa) SCIV 6, 3-4, 571-580.

Bujor 1956

Bujor, Ex., ContribuĠie la cunoaúterea populaĠiei geto-dace din nord-estul Dobrogei, SCIV 7, 3-4, 243-252.

Bujor 1957

Bujor, Ex., Săpăturile de salvare de la Murighiol (reg. ConstanĠa r. Tulcea), Materiale úi Cercetări Arheologice 3, 247-254.

Bujor 1958 Bujor 1959

1

Bujor, Ex., O geto-dakiiskoi culture v Murighiole, Dacia N.S. 2, 125-141. Bujor, Ex., ùantierul arheologic Murighiol (r. Tulcea, reg. ConstanĠa), Materiale úi Cercetări Arheologice 5, 373-378.

Bujor 19592

Bujor, Ex., ùantierul arheologic Murighiol (r. Tulcea, reg. ConstanĠa), Materiale úi Cercetări Arheologice 6, 325-330.

Bujor 1961

Bujor, Ex., ùantierul arheologic Murighiol (r. Tulcea, reg. ConstanĠa) Materiale úi Cercetări Arheologice 7, 397-300.

Bujor 1962

Bujor, Ex., ùantierul arheologic Murighiol (r. Tulcea, reg. ConstanĠa) Materiale úi Cercetări Arheologice 7, 297-300.

Cagnat 1914 ýermanoviü-Kuzmanoviü 1977-1978

Cagnat, R., Cours d'épigraphie latine. Paris. ýermanoviü-Kuzmanoviü, A., Rimski utvardjenie kod Kladova, Starinar 28-29, 127-133.

Charlesworth 1939 Christodoulou 2006

Charlesworth, M. P., Documents illustrating the reigns of Claudius and Nero. Cambridge.

Ciongradi 2007 Claude 1969

Ciongradi, C., Grabmonument und sozialer Status in Oberdakien. Cluj-Napoca. Claude, D., Die byzantinische Stadt im VI Jh, Byzantinisches Archiv, Heft 13. München.

Clemente 1968

Clemente, G., La Notitia Dignitatum. Cagliari.

Cojocaru 2005

Cojocaru, V. (ed.), Ethnic Contacts and Cultural Exchanges North and West of the Black Sea from the Greek Colonization to the Ottoman Conquest. Iaúi.

Coman 1957

Coman, I.G., Însemnări asupra lui Teotim de Tomis, Glasul Bisericii 16, 46-50.

Conrad 2004

Conrad, S., Die Grabstelen aus Moesia Inferior. Leipzig.

CoteĠ 1962

CoteĠ, P. V., Câteva date asupra evoluĠiei paleogeografice cuaternare a regiunii litorale Istria, Materiale úi Cercetări Arheologice 8, 424-431.

Christodoulou, D.N., Two bricks from Felix Romuliana (Gamzigrad) decorated with incised images, in: M. Vasic (ed.), Felix Romuliana, 50 years of Archaeological Excavation. Papers of the International Conference, Zajeþar, 27th -29th October 2003. Belgrade. 77-81.

115

Covacef 1975

Covacef, Z., ContribuĠii privind cultul lui Hercule în Scythia Minor, Pontica 8, 399-428.

Covacef 2002

Covacef, Z., Arta sculpturală în Dobrogea romană în sec. I-III p.Chr. Cluj-Napoca.

Cumont 1925

Cumont, F., Fragment de bouclier portant une liste d’étapes, Syria 6, 1 – 15.

Cumont 1926

Cumont, F., Fouilles de Dura Europos. Paris.

Dana 2006

Dana, D., Les noms de facture thrace dans LPGN IV. Les noms fantômes et d’autres corrections, ZPE 157, 127-142.

Daris 1964

Daris, S., Documenti per la storia dell’esercito romano in Egitto. Milano.

Darrouzès 1981

Darrouzès, J., Notitiae Episcopatuum Ecclesiae Constantinopolitanae. Texte critique, introduction et notes. Paris.

Dean 1916

Dean, L. R., A Study of the cognomina of soldiers in the Roman legions. Princeton.

Dechev 1976

Decev, D., Die thrakischen Sprachreste. Wien.

Degrassi 1952

Degrassi, A., I fasti consolari dell'impero romano. Roma.

Delehaye 1928

Delehaye, H., Les martyrs Epictete et Astion’, Académie Roumaine, Bulletin de la Section Historique 14, 1-5.

Desjardins 1868

Desjardins, E., Voyage archéologique et géographique dans la région du Bas-Danube, Revue Archéologique 17 (off print).

Destephen 2008

Destephen, S., Prosopographie du diocèse d’Asie (325-641), vol. 3. Paris.

Diaconu 1970

Diaconu, P., Les Pétchénégues au Bas-Danube. Bucharest.

DiMaio 1988

DiMaio, M., Smoke in the Wind: Zonaras’ use of Philostorgius, Zosimus, John of Antioch, and John of Rhodes in his Narrative on the Neo-Flavian Emperors, Byzantion 58, 236-249.

DiMaio, Arnold 1992

DiMaio, M., Arnold, D. W.-H., Per Vim, Per Caedem, Per Bellum: A Study of Murder and Ecclesiastical Politics in the Year 337 CE., Byzantion 62, 198-212.

Dobó 1940

Dobó, A., Publicum Portorium Illyrici. Budapest.

DoruĠiu 1964

DoruĠiu, Em., Precizări topografice despre unele inscripĠii dobrogene, SCIV 15, 1, 131136.

DoruĠiu-Boilă 1972

DoruĠiu-Boilă, Em., Castra legionis V Macedonica und Municipium Troesmense, Dacia NS 16, 133-144.

Duridanov 1985 Enßlin 1948

Duridanov, I., Die Sprache der Thraker. Neurid. Enßlin W., s.v. Valerius (Diocletianus) in: Real Encyclopädie der Classischen Altertumswissenschaft (Pauly Wissowa Kroll) VII A2 Stuttgart, 2419-2495. Florescu Gr., Incinta cea mare a cetăĠii. In: Histria - Monografie arheologică, I. Bucureúti. 66-95. Gaggadis-Robin, V., Hermary, A., Reddé, M., Sintes Cl. (eds.), Les ateliers de sculpture régionaux: techniques, styles et iconographie. Actes du Xe Colloque International sur l’Art Provincial Romain. Arles et Aix-en-Provence, 21-23 Mai 2007. Arles, Aix-enProvence. Gajewska, H., Topographie des fortifications romaines en Dobrudja. Wroclaw, Warszaw. Gâútescu, P., Modificările morfohidrologice ale Ġărmului românesc de acumulare al Mării Negre. Bucureúti. Georgiev, Vl., Issledovaniia po sravnitelno-istoricheskomu izikoznaniu. rodsvednnîie otnoscheniia indoevropeiskih iazîkov. Moskva.

Florescu 1954 Gaggadis-Robin et al. (eds.) 2009

Gajewska 1974 Gâútescu 1986 Georgiev 1958 Gerov 1950-1952

GhiaĠă 1980 Gocheva 1978

Gerov, B., Romanizmăt mezhdu Dunava i Balkana ot Hadrian do Konstantin Veliki, Godishnik na Sofiiskia Universitet, Istoriko-Filologicheski Fakultet, 47, 17-121; 48, 307398. GhiaĠă, A., Toponimie úi geografie istorică în Dobrogea medievală úi modernă, Memoriile SecĠiunii de ùtiinĠe Istorice, ser. IV, tom. V, 29-41. Gocheva, Z., Der Bendiskult und die Beziehungen zwischen Thrakien und Kleinasien, in: Hommage à Maarten J. Vermaseren. vol. I. Leiden.

116

Gostar 1964 Gökbilgin 1957

Gostar, N., Monumente epigrafice inedite din lapidariul Muzeului regional de arheologie Dobrogea, Sudii Clasice 5, 299-314. Gökbilgin, T., Rumeli’ de Yürükler, Tartarlar ve Evlâd-i Fâtihân. Istanbul.

Groag-Fluss 1932

Groag, E., Fluss, M., s.v. Memmius; s.v. Memmia, RE XV, 602-637; 637-638

Holder 1891-1897

Holder, A., Altceltischer Sprachschatz I (1891); II (1897). Leipzig.

Hornblower, Matthews 2000

Hornblower, S., Matthews, E., Greek Personal Names. Their Value as Evidence. London.

Ionescu 1904

Ionescu, M. D., Dobrogea în preajma veacului al XX-lea. Bucureúti.

Ivanov 1955

Ivanov, T., Dva natpisa ot antichnaia grad pri Razgrad, Izvestia Balgarskata Arheologicheskata Institut, Sofia 19, 175-183.

Ivanov 1969

Ivanov, T., Die Stadtgebau in Ober-und Unter-moesien und Thrakien in der Römerzeit und der Spätantike, in: Actes des Études Balkaniques et Sud est Européennes, vol. II Sofia. 491-502.

Ivanov 1980

Ivanov, T., Abritus. Rimski kastel i ranovizantiiski grad v Dolna Mizia I. Topografia i ukrepitelna sistema na Abritus. Sofia.

Jokl 1929

Jokl, N., Thraker B: Sprache, in: Reallexikon der Vorgeschichte (ed. M. Ebert) vol. XIII. Berlin, 278-298.

Jones 1971

Jones, A. H. M., The Cities of the Eastern Roman Empire. Oxford.

Julicher 1907

Julicher, A., s.v. Eunomios, RE VI, 1131-1132.

Kajanto 1963

Kajanto, I, Onomastic Studies in the Early Christian Inscriptions of Rome and Carthage. Helsinki.

Kajanto 1982

Kajanto, I., The Latin Cognomina. Helsinki.

Kajanto 1997

Kajanto, I., Roman nomenclature during the late Roman Empire, in: I. Di Stefano Manzella (ed.), Le iscrizioni dei cristaini in Vaticano. Citta di Vaticano. 103-111.

Katsarov 1924

Katsarov, G. I., Die Denkmäler des Thrakischen Reittergottes in Bulgarien. Leipzig.

