Evolution of the system of

defence works in
Roman Dacia

Ioana Bogdan Cătăniclu

Translated from the Romanian by

Etta Dumitrescu

BAR International Series 1 16

1981
 B.A.R.,
B.A.R.
122 Banbury Road, Oxford OX2 7BP, England

GENERAL EDITORS

A. R. Hands, B.Sc., :\1,A., D.Phil.

D. R. Walker, i\1.A.

B .A. R. S 116, 1981: 'Evolution of the system of defence works in

Roman Dacia'.
Ud Ioana Bogdan Cătăniciu, 1981.
Price no. 00 post free throughout the world. Payments made in cur-
rency other than sterling must be calculated at the current rate of
exchange and an extra 10 % added to cover the cost of bank charges.
Cheques should be made payable to 'British Archaeological Reports'
and sent to the above address.
ISBN O 86054 142 8.

BAR publishes monographs and coll ecttons of papers on all aspects of archae-
ology and on related subjects such as anthro pology, classical and medieval
history and numismatics.
BAR publishes BAR International Series which is concerned with world archae-
ology and BAR British Series which covers the British Isles .
For details of all BAR publications in print please write to the above address.
Information on new titles is sent regularly on request , with no obligation to
purchase.
Volumes are distributed direct from the publishers. AU BAR prices are inclu-
s ive of postage by surfacemail anywhere in the world.

Printed in Great Britain

 CONTENTS

Page

Foreword 1

Chapter 1 DACIA AND THE EMPIRE BEFORE THE CONQUEST tl

Chapter 2 TRAJAN'S WARS FOR THE CONQUEST OF DACIA (j

The First War 101-102 ()

The Second Dacian War 1t)

Chapter 3 THE EARLY ORGANISATION OF THE DACIAN

SYSTEM OF DEFENCE-WORKS 11

The Territory within the Range of Action of

Legio TIII Flavia Felix in 101-117/118 II

The Range of Action of Legio XIII Gemina in

106-117/118 15
Conclusions on the System of Trajanic Defences 18

The Dacian Territories Assigned to Moesia Inferior 19

Chapter 4 HADRIAN'S CONTRIBUTION TO THE ORGANISATION

OF THE DACIAN LIMES 21

Dacia Superior 22
Dacia Inferior 25
Dacia Porolissensis 37
The Earthwork Forts 40
The Stone Forts 41

Chapter 5 THE ANTONINE CONTRIBUTION TO THE ORGANISATION

OF DEFENCE WORKS IN DACIA 42

Chapter 6 THE REIGNS OF MARCUS AURELIUS AND COMMODUS

THE MARCOMANNIC WARS 46

Chapter 7 THE SEVERAN PERIOD 48

Chapter 8 THE LAST DECADES OF DACIA 53

Notes 56

List of Abbreviations 107

ADDENDA 111
INDEX 116
 FOREWORD

"This system of defences started being built as early as the time of

the Dacian wars but it is only after the Roman conquest , in Trajan' s
days, that it acquired a well=orde red form, to be afterwards extended
by all subsequent emperors who, each in his own way, contributed to
its consolidation and completion, "
M. Macrea, Viaţa in Dacia romană, 1969, p.218.

The pre sent study is the product of our attempt at making a critical estirnate
of a.ll the re sults of research conducted in the Dacian limes so far, and to call
attention to inadequacie s and to some facts that have escaped notice until now.
It is designed as a synthetical study which should make known the results of
discovertes in Dacia, and sum up a large number of excavation reports as
well as partial accounts. Professor Mihail Macrea+s untimely end prevented
him from completing the military history of Dacia, a book he had intended to
write and which would have fiUed up the gap noticeable in the past decades l in
this field.
The results of the comparatively la.rge number of a.rchaeological surveys
conducted in the forts, and, more recently, in the castra at Berzobis and
Potaissa as well as of research in the north-west, north and north-east sectors
of the Dacian limes have been partly published; but the significant amount
of data collected in the latter half of this century can only be fully thrown into
relief when viewed as a whole.
It is our long-standing concern with the subject that ties together this
work comprising almost all ohserved findings made avatlable up to now.
And the present author+s thesis, presented to the Babeş-Bolyat University,
Cluj-Napoca, Romania, in 1967, constituted the core of subsequent individual
research in the Dacian ltmes.
The realistic interpretation of the results of our research project into the
south-east sector of the Dacian limes, stretching between the Carpathianş
and the Danube, has been constantly based on a thorough examination of the
avatlable evidence concerning the other sectors of this line of Roman defences,
Having noted, during our trtps abroad, the absence of a comprehensive
study of Dacia, we have decided to present this first synthesis of the Dacian
Iimes , as it appears during the two eenturtes of the existence of the north-
Danubian Roman province.
We cannot hope to produce an original work; we only trust this study will
sum up the present knowledge of the Dacian limes and will enable us to formu-
late a number of relevant observations.

