XI, 6 Tentea

23/7/09

18:30

Pgina 1515

THE LOWER DANUBE ROMAN LIMES AT GALATI (ROMANIA).

RECENT RESULTS FROM EXCAVATION
AND AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHIC INTERPRETATION

ENTEA & IOANA A. OLTEAN

OVIDIU T

EXCAVATIONS
The Traian-Tulucesti vallum is located on the left bank of the Danube in the area where the
Siret River meets the Danube (Fig. 1, 1). The archaeological and epigraphical documentation of
the Roman territorium so defined is well known due especially to the discoveries made inside the
fortlet and settlement at Barbosi (TIR, L 35; Bucuresti, 1969: 25; Saulescu, 1991; Prvan, 1913:
14-27; Dorutiu-Boila, 1972: 55-58; Sanie, 1981: 75-111; Petculescu, 1982: 249-253; Croitoru,
2004: 80-90, 115-124). About Roman Cemetery from Barbosi, see Dragomir, 1981: 73-114;
1991: 237-245) and the fortlet at Galati in the Dunarea district (located 1,5 km east of Barbosi)
(Tentea & Clesiu, 2006: 39-88; see also Brudiu, 1976: 85-96; 1980: 314-320; 1981: 59-72;
1998: 209-216). Our observations will focus on the recent research undertaken in the latter, as
well as on the study of aerial photographs in the surrounding territorium.
According to the previous chronology, based on the amphorae discovered in three different
layers of filling in the ditches, the fortlet was thought to have functioned for almost two centuries.
However, in the absence of the internal stratigraphy, the identification of amphorae alone cannot
constitute an argument for establishing a phased chronology.
During excavation in 2004 it became apparent that the sides of the ditches bore no traces of
maintenance work. In some places they were difficult to identify, their upper parts having
collapsed immediately after the fortlet was abandoned. Thus, the amphorae regardless of their
date are simply residual. The lack of constant maintenance work caused the ditches to be fragile.
Thus, after the fortlet was abandoned, most of the earth that filled them came from the
dislocation of their upper margins. This phenomenon also explains the irregular aspect of their
sides.
Examination of larger areas at the preserved corners of the fortlet did not lead to the discovery
of any elements of the defensive system or of internal buildings. The fortlet is square, each side
measuring 40 m within the ditches. If we allow for a 1m berma and a vallum with dimensions
similar to the fossa (4 m), the interior area of fortlet would have been at least 0,09 ha (Fig. 2, 1).
During the 2004 campaign, a large number of narrow-necked light-clay amphorae (Fig. 1, 4),
defined by D. B. Selov and S. Yu. Vnukov (the variants discovered by us are B, C type (Selov B

XI, 6 Tentea

23/7/09

1516

18:30

Pgina 1516

LIMES XX

Gladius, Anejos 13, 2009

FIG. 1.
1) Map of the Lower Danube Roman Limes; 2) Roman forts along the Danube in the area during the
Principate; 3) The Roman landscape at Galati after Prvan 1913 and Brudiu 1998; 4) Drawing of a Selov
C type amphora discovered inside the ditches of the fortlet at Galati-Dunarea

XI, 6 Tentea

23/7/09

18:30

Pgina 1517

Gladius, Anejos 13, 2009

MOESIA & DACIA

1517

FIG. 2.
1) The Roman Fortlet at Galati, plan of the excavations carried out in 2004; 2) Areas covered by the RAF
vertical aerial photographs from 31.05.1944 at Galati