Kiessling 1912

Kiessling , s.v. Halmyris lacus, RE VII, 2276-2278

Kolendo 1966

Kolendo, J., Une inscription inconue de Sexaginta Prista, Eirene 5, 139-154

Kornemann 1901

Kornemann, E., s.v. consistere; s.v. conventus, RE IV, 922-926; 1173-1180.

Kretschmer 1896

Kretschmer, P., Einleitung in die Geschichte der griechischen Sprache. Göttingen.

Kubitschek 1914 Kubitschek, W., 1917

Kubitschek, W., s. v. Itineraria, RE IX, 2318-2353. Kubitschek, s. v. Karten, RE X, 2022-2149

Kubitschek, W., 1928

Kubitschek, s. v. Mansio, RE XIV, 1231-1251

Laufer 1971

Laufer, S., Diokletians Preisedikt. Berlin.

Leedom 1978

Leedom, J. W., Constantius II: Three Revisions, Byzantion 48, 133-36.

Leunissen 1989

Leunissen, P. M. M., Konsuln und Konsuläre in der Zeit von Commodus bis Severus Alexander (180-235 n. Chr.). Prosopographische Untersuchungen zur Senatorischen Elite in römischer Kaiserzeit. Amsterdam.

Levi 1967

Levi, A., and M., Itineraria Picta.Contributo allo studio della Tabula Peutingeriana. Roma.

Liverani (ed.) 2004

Liverani, P. (ed.), I colori del bianco. Policromia sulla scultura antica. Città del Vaticano, Rome.

Lucien-Brun 1973

Lucien-Brun, X., Constance II et le massacre des princes, Bulletin de l'Association Guillaume Bodé, ser. 4, 585-602.

Mărgineanu-Cârstoiu 1979

Mărgineanu-Cârstoiu, M., Piese de arhitectură din cetatea Tropaeum Traiani, in: I. Barnea (ed.), Tropaeum Traiani I. Cetatea. Bucureúti. 128-175.

Matei-Popescu 2001-2002

Matei Popescu, Fl., Trupele auxiliare romane din Moesia inferior, SCIVA 52-53, 173-242.

Minkova 2000

Minkova, M., The personal names of the Latin Inscriptions in Bulgaria, Studien zur

117

klassischen Philologie. Frankfurt am Main. Mitova-Dzonova 1978

Mitova-Dzonova, D., Ein Beitrag zur Geschichte des Antiken Dimum, in: Studien in honorem Veselini Beshevliev. Sofia. 217-223.

Mititelu 1943

Mititelu, I., Itineraria romana. Le bouclier de Dura Europos, Buletinul SocietăĠii Numismatice Române 22, 78-91.

Mocsy 1970

Mocsy, A., Gesellschaft und Romanisation in der römischen Provinz Moesia Superior. Amsterdam.

Moisil 1909

Moisil, C., CetăĠile romane la Dunărea de Jos, pe braĠul Sf. Gheorghe, Buletinul Comisiunii Monumentelor Istorice 2, 85-92.

Moisil 1910

Moisil, C., Unde a fost vechiul Halmyris, Buletinul Comisiunii Monumentelor Istorice 3, 93-94.

Munteanu 1973

Munteanu, M., Les divinitées du panthéon greco-romain dans les villages de la Dobrudja romaine, Pontica 6, 73-86.

MuúeĠeanu, Zahariade, Elefterescu 1979

MuúeĠeanu, C., Zahariade, M., Elefterescu, D., Spre o tipologie a útampilelor legiunii a XI-a Claudia în Moesia Inferior, Studii úi Materiale de Muzeografie úi Istorie Militară 12, 164-185.

Netzhammer 1907

Netzhammer, R., Auf dem Razelm. Bucharest.

Netzhammer 1909

Netzhammer, R., Aus Rumänien I. Einsiedeln.

Netzhammer 1918

Netzhammer, R., Die Christlichen Altert΋mer Dobrudscha. Bucharest.

Netzhammer 1937

Netzhammer R., Epiktet und Astion. Diokletianische Märtyrer am Donaudelta. Zug.

Oliver 1965

Oliver, J. H., Greek Roman Byzantine Studies, Dumbarton Oaks VI 146-149.

OpaiĠ 1991

OpaiĠ, A., Ceramica din aúezarea úi cetatea de la IndependenĠa (Murighiol) secolele V î.e.n.-VII e.n., Peuce 1991, 133-214.

Panin 1983

Panin, N., Black Sea Coast changes in the last 10,000 years, Dacia N. S. 27, 175-184.

Pape-Benseler 1911

Pape, W., Benseler, G. E. Wörterbuch der griechischen Eigennamen. Dritte Auflage neu bearbeitet von Dr. Gustav Eduard Benseler, Vierter Abdruck. Braunschweig.

Patsch 1910

Patsch, C. RE VII s.v. Halmyris, 2878-2879.

Pârvan 1906

Pârvan, V., Salsovia, Bucureúti.

Pârvan 1913

Pârvan, V., Descoperiri nouă în Scythia Minor, ARMSI II 34, 467-550.

Pârvan 1916 Pârvan 1924

1

Pârvan, V., Histria IV. InscripĠii găsite în 1914 úi 1915, in: ARMSI II 38, 533-732. Pârvan, V., Municipium Aurelium Durostorum, Rivista di Filologia e d’ Istruzione Classica N.S. 2, 12-13, 307-340.

Pârvan 19242

Pârvan, V., Nuove considerazioni sul vescovato della Scizia Minore, Atti della Pontificia Accademia Romana di Archaeologia, Rendiconti 2, 117-135.

Petolescu, Popovici 1989

Petolescu, C. C., Popovici, D., O inscripĠie inedită de la Carsium, SCIVA 40, 3, 241-247.

Pferdehirt 2004

Pferdehirt, B., Römische Militärdiplome und Entlassungsurkunden in der Sammlung des Römisch-Germanischen Zentralmuseums. Vol. I-II. Mainz.

Picard 1921

Picard, Ch. Fouilles de Thasos, Bulletin de Correspondance Hellénique 45, 86-173.

Pippidi 1958

Pippidi, D. M., 1958, Das Stadtgebiet von Histria in römischer Zeit auf Grund der ੒ȡȠșİıȓĮ der Laberius Maximus (SEG, I, 329), Dacia N.S. 2, 227-247.

Pippidi 1962

Pippidi, D. M., Epigraphische Beiträge zur Geschichte Histrias in hellenistischer und römischer Zeit, (Deutsche Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Berlin, Schriften der Sektion für Altertumswissenschaft 34) Berlin, 133-153.

Pippidi 1964

Pippidi, D. M., 1964, Un fragment inedit al hotărniciei lui Laberius Maximus, Studii Clasice 6, 331-339.

Pippidi 1965

Pippidi, D. M., Străinii de peste mări, in: D. Berciu, D. M. Pippidi, Din istoria Dobrogei vol I. GeĠi úi greci la Dunărea de Jos. Bucureúti. 139-324.

118

Pippidi 1967

Pippidi, D. M., Hotărnicia consularului Laberius Maximus, in: ContribuĠii la istoria veche a României. Bucureúti. 349-385.

Pippidi 1971

Pippidi, D. M., I Greci nel Basso Danubio dall’età arcaica alla

Pippidi 1975 Pippidi 1988 Poenaru-Bordea, Gh. 2003

conquista romana. Milano. Pippidi, D. M., Scythica Minora. Recherches sur les colonies grécques du littoral roumain de la Mer Noir. Bucureúti, Amsterdam. Pippidi, D. M., Studii de istorie úi epigrafie. Bucureúti. Poenaru-Bordea, Gh., Monedele, in : Suceveanu, Al., Zahariade, M., Topoleanu, F., Poenaru Bordea, Gh., Halmyris I. Monografie arheologică. Cluj-Napoca.

Pokorny 1946 – 1959

Pokorny, J., Indogermanisches Etymologisches Wörterbuch. München.

Polonic mss.

Polonic, P., Varia, manuscripts preserved in the Library of the Romanian Academy in Bucharest.

Popescu 1969

Popescu, Em., Contributions à la géographie historique de la Peninsule Balkanique aux V-VIIIe siècles de notre ère, Dacia N.S. 13, 403-415.

Popescu 1978

Popescu, Em., Zur Geschichte der Stadt in Kleinskythien in der Spätantike. Ein Epigraphischer Beitrag, Dacia N.S. 19, 173-182.

Popescu 1994

Popescu, Em., Saints Epictet et Astion, martyres à Halmyris, in: Christianitas Daco Romana. Bucureúti. 92-100.

Popov 1976

Popov, D., Essence, origine et propagation du culte de la déesse thrace Bendis, in: Dialogues d'histoire ancienne, 2 (= Annales litteraires de l'Université de Besançon, 188), Centre de recherches d'histoire ancienne 21. Paris. 289-303.

Portalsky 2005

Portalsky, A., Salmydessos reconsidered, Thracia XVI. In honorem X Congressus Studiorum Thracicorum 2005 Academiae Literarum Bulgaricae. Sofia. 35-44.

Preda 1980

Preda C., Descoperirea de la Murighiol (jud. Tulcea) úi unele aspecte ale circulaĠiei monedelor olbiene la Dunărea de Jos, SCN 7, 35-42

Raeck 1992

Raeck, W., Modernisierte Mythen: Zum Umgang der Spätantike mit klassischen Bildthemen. Stuttgart.

Rămureanu 1974

Rămureanu, I., SfinĠi úi martiri la Tomis - ConstanĠa, Biserica Ortodoxă Română 92, 7-8, 975-1011.

Rămureanu 1980

Rămureanu, I., in : Actele martirice (PărinĠi úi scriitori bisericeúti) 11. Bucureúti. 342351.

Rebuffat 1986

Rebuffat, R., Le bouclier de Doura, Syria 63, 85-105.

Ritterling 1925

Ritterling, E., s.v. Legio, RǼ XIII 1, 1328-1837.

Russu 1936

Russu, I. I., InscripĠii latine din Durostorum, Anuarul Institutului de Studii Clasice 2, 210-212.

Russu 1967

Russu, I. I., Limba traco-dacilor, ed. 2. Bucureúti.

Schulze 1991

Schulze, W., Zur Geschichte lateinischer Eigennamen, 2nd ed. Darmstadt.

Scorpan 1977a

Scorpan, C., Stele funerare inedite de la Sacidava, Pontica 10, 159-178.

Scorpan 1977b

Scorpan, C., Rezultate ale săpăturilor arheologice de la Sacidava (1974, 1976), Pontica 10, 229 –251. Seeck, O., s.v. Constantinus (3), RE IV, 1026.

Seeck 1901 Simion 1985

Simion, G., Eléments de civilisation grècque classique dans le monde gétique de la zone istro-pontique, in: Praktika, Actes du XIIe Congrès International d’archéologie classique, Athène 4-10 Septembre 1983, 272-279.

Simion 1990

Simion, G., O nouă cultură de la începutul epocii bronzului pe teritoriul istro-pontic, Peuce 10, 33-39; 21-34.

Simion 1995 Simion 2008

Simion, G., O nouă necropolă getică la Murighiol, jud. Tulcea, Peuce 11, 265-302. Simion G., Sarcofagele romane din Muzeul din Tulcea. Peuce S.N., 6, 251-276.

119

Shkorpil 1905

Slobozianu 1959 Smallwood 1967 Solin, Salomies 1988 Spaul 2000 Stronk 1991 Stuart 1999

Shkorpil, K. and H., Nekotoria iz doroghi vostochnoi Bolgarii. Okopi i zemliania ukreplenia Bolgarii, Izvestia Ruskogo Arheologhicheskogo Instituta v Konstantinopole, St. Petersburg 443-502; 503-543. Slobozianu, H., ConsideraĠii asupra aúezărilor antice din jurul lacurilor Techirghiol úi Agigea, Materiale úi Cercetări Arheologice 5, 735-752. Smallwood E. M., Documents illustrating the reigns of Claudius and Nero. Cambridge. Solin, H., Salomies, O., Repertorium ominum gentilium et et cognomina latinorum. Hildesheim, Zürich, New York. Spaul J., Cohors2. The Evidence for a Short History of the Auxiliary Infantry Units of the Imperial Roman Army, BAR International Series 841. Stronk, J., P., Conditions for Colonization: Calpes Limen and Salmydessos reconsidered, Thracia Pontica IV, Sofia, 97-112. Stuart, P., De Tabula Peutingeriana. Commentaar, 3rd ed. Nijmegen.

Suceveanu 1974

Suceveanu, Al., La défense du littoral de la Dobrudja à l’époque romaine, Revue Roumaine d’Histoire 13, 2, 217-238.

Suceveanu 1977

Suceveanu, Al., ViaĠa economică în Dobrogea romană. Bucureúti.

Suceveanu 1992

Suceveanu, Al., Die römischen Verteidigungsanlagen an der Küste der Dobrudscha, Bonner Jahrbücher 192, 195-223.

Suceveanu, Angelescu 1988

Suceveanu, Al., Angelescu, M. V., Nouvelles découvertes dans l’établissement gétique d’IndependenĠa (dép. De Tulcea), Dacia N. S. 32, 145-150.

Suceveanu, Barnea 1993

Suceveanu, Al., Barnea, I., Contribution a l’histoire des villes romaines de la Dobrudja, Dacia N. S. 37, 159-180.

Suceveanu, Zahariade 1986

Suceveanu, Al., Zahariade, M., Un nouveau vicus sur le territoire de la Dobroudja romaine, Dacia N. S. 30, 1-2, 109-120.

Suceveanu, Zahariade 1987

Suceveanu, Al., Zahariade, M. 1987, Du nom antique de la cité romaine tardive d’IndependenĠa, Dacia N.S. 31, 87-96.

Suceveanu, Zahariade, Topoleanu, Poenaru Bordea 2003

Suceveanu, Al., Zahariade, M., Topoleanu,F., Poenaru Bordea, Gh., Halmyris I. Monografie arheologică. Cluj-Napoca.

Sundwall 1913

Sundwall, J., Die Einheimischen Namen der Lykier nebst einem Verzeichnisse kleiasiatischer Nammenstamme, Klio 163. Klio-Beiheft 11.

ùtefan 1982

ùtefan, Al., Probleme ale strategiei Histriei úi ale organizării teritoriului său rural în epoca preromană, SCIVA 33, 2, 199-208.

ùtefan 1982

ùtefan, Al. S., Cetatea romană târzie de la Murighiol. Studiu aerofotografic’ Peuce IX, 1984, 297-310; 663-670.

Szabó, Kovács (ed.) 2009

Szabó, A., Kovács, P. (eds.), Tituli Aquincenses, 1. Tituli operum publicorum et honorarii et sacri. Budapest.

Talbert 2010

Talbert, R.J.A., Rome's World: The Peutinger Map Reconsidered. Cambridge.

Tocilescu 1896

Tocilescu, Gr. C., Inschriften aus Rumänien, Archäologisch Epigraphische Mittheilungen aus Österreich-Ungarn 19, 79-111

Tocilescu mss.

Manuscripts preserved in the library of the Romanian Academy, Bucureúti.

Tomaschek 1980

Tomaschek, W., Die Alten Thraker, 2nd ed.. Wien.

Topoleanu 2000

Topoleanu, F., Ceramica romană úi romano-bizantină de la Halmyris (sec. I-III). Tulcea.

Uhden 1932

Uhden, R. Bemerkungen zu dem römischen Kartenfragment von Dura Europos, Hermes 67, 116-125.

Uscătescu Barón 1992

Uscătescu Barón, Al., Ceramica importada en Gerasa (Ӹaras, Jordania): el lote de las excavaçiones del Macellum, Caesaraugusta 69, 115-182.

van Berchem 1937

van Berchem, D., L’annone militaire dans l’empire romain au IIIe siècle, Mémoires de la société générale des antiquaires de France 80, 117-201.

120

van Berchem 1974

van Berchem, D., Les itinéraires de Caracalla et l’itinéraire Antonin, in: Actes du IXe Congrès International d’Études sur les frontières romaines, Mamaia 1972. Bucharest, Köln. 301-307.

Velkov 1977

Velkov, V., Cities in Thrace and Dacia in Late Antiquity. Amsterdam.

Velkova 1974

Velkova, Zh., Nachträge zu den thrakischen Sprachresten (1957-1972), Linguistique Balkanique 17, 2, 55-77.

Vlahov 1963

Vlahov, K., Nachträge und Berichtigung zu den thrakischen Sprachresten Rückwörterbuch, Godishnik na Sofiiskia Universitet, Istoriko-Filologicheski Fakultet 57, 2, 221-273.

Vlahov 1976

Vlahov, K., Trakiiski lichni imena fonetiko-morfologichni prouchvania. Sofia.

Vulpe 1938

Vulpe, R., Histoire ancienne de la Dobrudja. Bucureúti.

Vulpe 1968

Vulpe, R., Perioada Principatului (sec. I-III), in: Vulpe, Barnea 1968, 13-292.

Vulpe, Barnea 1968

Vulpe, R., Barnea, I., Din istoria Dobrogei II. Romanii la Dunărea de Jos. Bucureúti.

Walde, Pokorny 1928 Walde3 1935-1954

Walde, Ä., Pokorny, J., Vergleichendes Wörterbuch der indogermanischen Sprachen, vol. I-III. Berlin. Walde, Ä., Lateinisches etimologisches Wörterbuch, 3rd ed., vol I-III. Berlin.

Weiss 1911

Weiss, J., Die Dobrudscha im Altertum. Sarajevo.

Weiß 2000

Weiß, P., Zu Vicusangaben und qui-et-Namen auf Flottediplomen des 3 Jh. S, ZPE 130, 279-285.

Whitehouse 1985 Zah, Suceveanu 1971

Whitehouse, D., 1985. The Schola Praeconum, I. The Coins, pottery, Lamps and Fauna, Papers of the British School at Rome 50. Zah, Em., Suceveanu, Al., Bessi Consistentes, SCIV, 22, 4, 567-578.

Zahariade 2003

Zahariade, I., Roman bone skates from Halmyris, Thraco-Dacica S. N. 1,183-187.

Zahariade 1975

Zahariade, M., Noi consideraĠii istorice asupra scutului de la Dura Europos, SCIVA 26, 507-527.

Zahariade 1986

Zahariade, M., Vexillation in northern Dobroudja Dacia NS 30, 173-176.

Zahariade 1988

Zahariade, M., Moesia Secunda, Scythia úi Notitia Dignitatum. Bucureúti.

Zahariade 1990

Zahariade, M., New Epigraphical Finds in the Roman Fort of IndependenĠa, Tulcea County, Dacia N.S. 31, 259-266.

Zahariade 1991

Zahariade, M., An Early and Late Roman Fort on the Danube”, in Roman Frontier Studies 1989. Proceedings of the XVth International Congress of Roman Frontier studies, Exeter 311-317.

Zahariade 1994

Zahariade, M., InscripĠia de fundaĠie tetrarhică de la Halmyris, Pontica 29, 173-186.

Zahariade 1997

Zahariade, M., The Halmyris Tetrarchic Inscription, ZPE 119, 230-236.

Zahariade 1997

Zahariade, M., The Fortifications of Lower Moesia. Amsterdam.

Zahariade 1999

Zahariade, M., The Tetrarchic Building Inscriptions and the Lower Danubian Limes, in: XI Congresso Internazionale di Epigrafia Greca e Latina, Roma 18-24 Septembre 1997. Roma. 453-457.

Zahariade 2006

Zahariade, M., A History of a Later Roman Province: Scythia Minor (284-681). Amsterdam.

Zahariade 2009

Zahariade, M., Epigraphica Halmyridensia I, Thraco-Dacica N. S. 1, 1-2, 107-124.