XI, 6 Tentea

23/7/09

1518

18:30

Pgina 1518

LIMES XX

Gladius, Anejos 13, 2009

= Zeest 64 / Selov C = Zeest 94), (Selov, 1986: 395-400; Vnukov, 2004: 407-415; Opait, 2004:
31), were discovered in the ditches. Accepting the fact that the frequency for this type of artefact
is greater in the 2nd century AD, it is possible the fortlet functioned in the first half of the same
century. On the basis of the tituli picti and the traces of resin inside some examples, this type of
amphora seems to have been used for transporting wine. These amphorae are wide-spread on the
shores of the Black Sea, especially on the northern and western shores, but are rarely found in the
Mediterranean region (Dyczek, 2001: 219) 1.
One must differentiate this short-lived fortlet from a camp, because its small dimensions do
not allow such a comparison. The argumentation is based exclusively on archaeological
observations on the fortlets ditches, the only elements preserved of the entire structure. The
dimensions of the ditches are large in comparison to the size of the fortlet, a situation which may
be explained if it is identified as for training. The fortlets possible strategic role can be further
analysed only if similar discoveries are made in the area. The excavation allows us to place this
structure in the category of small fortlets used for sheltering groups of soldiers in certain outposts,
with the mission of surveying fords, roads or places of specific strategic importance. In these
circumstances, a vexillatio could be sent near the garrison, in a place where a centurio or a variable
number of soldiers could be stationed. The sources indicate that such vexillations could be
deployed even for as long as several years. The closest analogies are the fortlets at Martinhoe or
Barburgh Mill (Britannia) (Breeze, 1974: 147, 152 table V for a comparative study of Roman
fortlets in Scotland; see also Breeze, 1983: 43-46; 1993: 505-510), those at Abrud, Boita, Sapata
de Jos (Dacia) (Gudea, 1997, n. 20, 46, 59) or the fortlets in the Iron Gates area in Moesia
superior (Gudea, 2001, n. 11a-c, 12a-j.). Other analogies are the outposts or campaign fortlets
in the Barbaricum, located north of the Danube, in the area between the Flavianis (Mautern)
Noricum and Brigetio (Komrom) forts Pannonia Superior (Kandler & Vetters, 1986: 231247). A good analogy for the strategy adopted in the Galati-Barbosi sector is Kelamantia (IzaLenyvr) (Kuzmov & Rajtr, 2003: 194-198).
In the nearby cemetery, seven graves have been examined five cremations and two of
inhumations. In the cremation graves (M 1, M 2, M 5 and M 7) the pit bears traces of fire that
caused the walls to turn red (3-5 cm thick) down to the lower part of the complex. The same
situation was encountered in the graves excavated some 500 m north of the fortlet at Barbosi
(Dragomir, 1991: 237). Close analogies for the graves in the necropolis at Galati are to be found
in the cemeteries belonging to neighbouring towns Carsium (Buzdugan et alii, 2000: 426 fig. 1),
Noviodunum (Simion, 1984: 82, 490 pl. VII/3,4 - type c) or Histria (Alexandrescu, 1966: 138
fig. 11).
Artefacts recovered from five of the seven graves excavated can be dated to the end of the 1st
century AD and during the middle of the 3rd century AD In the case of the earlier artefacts
determination was made using analogies offered by prototypes, but the spread of these specific
models in the provincial milieu took a certain period of time. Therefore, their presence at Galati
occurred much later, in the 2nd and the 3rd centuries AD, as indicated by the rest of the
inventory.
According to V. Prvan, the necropolis at Barbosi extended mainly in the area north of the
fort (Prvan, 1913: 19 fig. 9). The distance between the tumuli at Barbosi and those in the
Dunarea district (Brudiu, 1998: 210 fig. 1) is of approximately 700 m, an area which

Were discovered also two amforae Dressel 24 type (Manacorda, 1975: 378-383; Panella, 1986: 609-636).

XI, 6 Tentea

23/7/09

18:30

Pgina 1519

Gladius, Anejos 13, 2009

MOESIA & DACIA

FIG. 3. Aerial photographic interpretation of the archaeological remains at Galati

1519

XI, 6 Tentea

23/7/09

18:30

Pgina 1520

1520

LIMES XX

Gladius, Anejos 13, 2009

corresponds to the lowest ground near the Catusa Lake also affected by modern roads. Since the
latter may have affected eventual funerary complexes, the two areas may have constituted a single
necropolis laid along the road that crossed the Danubes ford, passed north of the fort at Barbosi
and followed the Siret River in the Barbaricum (Fig. 1, 3).

AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHIC EVIDENCE

The reported discoveries in the Galati-Dunarea area provide only a fragmentary picture of the
archaeological landscape in the Roman period. The landscape around the two identified fortlets
at Galati has undergone great transformations in modern times as the town developed at the
confluence of the rivers Siret and Danube. Development was particularly dramatic in the first two
decades following the Second World War, affecting some 14 square kilometres to the north of the
fortlet at Barbosi with the building of a large steel factory (now Mittal Steel-Galati) between the
lakes of Catusa and Malina. Vertical aerial photographs taken on 31 May 1944 by the RAF for
military use provide images of the landscape prior to this development. The WWII aerial
photographic archives have been declassified and over 5,5 million photographs produced during
the war by the British, American and German air forces are available for consultation and
purchase at The Aerial Reconnaissance Archive at Keele University (UK). The RAF material
(60.PR.460) provides a slightly incomplete coverage of the area to the east- southeast and the
north-northwest of the town of Galati, including most of the area affected later by the
construction of the steel factory (Fig. 2, 2).
During recent programmes of archaeological aerial reconnaissance in various areas of Romania
by W. S. Hanson and I. A. Oltean (2003: 101-117), it was established that the best time for
cropmark formation there is from early-mid June to early-mid July. Therefore, the date of the
photographs is slightly too early to best reveal buried archaeological remains. Nevertheless, larger
features (e.g. enclosures, roads, funerary barrows tumuli) and features which at the date of
photography were not entirely flattened buried are apparent as soilmarks, germination marks and
cropmarks. A large number of features of various dates have been mapped (Fig. 3). Apart from
5-6 rectangular enclosures and field boundaries of uncertain later date, and an alignment of
trenches probably constructed during the First World War, the majority of features are likely to
be of ancient date, probably Roman and late Iron Age. These include 6 roads visible as linear
features, (with 3 more suggested by tumuli alignments), along with 16 rectangular/square
enclosures of probable Roman date and some 200 tumuli. Unfortunately the fort at GalatiBarbosi and its immediate vicinity is not documented by the available photographs.
In May 1944, remains of the excavated fortlet at Galati-Dunarea measured 89 x 85 m. It had
a rampart 6-7 m in width defining an internal area of some 26 x 30 m, but without traces of
internal buildings or subdivisions. The rampart was surrounded by a ditch 11m wide with an
outer bank 12m wide created by upcast from the ditch. Some 54 tumuli clustered within 500600 m of the fortlet (mainly to the N and NE) indicating by far the largest concentration of
tumuli (and, therefore, indication of occupation) noted in the areas which have been mapped.
Some 15 other rectangular enclosures of broadly similar dimensions have been identified on
the aerial photographs. At least 2 of them (one of 73 x 76 m and the other 98 x 99 m) located
to the NW of Galati-Dunarea at distances of some 2.800 m from each other could have been
fortlets. Both of them are characterized by the presence of a surrounding ditch outside the
rampart (though without the outer upcast bank present at Galati-Dunarea).

XI, 6 Tentea

23/7/09

18:30

Pgina 1521

Gladius, Anejos 13, 2009

MOESIA & DACIA

FIG. 4. Distribution of archaeological remains behind the line of the Roman limes at Galati

1521

XI, 6 Tentea

23/7/09

18:30

1522

Pgina 1522

LIMES XX

Gladius, Anejos 13, 2009

Another fortlet may have been located further to the NE in the northern area of the modern
town. But for the large majority of rectangular enclosures no outer ditch was visible beyond the
bank/rampart. In 4 cases an internal ditch was present, suggesting that the rampart was in fact
an upcast bank, thus considerably reducing the internal area compared to the excavated fortlet,
though this would still have been sufficient to accommodate a watchtower. The military nature
of the remaining examples, defined only by a surrounding bank, is less sure.
Based on the interpretation of the historical aerial photographs the limes installations on the
left bank of the Danube around the modern town of Galati would have included at least 4 or 5
small fortifications (fortlets) along with a number of watchtowers (Fig. 4). They extended as far
as 6.5 kilometres away from the line of the Danube within the territory enclosed by the TraianTulucesti vallum and, if they were contemporary, the fortlets were sufficiently close together (1
and 2 leuga) to facilitate communications and control of the territory.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
ALEXANDRESCU, P. (1966): Necropola tumulara. Sapaturi 19551961, Histria II, Bucuresti,
133-294.
BREEZE, D. (1983): Roman Forts in Britain, Aylesbury.
BREEZE, D. (1974): The Roman Fortlet Barburgh Mill, Dumfriesshire, Britannia, 130-162.
BREEZE, D. (1993): The garrisoning of Roman Fortlets, D. BREEZE & B. DOBSON: Roman
Officers and Frontiers, Stuttgart, 505-510.
BRUDIU, M. (1976): Un cavou roman descoperit la Galati, SCIVA 27, 1, 85-96.
BRUDIU, M. (1981): Un castellum roman descoperit la Galati si semnificatia lui, Danubius 10,
59-72.
BRUDIU, M. (1998): Drumul roman prin Moldova de Jos ntre intuitie si realitatile arheologice,
Pontica 31, 217-225.
BUZDUGAN, C. et alii (2000): Cercetarile preliminare din necropola tumulara de la Hrsova
(jud. Constanta), Cercetari Arheologice 11.2, 425-455.
CROITORU, C. (2004): Fortificatiile liniare romane n stnga Dunarii de Jos (secolele IIV p. Chr.)
(I), Galati.
DORUT IU-BOILA, E. (1972): Teritoriul militar al legiunii V Macedonica la Dunarea de Jos,
SCIVA 23/1, 55-58.
DRAGOMIR, I. T. (1981): Morminte romane ntr-un tumul la Tirighina-Barbosi n sudul roman
al Moldovei, Danubius 10, 73-114.
DRAGOMIR, I. T. (1991): Descoperirea fortuita a unui mormnt tumular de incineratie de la
Tirighina-Barbosi, Pontica 24, 237-245.
DYCZEK, P. (2001): Roman Amphorae of the 1st3rd Centuries AD Found on the Lower Danube.
Typology, Warsaw.
GUDEA, N. (1997): Der dakische Limes. Materialen zu seinen Geschichte, Sonderdruck aus
JRGZMainz 44, 1-113.