Zahariade, Suceveanu, OpaiĠ, OpaiĠ, Topoleanu 1986 Zgusta 1955

Zahariade, M., Suceveanu, Al., OpaiĠ, A., OpaiĠ, C., Topoleanu, F., Early and late Roman fortification at IndependenĠa, Tulcea County, Dacia N.S. 31, 97-106. Zgusta, L., Die Personnenamen griechischer Städte der nördlicher Schwarzmeerküste. Praha.



121

Abbreviations ARMSI AE CIL CPL IDR IGB IGLR ILB ILJug. ILS IMS IOSPE ISM LPGN MDGR OLD OPEL P. Lond. P. Oxy P. Thead. RE RMD SCIV(A) SEG TAM ThLL TIR ZPE

Analele Academiei Române. Memorii. SecĠia Istorie. Année Épigraphique, Paris. Corpus Inscriptionum Latinarum, Berlin. Cavenaille, R. 1958. Corpus Papyrorum Latinarum, Wiesbaden. InscripĠiile antice din Dacia úi Scythia Minor. InscripĠiile Daciei Romane. Vol. I-IV Bucureúti 1977-2001. G.Mihailov, Inscriptiones Graecae in Bulgaria repertae, vol.I-IV Serdicae 1956-1966. Em. Popescu, InscripĠiile greceúti úi latine din secolele IV-XIII descoperite pe teritoriul României, Bucureúti 1976. B. Gerov, Inscriptiones Latinae in Bulgaria repertae, Serdicae 1989. Šašel, Inscriptiones latinae quae in Jugoslavia inter annos MCMLX et MCMLXX repertae et editae sunt, Ljubliana1978. H. Dessau, Inscriptiones Latinae Selectae, vol. I-III Berlin 1892-1916. Inscriptions de la Mésie Superieure vol. I-IV, VI Beograd 1982-1995. V. Latyshev, Inscriptiones antiquae orae septentrionalis Ponti Euxini Graecae et Latinae, vol. I-II, IV Sankt Petersburg 1885-1901. InscripĠiile din Scythia Minor greceúti úi latinae, vol. I-III, V Bucureúti, Paris 1983-1999. Lexicon of Greek Personal Names, vol. I-V Oxford 1987-2010. Marele DicĠionar Geografic al României, vol.I-V Bucure‫܈‬ti 1898-1902. Oxford Latin Dictionary, Oxford 1968. Onomasticon Provinciarum Europae Latinarum, Ediderunt, B. LĘrincz et F. RedĘ, vol. I-IV Budapest & Wien 1999-2005. Greek Papyri in the British Museum, (F. G. Kenyon, H. I. Bell eds), London. The Oxyrhynchus Papyri, (B. P., Grenfell, , A. S., Hunt and others eds), London, Papyrus Theadelphi, Tax Documents from Theadelphia: Papyri of the Second Century A.D., (J. Day, K. C. Walker, eds) London. Real Encyclopädie der Classischen Altertumswissenschaft (Pauly Wissowa Kroll), Stuttgart. Roman Military Diplomas, vol. I-V London 1978-2005. Studii si cercetari de istorie veche(úi arheologie), Bucureúti. Supplementum Epigraphicum Graecum, Paris. Tituli Asiae Minoris, Vindobonae 1901Thesaurus Linguae Latinae, Leipzig. Tabula Imperii Romani, L 35, Bucharest 1969. Zeitschrift für Papyrologie und Epigraphik, Bonn.

Special abbreviations M-masculine Mss.-manuscript(s) N.-Neutral Nhd.- neuhochdeutsch Pl.-Plural Sg.-singular Skr-Sanskrite Thr.-Thracian Turk.-Turkish

Acc.-Accusative Afries-altfriesisch Ags.- anglo-saxon Ahd.- althochdeutsch Cm-centimeter Dac.-Dacian Dat.-Dative Gen.-Genitive Goth.-Gothic Gr.–Greek Illyr.-Illyrian Km -kilometer Ksl-kleinslawisch Lat-Latin Lit.-Lithuanian M-meter

122

Other Abbreviations ICEM MNA L LR PN

Institutul de Cercetări Eco-Muzeale Tulcea,. Muzeul NaĠional de AntichităĠi (today part of the Archaeological Institute «Vasile Pârvan«, Bucharest) Level Late Roman Personal Name

CRITICAL SIGNS ( ) [ ] { } < > Ń ¬ + [-] [--] [---] [--/--] ---| | [---] ABCD |---ABCD[---]|--------? //// ৽ !

Letters omitted in the original by abbreviations Letters missing in the original which may be restored with reasonable certainty exclusion by editor Orthographically superfluous letter occurring in the original or correction made to the original in the transcript Letter/syllable corrected by editor Corrupted letter whose trace is visible ҥincomplete letter with probable identification short gap, indetermined two letters indetermined length change of line one or severeal lines missing at the beginning of the text ABCLetters in the transcript which cannot be interpreted ABCDone or severeal lines missing at the beginning of the text with a gap in the first preserved line one or several lines missing at the end of the text one or several lines missing at the end of the text and a gap at the end of the last preserved line uncertainty even of a gap at the beginning or the end of the text Faint marks observable on the surface of inscription indicating the number and position of missing letters Subscript dots are used to mark uncertain letters on the original surface A mistake in the original

123

INDICES* I. Personal Names NOMINA VIRORUM ET MULIERUM ȆĮȣıĮȞȓĮȢ: 531-2 ȆİįĮȖİȓIJȞȣȠȢ: 622 Ȉ઀ȝȘ: 1063 ; 79 ȈȝȓȞșȚȠȢ: 801 ȈȩIJĮ: 553 ȈȪȝȝĮțȠȢ: 51 ȈȦțȡȐIJȘȢ: 90; 91; 98b ȈȦıIJȡȐIJȠȢ: 712 ȈȦIJȒȡȠȢ: 551-2 ȉȠȝȠ [----]Ƞȣ: 952 ੥ĮțȓȞșȚȠȢ: 533; 57, 21; 673 ; 87 ĭȓȜĮȚȞȓȢ: 88 ȉȘȜȑȝĮȤȠȢ: 542 ȉȚȝĮıĮȖȩȡĮȢ: 57; 11-2 ; 722 ; 742

1. Graeca ਝȖĮșȠțȜİ૨Ȣ: 77 ਝȖȑȝĮȤȠȢ: 581-2 ; 592 ; 66 ਝȖȡȚȐȞȚȠȢ: 51; 523-4; 613; 732; 1022 ǹੁȞȑĮȢ: 1021 ਝੁȞȒIJȠȡȠȢ: 602; 612 ; 621; 63, 642 ਝȝĮȓȠȢ: 1061 ਝȞIJȓȖȠȞȠȢ: 761 ਞȡȐțȜોȢ: 38 ; 61 ਝȡȚıIJİȓįĮȢ: 802 ; 812 ਝȡȓıIJȚȠȞ: 101 ਝȡȚıIJȠțȜોȢ: 553 ਝȡȚıIJȠțȡȐIJİȣȢ: 78; 79; 91 ਝȡȓıIJȠȞ: 521-2 ਝ[...]ȠȢ: 1003. ǻĮȜȚȫ: 682, 811. ǻĮȝȠțȜોȢ: 65 ǻĮȝȠșȑȝȚȠȢ: 971-2. ǻĮȝȠțȡȐIJȘȢ: 65; 82- 84 ǻ૙ȠȢ: 99b ǻȚȠıșȑȠȢ: 643 ǻȦȡȩșİȠȢ: 85 ਫȝȓȞșȚȠȢ: 801 ਬȡȝĮ૙ȠȢ: 75 ਬȡȝોȢ: 36 I 4-5 ǽȩIJȚ: 115 ਺ȡȐț(ȜોȢ) : 49 ĬİıȝȠijȩȡȚȠȢ: 98a2 ĬȑıIJȦȡ: 702 ĬİȣijȐȡȞİȣȢ: 98a1 ੊ĮıȚțȡȐIJȘȢ: 99a1 ੊İȡȫȞȣȝȠȢ: 731 ȀȐȡȞİȠȢ: 601 ȀȣȡȚĮțȩ(Ȣ) : 144 ȀȜİȓįĮȝȠȢ: 861 ȀȜİȚIJȩȝĮȤȠȢ: 1001-2 ȀȜİȫȞȣȝȠȢ: 672 ȀȡĮIJȓįĮȢ: 682 692, 702, ȀȣȡȚĮțȩȢ: 143 ȂĮȡıȪĮȢ: 57, 22; 891 ȂȠȣıĮ૙ȠȢ: 48 ȃĮȞȫȞȠȢ: 501 ȆĮȞȐȝȠȢ: 693; 703; 713; 762; 892; 99a2

2. Latina Aelia Bendsi: 225-6; 46 Aelia Marcia: 245-6 Aelius Sabinus: 205-6; 42; 46 Aelius Saturninus: 305-7; 52 Aelius Sissa: 54 adn Aelius Sola: 242-3; 45, 46 Aelius Titianus: 214; 43, 46 Aelius Valens: 202-3; 8; 42, 46 Aelius[...]: 295 Artemidora: 281 Valerius Longinus: C.183-4; 37, 39 Claudia Bersille: 194-5 Claudius Clemens: 275-6 Claudius Martinus: 275-6 Flavia Primitiva: 235 Flavia Titia: 212 Flavius Valerius: 104-5; 32, 33 Flavius Martinus: 257-8 Flavius Secundus: 2510-11 Flavius Valens: 232-3 Heraclius: 2814 Iuliana: 2813 M. Ulpius Marcellus: 192-3 Marcius: 94 Marcus Papario: 65-6 Memmia Marcia: 252-3 Memmius Marcus: 255-6 124

Nepotianus: 288-9 Papirius: 292 Publius Pompeius: 84-5; 31 Quintus[…]: 325 Sextus[…]: 324 Sisso: 313-4 Sossius Sossi: 76-7 T. Flavius Secundus: 223-4 Titus Collumela: 67 ; 30

Valeria Nene: 262-3 Valerius Ponticus: 261-2 Valerius Valens: 265 Valerius Valerinus Constans : 361-2; 60 adn Victor: 2811-12 Vitalis: 2815-16 Viventia: 284

*The bolded numbers represent the numbers in the catalog; the unbolded numbers indicates common pages

II. Surnames COGNOMINA Artemidora: 281; 51 Bendsi: 225-6 Bersille: 194-5 Capito: 321 Clemens: 275-6 Collumela: 67 Constans: 361-2 ; 60 Heraclius: 2814 ; 51 Iuliana: 2813 Laelianus: 107 Longinus: 183-4 Marcellus: 192-3 Marcia: 245-6 Marcia: 252-3 Marcus: 255-6 Martinus: 257-8 Martinus: 275-6 Nene: 262-3 Nepotianus: 288-9 Paparione: 65-6

Pompeiano: 84-5 Ponticus: 261-2 Primitiva: 235 Sabinus: 205-6 Saturninus: 305-7 Secundus: 223-4 Secundus: 2510-11 Sextus: 324 Sisso: 316-7 Sola: 242-3 Sossius: 76-7 Titia: 212 Titianus : 214 Valens : 202-3 ; 8 Valens: 232-3 Valens: 265 Valerius: 104-5; 32, 33 Victor: 2811-12 Vitalis: 2815-16; 50, 51 Viventia: 284; 50, 51

III. Latin names in Greek inscriptions NOMINA LATINA IN INSCRIPTIONES GRAECAE ǺĮȜȑȡȚĮ ǻȚȠțȜȘIJȚȐȞȠȣ: 36 II 16-17; 60 BĮȜȑȡȚȠȢ ǺĮȜİȡȓȞȠȢ ȀંȞıIJĮȞȢ: 36 I 1-2; II13-14; 60 ȈİțȠ઄ȞįȠȢ ਬȡȝૌȠȣ: 36 I 4-5; 60 125

IV. Greek names in Latin inscriptions NOMINA GRAECA IN INSCRIPTIONES LATINAE Artemidora: 281; 51 Heraclius: 2814; 51 Ponticus: 261-2 Strato (?): 65-6; 29 V. Thracian and Micro-Asian surnames COGNOMINA THRACICA ET ASIAE MINORIS Bendsi: 225-6 ; 44 Bersille: 194-5 ; 40 Nene: 262-3 ; 48-49 Sisso: 316-7; 54 Sola: 242-3; 46

VI. Roman Emperors and their families IMPERATORES ET DOMVS EORVM Imp(erator) Caes(ar) C(aius) Aur(elius) Val(erius) Diocletianus Pius Feli(x) invictus Augustus Germanicus Max(imus) Gothicus Max(imus) Sarmaticus Max(imus), Britannicus Max(imus), PersicusMax(imus): 11 ; 4-5 ; 21 ; 4-5 ; 31 ; 4-5; 8 Imp(erator) Caes(ar) M(arcus) Aur(elius) Maximianus Pius Fel(ix) Invictus Aug(ustus) Germanicus Max(imus) Gothicus Max(imus) Sarmaticus Max(imus), Britannicus Max(imus), Persicus Max(imus): 12 ; 4-5 ; 22 ; 4-5 ; 32 ; 4-5 Imp(erator) Caes(ar) Fl(avius) Val(erius) Constantius nob(ilissimus) Caes(ar) Germanicus Max(imus) Gothicus Max(imus) Sarmaticus Max(imus), Britannicus Max(imus), Persicus Max(imus): 13 ; 4-5 ; 23 ; 4-5 ; 33 ; 4-5 Imp(erator) Caes(ar)Gal(erius) Val(erius) Maximianus nob(ilissimus) Caes(ar) Germanico Max(imus) Got]hicus Max(imus) Sarmaticus Max(imus),Britannicus Max(imus), Persicus Max(imus): 13 ;4-5 ; 23 ; 4-5 ; 33 ; 4-5 D(ominus) N(oster) Constantius Aug(ustus): 41-3 D(ominus) N(oster) Constantinus Augustus: 44-6 VII. CONSULES Consuls Anno 171: 200: 209:

Severo et Herenniano: 86-7; 31; 36 Victorino et Severo: 95-6; 32; 36 Commodo et Laeliano: 106-7; 33; 36

126

VIII. Administration RES MVNICIPALIS cives Romani consistentes: 62; 72-3; 82; 92; 102; 112; 122; 132; 142; 152 magister: 66; 77; 85; 94; 105; 114; 124; 135; 145; 155, adn principalis: 289-10

IX. Military units and military personnel RES MILITARIS cuneus equitum Arcadum: 10 ex beneficiarius consularis: 186-7 legio I Iovia Scythica: 36 II14-15; 45; 46. legio I Italica: 53; 267-8 legio II Herculia: 6

legio V Macedonica: 185 legio XI C(laudia) p(ia) f(idelis): 54 miles: 267 veteranus: 184; 209 vexillatio: 52

X. Greek words VERBA GRAECA ਕʌȡİț[…]: 36 I5 ਕıIJȣȞȠȝȠȢ: 502 Į੝IJં: 1064 ȕİȞİijĮț[…]: 36 II20 ȕȡȠIJȓįĮ: 522-3, 862 į੻: 36 I6; 1063 įȚĮȕȓȞIJȚ: 36 II18 įȠȪȝȠȢ: 49 įȦș(ȒıİȚȞ): 36 II18 [਩]Ȝ[ĮȚȠȞ]: 119 ਥʌ੿: 51-53, 55, 57-74, 961, 981, 99a 1,1001, 1011, ਥʌȡ઀ĮIJȠ: 1063 ȗȦ: 109

ੂİȡ੼ȦȢ: 66; 721 țȠȞ[---]: 146 țȪȡȚİ: 120 țȠ૨[ȡȝȚ]: 116 ȝȒIJȘȡ: 56 [?] ȝoȡȚࣂ: 1063 ȅıIJȠʌȠȚȩȞ: 36 II17-18 ੒ȡȠșİıȓĮ: A I; 1, 2 ʌȜȠȣȡȚȝȞȠȢ: 36 I8 ʌȡȐȣ (?): 95 IJİıĮȜȠȣ[…]: 36 II21 IJȡȚȕĮ૙ȠȞ: 1062 ijȡȐIJİȡ: 36 I3 [?] ȝoȡȚࣂ: 52

XI. Latin words VERBA LATINA aeternum: 16 ; 26 ; 36 anni: 182; 204,7; 216; 224-5; 234; 254; 274; 2811-13, 15-17 ; 294 ; 317 ; 342 bene merenti: 195; 215-6 ; 315-6 ; 264 ; 316 ; conductor : 1 127

coniux : 195-6 236 ;7-8; 246-7 ; 2512 ; 282 constituere : 16 ; 26 ; 36 consules : 88 ; 97 ; 107 cum: 282 curam agente: 64; 75; 83-4; 93-4; 104; 114; 124; 134; 144; 155 d(ispensator): 47 d(octor ?) : 2511 d(omesticus): 48 de suo: 67, 8 debellatas: 15 ; 25 ; 35 ea: 229 eius: 257,9,11 et: 12, 3 ; 22, 3 ; 32; 54; 86; 95; 107 ; 194,6; 204,6; 222; 257,9; 262; 283; 316 faciendum curavit: 332 ; ~curaverunt: 327 filia: 283,14 filius: 206 ; 266 ,7 ; 282-3, 12 ; 316 ; 326 fines Histrianorum: 2 frater: 2814, 16 frons: 239 gentes: 15 ; 25 ; 35 hostium: 15 ; 25 ; 35 in: 16 ; 26 ; 36; 239 laterculum legionis: 39; 48; 51; 52 lectores: 2818-19 locus: 239 maritus: 226-7 ; 258-9 ; 321 mater: 212-3 militavere: 307 monumentum: 239 nati: 196 parentes: 263-4 pater: 256 ; 266 ; 284 pedes: 239 pientissimus/a: 227-8; 267 ; 247 ; 2514 post: 15 ; 25 ; 35 ponere: 68; 193; 208 ; 213 ; 2210 ; 238 ; 244-5 ; 269 ; posuerunt: 2514 ; 285-6 praesidium: 17 ; 27 ; 37 profuturum: 16 ; 26 ; 36 qui: 15 ; 25 ; 35 respublica: 16 ; 26 ; 36 sibi: 194; 229 sodalicii: 40 suo: 227, 10 ; 243-4 ; sua 283 titulum: 208 ; 285 valete: 2818 vicus militaris: adn vicus stationis classis: 37 vivo: 229 ; 243 vixit: 181-2; 203; 7; 216; 224; 233; 253; 273-4; 2810, 12,13,15,16; 293; 317; 342

128

XII. Numbers NUMERI II: 2812 III: 2823, 15 V: 2817; 307 VIII: 207 X: 317 XVIIII: 254 XX: 274

XXXII: 182 XXXVII: 2811 XLV: 204 L: 225 LX: 216 LXX: 234

XIII. Gods and goddesses DII DEAQUE. Dis Manibus: 191; 201; 211; 221, 2; 231; 241; 251; 261; 271; 287; 291 Hercules: 51 Iuppiter Optimus Maximus: 61; 71;81;91;101;111;121 ; 131;141;151 Memoria: 222; 288

XIV. Christain religion RELIGIO CHRISTIANA ǹ[ȝȒȞ] Ȁ઄[ȡȚİ ǺȠ੾șȘ(?)]: 108 ’I(Ș)ı(Ƞ૨Ȣ) X(ȡȚıIJંȢ): 44 [Ȁ(઄ȡȚİ) ȕȠ੾ș]Ș C[...]: 145 […] H C […]=[Ȁ(઄ȡȚİ) ȕȠ੾ș]Ș C[...]: 144 K[઄ȡȚİ](?): 120, 121 M(੾IJȘȡ) Ĭ(İȠૣ): 145 Ȇȡ[İıȕȪIJİȡȠȢ]: 123 ȋ[ȡȚıIJȩȢ] Ȃ[ĮȡȓĮ] Ȗ[İȞȞ઼]: 119 XV. Geographic terms GEOGRAPHICA ǹੁȖ઄ʌIJȚȠȢ: 56 Ratiaria: 296 Stratonis (turris)(?): 65-6 ĬȐıȠȢ: 541 vicus classicorum: 61-2; 74; 83; 93; 103; 113; 123; 133; 143; 153 129