XI, 6 Tentea

23/7/09

18:30

Pgina 1523

Gladius, Anejos 13, 2009

MOESIA & DACIA

1523

GUDEA, N. (2001): Die Nordgrenze der rmischen Provinz Obermoesien. Materialien zu ihrer
Geschichte (86275 n.Chr.), Sonderdruck aus JRGZMainz 48, 1-118.
HANSON, W. S. & OLTEAN, I. A. (2003) The identification of Roman buildings from the air:
recent discoveries in Western Transylvania, Archaeological Prospection 10, 101-117.
JONES, M. J. (1975): Roman Fort Defences to AD 117, BAR Int. Series 21, Oxford.
KANDLER, M. & VETTERS, H. (1986): Der rmische Limes in sterreich. Ein Fhrer, Wien, 231247.
KUZMOV, K. & RAJTR J. (2003): Iza Lenyvr Fort, 194-196; Iza temporary camps, Z.
VISY (ed.): Roman Army in Pannonia. An archaeological Guide of the Ripa Pannonica, Pcs,
194-198.
MANACORDA, D. (1975): Proposta per una identificazione dellanfora Dressel 24, Arch. Class.
27, 378-383.
OPAIT , A. (2004): Local and Imported Ceramics in the Roman Province of Scythia (4th6th centuries
AD), BAR Int. Series 1274, Oxford.
PANELLA, C. (1986): Oriente ed Occidente: considerazioni su alcune anfore egee di eta imperiale
a Ostia., Recherches sur les Amphores Grecques, J.-Y. EMPEREUR & Y. GARLAN (ds.):
Recherches sur les amphores grecques. Actes du colloque international (Athnes, 1984), Bulletin de
Correspondance Hellnique. Supplment 13, Athnes, 609-636.
PETCULESCU, L. (1982): Despre cronologia fortificatiilor romane de la Barbosi, Pontica, 15,
249-253.
SANIE, S. (1981): Civilizatia romana de la est de Carpati si romanitatea de pe teritoriul Moldovei,
Iasi, 75-111.
SAULESCU, Gh. (1991): Descrierea istorico-geografica a cetatei Caput Bovis (Capul Boului sau
Ghertina) a carei ruine se afla n apropierea Galatiului, Iasi.
SELOV, D. B. (1986): Les amphores dargile claire des premiers sicles de notre re en Mer
Noire, J.-Y. EMPEREUR & Y. GARLAN (ds.): Recherches sur les amphores grecques. Actes du
colloque international (Athnes, 1984), Bulletin de Correspondance Hellnique. Supplment
13, Athnes, 395-400.
SIMION, G. (1984): Descoperiri noi n necropola de la Noviodunum. Raport preliminar, Peuce
9, 75-96, 481-502.
T
ENTEA, O. & CLESIU, S. (2006): Fortificatia si necropola romana de la Galati, cartier Dunarea
raport arheologic (The Roman Fortlet and Cemetery from Galati, Dunarea district
Archaeological Report), Cercetari Arheologice 13, 39-88.
VNUKOV, S. Yu. (2004): Pan-roman amphora types produced in the Black Sea Region, J.
EIRING & J. LUND (eds.): Transport Amphorae and Trade in the Eastern Mediterranean. Acts of
the International Colloquium at the Danish Institute at Athens (2002), Monographs of the
Danish Institute at Athens 5, Athens, 407-415.
WELFARE, H. & SWAN, V. (1995): Roman Camps in England, London.

XI, 6 Tentea

23/7/09

18:30

Pgina 1524