XVI. Noteworthy abbreviations and isolated letters ABBREVIATIONES ET LITTERAE SINGULARES NOTABILIORES A 163; 374 AE 314 ANTE [...] 373 D P I 371 EA 315 I 375 IVC: 343 G: 162 M: 39b; 42 SIN [...]: 372 IY: 47 K: 39a ȀȁȀȅ: 1431; KȠȞ [...]: 146 ȀȆǹ(?):118 Kĭ ȋǹ: 1061

KࢥąȞIJ: 1062 MIR: 351 NTYK: 39b 1 NK: 39b 2 Ȇ: 142 ȆX: 39a ȆȇIȆȞ: 39c P + E: 142 PP: 148 S: 161 Ĭʌ: 41 CTAXN: 110 XXI: 108 Ȧ: 41 V: 164

XVII. Liquid measurements SEXTARII N: 50 (=27,18 l.) 113, 127 ȃī: 53 (=28,81 l.) 130 NZ: 57 (=30,982 l.) 112 ȃĬ:59 (=32,072 l.) 128, 129 Ȅȇǹ:101(=54,903 l.) 131 Xȁī: 33 (= 17,999 l.) 123 XȂĬ: 49 (= 26, 81 l) 119 ȋȄĬ: 69 (=37,508 l.) 124, 139

Ĭ: 9 (=8,697 l.) 126 ǿĬ: 19 (=10,328 l.) 132 ǿǽȋ:16 (=8,697 l.) 125 K:20 (=10,871 l.) 120, 121, 122 KAM= 117 KB: 22 (=11,959 l.) 114 M: 40 (=21,477 l.) 111

XVIII Signs SIGNA Ő

107, 110, 119, 120, 122 XIX. Other Ancient Personal Names

Astion: 8 Charagonius Philopalaestrus: 1; 2 Epictetus: 8

Eunomios: 9 Evangelicus: 8 Fabius Pompeianus: 1; 2. 130

Laberius Maximus, M.: 1-3 Latronianus: 8 XX. Ancient Authors and Works Acta Sanctorum: 8 Aeschylus: 14 Anna Comnena: 5 Apollonios Rhodios: 14 Arrianos: 14 Athenaios: 81 Codex Iustiniani: 11 Constantinus Porphyrogenitus: 11; 13 Diodorus Siculus: 14 Dioscorides: 81 Florus: 15 Herodot: 14 Hierocles: 11 Homer: 14, 15 Isidoros: 37 Itinerarium Antonini: 6 Lucanus: 37 Nicephoros Callisthenis Xanthopoulos: 12

Notitia Dignitatum: 10; 15 Notitia Episcopatuum: 12 Philostorgios: 8 Plinius (the Elder): 3; 4; 14; 15 Polybios: 3 Procopius: 11; 12; 16 Ptolemaios: 14 Ravenna Cosmography: 15 Scutum Durae Europi: 5 SophȠcles: 14 Stephanos Byzantios: 14 Strabo: 14 Tabula Peutingeriana: 7 Themistios: 11 Thucydides: 14 Ulpianus: 37 Xenophon: 14

XXI. Ancient Place Names Ad Salices: 7 Ad Stoma: 7 Aegyssus: 6; 108 Callatis: 61 Capidava: 32; 89 Chalcedon: 12 Danubis: 5 Dinogetia: 108 Dominium Argamensium: 1; 4; 5 Dura Europos: 5 Europa: 12 Halmyris Lacus: 1-3 Fines Histrianorum: 2 Histria/Histropolis: 2; 3; 61; 86; 89; 107; 111; 112 Ibida: 89; 108 Istros (river): 5; 6; 9; 12 Mysia: 9; 12

Noviodunum: 6; 7; 60; 91-93; 107; 108 Peuce: 1-3 Potaissa: 61 Publicum portorium Ripae Thraciae: 1; 2 Ratiaria: 47; 52 Ripa Thraciae: 24 Sacidava: 89; 93; 99; 108 Salsovia: 6, 7 Scythia (Minor): 8; 10; 11; 13 Sucidava: 82 Tomis: 5; 82 Troesmis: 31; 60; 89; 94; 95; 99; 107; 108 Tropaeum Traiani: 99 Vallis Domitiana: 6 Vicus Vergobrittianus: 36 Vicus Ulmetum: 36; 86 Ulmetum: 86; 89; 93-95; 102

131

XXIV. CONSPECTVS Concordance table with other publications OPERA QVAE PRIORUM LOCO AFFERENTUR Nr.cat. 1

5

6

7

Zahariade 1994

ZPE 119, 1997

Suceveanu et alii 2003

AE 1995

AE 1997

AE 1999

AE 2003

173-186

228-236

115 no. 1

1345

1318

1323

1550

Zahariade 1986

Suceveanu et alii 2003

AE 1988

AE 1989

AE 2003

173-176

116 no. 2

992

640

1550

Zahariade 1986

Suceveanu et alii 2003

AE 1988

Avram 2007

110 no. 2

116-117 no. 4

987

106 no. 10

Zahariade 1986

Suceveanu et alii 2003

AE 1988

Avram 2007

112 no. 5

118 no. 7

989

106 no. 11

Zahariade 1986

Suceveanu et alii 2003

AE 1988

AE 2003

110 no. 1

116 no. 3

986

1550

106 no. 8

9

Zahariade 1986

Suceveanu et alii 2003

AE 1988

AE 2003

Avram 2007

111 no. 3;112 no.6

117 no. 5; 118-119 no. 8

988;990

1550

106 no. 12

10

Zahariade 1986

Suceveanu et alii 2003

AE 1988

AE 2003

Avram 2007

111 no. 4;113 no.7

117- 118no. 6; -119 no. 9

991

1550

106 no. 9

11

Zahariade 1986

Suceveanu et alii 2003

119 no. 10

118-no. 7

18

Zahariade 1990

Suceveanu et alii 2003

AE 1991

262-263 no. 5

121-122-no. 15

1386

8

20

21

22

23

25

26

27

28

Zahariade 1990

Suceveanu et alii 2003

Conrad 2004

AE 1991

260-261 no. 3

120 no. 13

182 no. 214

1386

Zahariade 1990

Suceveanu et alii 2003

Conrad 2004

AE 1991

264 no. 7

123 no. 17

181-182 no. 212

1388

Zahariade 1990

Suceveanu et alii 2003

Conrad 2004

AE 1991

259-260 no. 1

119-120 no. 11

182 no. 213

1382

Bujor 1954

Zahariade 1990

AE 1991

599-601

264 no. 8

Zahariade 1990

Suceveanu et alii 2003

Conrad 2004

AE 1991

262 no. 6

122 no. 16

182-183 no. 216

1387

Zahariade 1990

Suceveanu et alii 2003

AE 1991

261 no. 4

121 no. 14

Zahariade 1990

Suceveanu et alii 2003

Conrad 2004

AE 1991

260 no. 2

120 no. 12

183 no. 217

1383

Tocilescu 1896

CIL III 13739

IGLR 168

1389

1385

Suceveanu et alii 2003

91-92 no. 34 107

114

115

117

118

119

120

121

123-124 no. 19

Zahariade 1988

Suceveanu et alii 2003

146-150 no. 2

124-125 no. 20

Opait 1986

Topoleanu 2000

152 no. 149

160 no. 420

Opait 1986

Topoleanu 2000

152 no. 150

160 no. 421

Opait 1986

Topoleanu 2000

152 no. 153

160 no. 422

Opait 1986

Topoleanu 2000

152 no. 151

160 no. 423

Opait 1986

Topoleanu 2000

152 no. 152

160 no. 424

Opait 1986

Topoleanu 2000

140 no. 55

161 no. 425

Opait 1986

Topoleanu 2000

Avram 2007

132

152 no. 145 124

Opait 1986 146 no. 103

125

Opait 1986 151 no. 143

126

Opait 1986 151 no. 133

130

132

133

136

138

161 no. 426 Topoleanu 2000 161 no. 429 Topoleanu 2000 161 no. 430 Topoleanu 2000 161 no. 362

Opait 1986

Topoleanu 2000

151 no. 142

161 no. 434

Opait 1986

Topoleanu 2000

152 no. 146

162 no. 435

Opait 1986

Topoleanu 2000

152 no. 148

162 no. 436

Opait 1986

Topoleanu 2000

152 no. 144

162 no. 439

Opait 1986

Topoleanu 2000

152 no. 147

162 no. 441

SOURCES OF ILLUSTRATIONS C.-G. Alexandrescu (Archaeological Institute “Vasile Pârvan”, Bucharest): Figs. 1 (after Suceveanu, Zahariade, Topoleanu, Poenaru Bordea 2003, fig. 1); 21-28; 37-42; 44-54; 56-57; 63-68; 76-79; 82; 84-85; 89; 91-102; 104-108; 112; 227. A. Baltres (National Geological Institute, Bucharest): Figs. 217-226; 228-229. Iuliana Barnea (Archaeological Institute “Vasile Pârvan”, Bucharest): Figs. 20; 86; 90; 103; 113; 212. O.-H. Barbu (National Museum of History of Romania, Bucharest ): Figs. 55; 58-59. George Chelmec (Archaeological Institute “Vasile Pârvan”, Bucharest): Figs. 15-19; 29-34; 69-70; 74-75; 8788; 109-111; 118-128; 135; 137-144; 146-149; 151-152; 154-156; 159-160; 162; 205-211. G. NuĠu (ICEM Tulcea): Fig. 35. M. Zahariade (Archaeological Institute “Vasile Pârvan”, Bucharest): Figs. 2-3 (after www.googleearth.com); 36; 60; 62; 73; 80-81; 83; 116-117; 129; 201-204. Fig. 4: after Cumont 1925, pl 1 at http://www.persee.fr/web/revues/home/prescript/article/syria_0039 7946_1925_num_6_1_3095. Fig. 5: after http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Part_of_Tabula_Peutingeriana_showing_ Eastern_Moesia_Inferior,_Eastern_Dacia_and_Thrace.png. Fig. 6: after http://www.ne.jp/asahi/luke/ueda-sarson/DuxScythiae.html Fig. 7: C.-G. Alexandrescu/M. Zahariade using the general plan drawn by C. MehedinĠeanu (DirecĠia Monumentelor Istorice). Fig. 8: C.-G. Alexandrescu/M. Zahariade using the aerial photography of G. Dumitriu. Fig. 9-13: C.-G. Alexandrescu/M. Zahariade using photographies by M. Zahariade. Fig. 14: Graphic restitution by C. Draghia. Fig. 43: after Baumann 1984, 627, fig.71. Fig. 61: after Bujor 1954, fig. 1. Fig. 71: after IGLR 168. Fig. 114: after www.ubi-erat-lupa.org/ID 3180_2. Fig. 115: after www.ubi-erat-lupa.org/ID 3180_3. Fig. 130: after OpaiĠ 1991, pl. 1, 4. Fig. 131: after OpaiĠ 1991, pl. 47, 6. Fig. 132: after OpaiĠ 1991, 134 no 7 pl. 1,7. Fig. 133: after Bujor 1957, 248 pl. I 2. Fig. 134: after Bujor 1958, 133 fig. 6. 2. Fig. 136: after Simion 1995, 271 no. 2 fig. 8c. Fig. 145: after Simion 1995, 274 no. 21 fig. 9d. Fig. 150: after Simion 1995, 275 no. 26 fig. 9h. Fig. 153: after Simion 1995, 275 no. 29 fig. 10b. Fig. 157: after Simion 1995, 278 no. 2 fig. 11b. 133

Fig. 158: after Simion 1995, 278 no. 2 fig. 11c. Fig. 161: after Simion 1995, 278 no. 4 fig. 11f. Fig. 163: after Suceveanu, Angelescu 1988, 146-150 no. 2 fig. 2. Fig. 164: after Topoleanu 2000, pl. XLVI fig. 368. Fig. 165: after Topoleanu 2000, pl. LIII fig. 417. Fig. 166: after Topoleanu 2000, pl. LIII fig. 397. Fig. 167: after Topoleanu 2000, pl. LIII fig. 368. Fig. 168: after Topoleanu 2000, pl. LIII fig. 419. Fig. 169: after Topoleanu 2000, pl. LIII fig. 418. Fig. 170: after Topoleanu 2000, pl. LIII fig. 420. Fig. 171: after Topoleanu 2000, pl. LIII fig. 421. Fig. 172: after Topoleanu 2000, pl. LIII fig 325. Fig. 173: after Topoleanu 2000, pl. LIII fig. 422. Fig. 174: after Topoleanu 2000, pl. LIII fig. 423. Fig. 175: after Topoleanu 2000, pl. LIII fig. 424. Fig. 176: after Topoleanu 2000, pl. LIII fig. 425. Fig. 177: after Topoleanu 2000, pl. LIII fig. 426. Fig. 178: after Topoleanu 2000, pl. LIII fig. 427. Fig. 179: after Topoleanu 2000, pl. LIII fig. 428. Fig. 180: after Topoleanu 2000, pl. LIII fig. 429. Fig. 181: after OpaiĠ 1991, 151 no. 143. pl. 24. Fig. 182: after Topoleanu 2000, pl. LIII fig. 362. Fig. 183: after Topoleanu 2000, pl. LIV fig. 431. Fig. 184: after Topoleanu 2000, pl. LIV fig. 432. Fig. 185: after Topoleanu 2000, pl. LIV fig. 433. Fig. 186: after Topoleanu 2000, pl. LIV fig. 434. Fig. 187: after Topoleanu 2000, pl. LIV fig. 330. Fig. 188: after OpaiĠ 1991, 152 no. 146 pl. 24. Fig. 189: after Topoleanu 2000, pl. LIV fig. 436. Fig. 190: after Topoleanu 2000, pl. LIV fig. 437. Fig. 191: after Topoleanu 2000, pl. LIV fig. 438. Fig. 192: after OpaiĠ 1991, 152 no. 144 pl. 24. Fig. 193: after Topoleanu 2000, pl. LIV fig. 440. Fig. 194: after OpaiĠ 1991, 152 no. 147 pl. 24. Fig. 195: after Topoleanu 2000, pl. LIV fig. 442. Fig. 196: after Topoleanu 2000, pl. LIV fig. 330. Fig. 197: after Topoleanu 2000, pl. LX fig. 484. Fig. 198: after Topoleanu 2000, pl. LXII fig. 505. Fig. 199: after Topoleanu 2000, pl. LXIII fig. 508. Fig. 200: after Topoleanu 2000, pl. LVIII fig. 470. Fig. 213-214: after http://www.mediterranees.net/art_antique/oeuvres/zliten/venatio.html Fig. 215: after Raeck 1992, fig. 27. Fig. 216: after Andreae 1980, pl. 95,4.

134

Fig. 1: Halmyris. General plan of the villages of Murighiol and Dunavãþu de Sus

Fig. 2: Overview of the area of Halmyris

Fig. 3: The Razelm-Sinoe Complex

Fig. 4: Scutum Durae Europi

Salmorus

Fig. 5: Tabula Peuringeriana,VII 4 o. Detail of the Lower Danube region, with the indication of the location of Salmorus

Fig. 6: Notitia Dignitatum. XXXIX Dux Scythiae: 18. Cuneus equitum Arcadum, Talamonio

nos. 22 and 27

no. 3 nos. 18, 20, 21, 25 and 26

no. 46 no. 37 no. 2

nos. 5 to 15

no. 4

nos. 41 and 42

no. 44 no.38

no. 36

nos. 19, 24, 30, 31, 32, 33 and 34

no. 39 no. 35

no. 17

no. 29 no. 16

no. 1b no. 1a

0

Fig. 7: Halmyris fortress. General plan of the excavated area with find spots of the stone and brick epigraphs.

12 m

nos. 5 to 15 no 4

nos. 18, 20, 21, 25 and 26

nos. 22 and 27

Fig. 8: Halmyris. The North gate (aerial view from the N), with a clear distinction of the finding spots where the votive altars (interior) and tombstones (exterior and threshold) were found

no 33

no 32

no 151 no 19

Fig. 9: Halmyris. The second entrance of the South wing of the West gate with the finding position of the tombstones cat. no. 19, 32, 33 and 151

no 24

Fig. 10: Halmyris. The position of the reused tombstone of Aelius Sola (cat. no. 24) in the structure of the 'secret well'

no 30

Fig. 11: Halmyris. The North bastion of the W gate (after modern restauration) with the indication of the finding spot a fragment of a tombstone (cat. no. 30)

no 25

Fig. 12: Halmyris. The N gate showing the place where cat no. 25 was found

no 18

no 21

Fig. 13: Halmyris. The North gate with the indication of the finding place of cat. no. 18 and cat. no. 21 in the late 3rd century CE threshold

Fig. 14: Cat. no. 1 (restitution)

Fig. 15: Cat. no. 1b

Fig. 16: Cat. no. 1a

Fig. 18: Cat. no. 3

Fig. 17: Cat. no. 2

Fig. 19: Cat. no. 4

0

10cm

Fig. 20: Cat. no. 5

Fig. 21: Cat. no. 5 (detail of the inscription)

Fig. 22: Cat. no. 5 (front side)

Fig. 23: Cat. no. 5 (detail of the right side)

Fig. 24: Cat. no. 5 (detail of the top, view from the back of the altar)

Fig. 25: Cat. no. 6

Fig. 26: Cat. no. 7

Fig. 27: Cat. no. 8

Fig. 28: Cat. no. 9

Fig. 29: Cat. no. 10

Fig. 31: Cat. no. 12

Fig. 30: Cat. no. 11

Fig. 32: Cat. no. 13

Fig. 35: Cat. no. 16

Fig. 33: Cat. no. 14

Fig. 34: Cat. no. 15

Fig. 36: Cat. no. 17

Fig. 37: Cat. no. 18

Fig. 38: Cat. no. 19

Fig. 40: Cat. no. 19

Fig. 39: Cat. no. 19

Fig. 41: Cat. no. 19

Fig. 42: Cat. no. 19

Fig. 43: Gravestone of Othis and his wife Bithidia, from Ibida (Tulcea County)

Fig. 44: Gravestone of Othis and his wife Bithidia, from Ibida (Tulcea County) - detail of the right side

Fig. 45: Cat. no. 20, frgm. 1

Fig. 46: Cat. no. 20, frgm. 2

Fig. 47: Cat. no. 20, frgm. 1 - details

Fig. 48: Cat. no. 20, frgm. 1 - detail

Fig. 49: Cat. no. 20, frgm. 1 - detail

Fig. 50: Cat. no. 20, frgm. 1 - detail

Fig. 51: Cat. no. 21

Fig. 52: Cat. no. 21 - detail of the inscription

Fig. 53: Cat. no. 21 - detail

Fig. 55: Cat. no. 21 - detail

Fig. 54: Cat. no. 21 - detail

Fig. 56: Cat. no. 21 - detail of the inscription with alternated rows, with and without red colour

Fig. 57: Cat. no. 21 - detail of the fronton, with remains of the polychromy and the preparatory strata

Fig. 58: Cat. no. 21

Fig. 59: Cat. no. 21

Fig. 61: Cat. no. 23 Fig. 60: Cat. no. 22 -detail of the inscription

Fig. 62: Cat. no. 24 - detail of the inscription

Fig. 63: Cat. no. 25

Fig. 64: Cat. no. 25 - detail

Fig. 65: Cat. no. 25 - detail

Fig. 66: Cat. no. 25 - detail

Fig. 67: Cat. no. 26

Fig. 68: Cat. no. 26 - detail of the inscription

Fig. 69: Cat. no. 27

Fig. 70: Cat. no. 27 - detail of the inscription

Fig. 72: Cat. no. 29

Fig. 71: Cat. no. 28 Fig. 73: Cat. no. 29 - detail of the inscription

Fig. 74: Cat. no. 30

Fig. 75: Cat. no. 31

Fig. 76: Cat. no. 32, fragment 2

Fig. 77: Cat. no. 32, fragment 2 - detail of the border, with rests of color

Fig. 78: Cat. no. 32, fragment 1 and 2 - detail of the inscription

Fig. 79: Cat. no. 33

Fig. 80: Cat. no. 33 - detail of the inscription, soon after the discovery

Fig. 81: Cat. no. 33 - in situ, at the moment of the discovery in the wall

Fig. 82: Cat. no. 33 - detail

Fig. 83: Cat. no. 33 - detail of the snakes, reaching to the rim of the crater

Fig. 85: Cat. no. 33 - detail of the left border

Fig. 84: Cat. no. 33 - detail of the left border

Fig. 86: Cat. no. 33

Fig. 88: Cat. no. 35 Fig. 87: Cat. no. 34

Fig. 90: Cat. no. 149 - profile Fig. 89: Cat. no. 149

Fig. 91: Cat. no. 149 - view on the fragmentary state of the monument

Fig. 92: Cat. no. 150

Fig. 94: Cat. no. 150 - front side

Fig. 93: Cat. no. 150

Fig. 95: Cat. no. 150 - front side, frontal view

Fig. 96: Cat. no. 150 - front side, detail

Fig. 98: Cat. no. 150 - front side, detail

Fig. 100: Cat. no. 150 - left side, detail

Fig. 97: Cat. no. 150 - front side, detail

Fig. 99: Cat. no. 150 - front side, detail

Fig. 101: Cat. no. 150 - right side, detail

Fig. 102: Cat. no. 151

Fig. 103: Cat. no. 151

Fig. 104: Cat. no. 151 - detail

Fig. 106: Cat. no. 151 - detail of the left border

Fig. 105: Cat. no. 151 - detail

Fig. 108: Cat. no. 151 - detail of the mirror

Fig. 107: Cat. no. 151 - detai of the basketl

Fig. 109a-c : Cat. no. 151. Restauration - the on spot rough assemblage of the fragments in three identifiable groups, shortly after their retrieval from the wall.

Fig. 110 a-d : Cat. no. 151. Restauration - The main parts of the monument after a preliminary assemblage

0

20cm

Fig. 111: Cat. no.151 - The monument in its first phase of complete re-assemblage

Fig. 112: Cat. no.151 - The monument after its final restoration

Fig. 113: Hypothetical reconstruction of a tombstone of Conrad type II.b2, using the fragments Cat. no.151 and 33

Fig. 114: Fragmentary gravestone from Ulcisia Castra

Fig. 115: Fragmentary gravestone from Ulcisia Castra - detail of the women portrait

Fig. 116: Cat. no. 36 face I

Fig. 117: Cat. no. 36 face II

Fig. 119: Cat. no. 38

Fig. 118: Cat. no. 37

Fig. 121: Cat. no. 40 Fig. 120: Cat. no. 39

Fig. 122: Cat. no. 41

Fig. 123: Cat. no. 42

Fig. 124: Cat. no. 43

Fig. 125: Cat. no. 44

Fig. 126: Cat. no. 45

Fig. 127: Cat. no. 46

Fig. 128: Cat. no. 47

Fig. 129: Cat. no. 48

0

6cm

Fig. 130: Cat. no. 49

Fig. 131: Cat. no. 51

0

Fig. 132: Cat. no. 52 (cartouche not to scale)

Fig. 133: Cat. no. 54

Fig. 134: Cat. no. 55 Fig. 135: Cat. no. 57 - handle 1

6cm

Fig. 136: Cat. no. 58

Fig. 137: Cat. no. 60

Fig. 138: Cat. no. 62 Fig. 139: Cat. no. 64

Fig. 140: Cat. no. 66 Fig. 141: Cat. no. 67

Fig. 142: Cat. no. 68 Fig. 143: Cat. no. 70

Fig. 144: Cat. no. 76

Fig. 145: Cat. no. 77

Fig. 147: Cat. no. 79 Fig. 146: Cat. no. 78

Fig. 148: Cat. no. 80

Fig. 149: Cat. no. 81

Fig. 150: Cat. no. 82 Fig. 151: Cat. no. 83

Fig. 152: Cat. no. 84

Fig. 154: Cat. no. 88

Fig. 153: Cat. no. 85

Fig. 155: Cat. no. 89

Fig. 157: Cat. no. 98a

Fig. 156: Cat. no. 90 Fig. 158: Cat. no. 98b

Fig. 159: Cat. no. 99a

Fig. 160: Cat. no. 99b

Fig. 161: Cat. no. 100

Fig. 162: Cat. no. 101

0

6cm

Fig. 164: Cat. no. 107

0

3cm

Fig. 163: Cat. no. 106

0 0

4cm

4cm

Fig. 165: Cat. no. 108

Fig. 166: Cat. no. 109

0

0

4cm

Fig. 168: Cat. no. 111

4cm

Fig. 167: Cat. no. 110

0

0

4cm

4cm 0

Fig. 170: Cat. no. 113

Fig. 169: Cat. no. 112

0

Fig. 171: Cat. no. 114

4cm 0

Fig. 172: Cat. no. 115

0

4cm

0

4cm

Fig. 173: Cat. no. 116

4cm

Fig. 174: Cat. no. 117

4cm

Fig. 175: Cat. no. 118

0

4cm

Fig. 176: Cat. no. 119 0

2cm

Fig. 177: Cat. no. 120

0

0

4cm

Fig. 178: Cat. no. 121

4cm

Fig. 179: Cat. no. 122

0

4cm 0

2cm

Fig. 180: Cat. no. 123 Fig. 181: Cat. no. 124

0

4cm

Fig. 182: Cat. no. 125

0

4cm

Fig. 183: Cat. no. 126

0

4cm

Fig. 184: Cat. no. 127 0

4cm

Fig. 185: Cat. no. 128

0

2cm

Fig. 186: Cat. no. 129

0

4cm

Fig. 187: Cat. no. 130

0

0

2cm

Fig. 188: Cat. no. 131

4cm

Fig. 189: Cat. no. 132

0

0

4cm

4cm

Fig. 191: Cat. no. 134

Fig. 190: Cat. no. 133

0

0

6cm

4cm

Fig. 193: Cat. no. 136

Fig. 192: Cat. no. 135

0

4cm

Fig. 195: Cat. no. 138

0

2cm

Fig. 194: Cat. no. 137 0

4cm

Fig. 196: Cat. no. 139

0

0

4cm

4cm 0

Fig. 198: Cat. no. 141

Fig. 197: Cat. no. 140

0

4cm

Fig. 199: Cat. no. 142

4cm

Fig. 201: Cat. no. 144

Fig. 200: Cat. no. 143

Fig. 202: Cat. no. 145

Fig. 204: Cat. no. 146

Fig. 203: Cat. no. 105

0

3cm

Fig. 205: Cat. no. 147

0

3cm

Fig. 206: Cat. no. 148

Fig. 207: Cat. no. 152 Fig. 208: Cat. no. 153

Fig. 209: Cat. no. 154

Fig. 210: Cat. no. 155

Fig. 211: Cat. no. 156

Fig. 212: Cat. no. 156

Fig. 213: Mosaic floor from the villa from Zliten (Libya) with hunting scenes in the arena

Fig. 214: Mosaic floor in Zliten. Detail of the wounded animal

Fig. 215: Glass bowl with hunting scene

Fig. 216: Sarcophagus with hunting scenes. Rome. Musei Capitolini, Centrale Montemartini. Inv. no 837

Fig. 217: Northern part of Dobrogea, with the archaeologic sites involved in the geological survey, and the areal distribution of the Turonian, yellowish-brown rocks, of the Dolojman Formation. With red are marked the lower member of this formation, containing sandstones and spongolites; with blue is depicted the upper member, dominantly calcareous

Fig. 218

Fig. 219

Fig. 218 and 219: Sweeping views of the tower E (fig. 218) and bastion F (fig. 219) of the Late Roman wall of Histria (4th century A.D.), in which various rock types were rendered in false colors. The wall contains numerous spolia. In yellow are marked the Turonian rocks (using the survey of Gr. Florescu 1954)

Fig. 220: Histria - inverted block of yellowish-brown rock, bearing an inscription, reused in the curtain h of the Late Roman wall

Fig. 221: Halmyris, Northern gateway ashlar masonry built with large blocks of yellowish-brown, Turonian rocks. Weathering, due to the selective dissolution of cement, is visible

Fig. 222: Histria, Late Roman wall. Deeply weathered blocks of yellowish-brown rocks. Prominent bands and aligned lenses of chert occur in relief as strongly cemented parts of the rock

Fig. 223: Cape Dolojman, the cliff. Hard, Turonian spongolites showing streaky-laminated internal structure in the decimeter-thick beds, separated by smooth discontinuities

Fig. 224: Spongolite - highly enlarged microscopic image, shown in thin section. Fine, monoaxon and triaxon siliceous sponge spicules (S) and dark specks of finely disseminated, opaque stain of organic nature (kerogen) are to be seen.

Fig. 225: Histria, Temple of Aphrodite (6th cent. BC), built with blocks of yellowish-brown, Turonian rocks.

Fig. 226: Histria, Temple of Aphrodite - The first two rows of carefully squared blocks of the rusticated masonry. Some blocks are deeply weathered due to the lack of homogeneity caused by bioturbation

Fig. 227: Troesmis - Corinthian capital from the Eastern fortress. carved in yellowish-brown, Turonian rock

Fig. 228: Burrowing (bioturbation) structures (light colored, contorted traces), disturbing the primary lamination in a bed of yellowish-brown, Turonian rock, in the cliffed Cape Dolojman. Scale bar = 5 cm.

Fig. 229: The large Codru Quarry, near Babadag, cut in massive beds (lower half) and decimeter-thick beds (upper half) of yellowish-brown rocks, largely composed of Turonian spongolites.