1
 It is our aim to study the process of development of the limes in Dacia
considering that it is precisely this aspect that has been m~erlooked in
the investigations carried out so far. We want to draw attention to the neceas-
ity for improving the quality of research in this field and for doing away with
irrelevant conclusions that cannot but impair the complete picture of its
historical evolution.
We have set out to assess the validity of every single argument underlying
the hypotheses currently regarded as firmly grounded from a desire to con-
tribute our share to the elimination of fal se assumptions and uncertatnttes.
In doing this, we have eneountered a number of difficulties, such as the
scarcity of scientific monographsf on the various elements making up this
system of defences , unpublished results of research conducted over a number
of years, insufficiently grounded conclusions, etc. With few exceptions , all
these fortifications have been dated according to epigraphic evidence or coin
discoveries; the study of archaeologtcal evidence found in Dacia, pottery
matertal-i in particular, is too limited to enable us to determine the exact
chronology of those defence works for which epigraphic data or coins are
wanting.
Moreover, in the present stage of field resea.rch, whose pace has become
inexplicably slow in the last twenty years, we felt sure that our information
about the defence works in Dacia is still inadequate, as there are still innumer-
able fortifications unidentified on the ground; proof thereof are the results
of the field surveys carried out by the brothers Istvan and Geza Ferenczi in
the limes of Dacia Porolissensis and, more recently, along Dacia' s east
boundary line. We consider that Iarger=scale research on the ground, relying
on the previous study of 17th and 19th century military maps and of arr-photo-
graphs, could lead to the identification of those temporary forts that must
have existed along the north bank of the lower Danube and must have served,
as early as the lst century, as crossing-points, as outposts for intercepting
the movements of the Daclan troops, or as marching camps that can be traced
back to the time of Domitians wars, and which have not been the subject of
particular research so far.
We will try our best to present all the topographical elem ents we have at
hand, thus enabling the reader to assess the strategic function of the defence
works under discussion. Moreover, we will present the plans and sections
typical of every studied fort, in so far as they have been published, to spare
readers the trouble of resorting to vartous publications in which they have
appeared, Our possible observations on already recorded situations will be
marked ********
The limes will be dealt with in ancient administrative units and strategic
units.

2
 mTES

1. Istoria militară a Daciei by Vasile Christescu, the only comprehensive

work on the subject, was published in 1937. N. Gudea, Aufsteig und
Niedergang des r~mishen Welt, Principat Series, II. 6 1977, advances
some of his viewpoints and gives a list of the Dacian defence works intended
to be "eine Ehrenschuld gegenuber dem r~mischen Dakien und der
Milltârgeschtchte des Rome.rretches". We think, however, that this study
failed to cope with the task the author set himself', mainly on account of
the very limited space available for each of the problems dealt with.
2. Except for the accounts of the excavations at Comâlâu , Cumidava-Rîş-
novand at Buciumi there are no such works available, the excava-
tion reports published being too brief and, more often than not, essential
data regarding the planning, stratigraphyand finds are wanting.
3. The only monograph made avatlabl e is the one compiled by G. Pompilian,
Ceramica romană din Oltenia, Scrisul românesc, 1976; unfortunately,
as the author himself confesses , "the rich pottery material brought to
light by previous research, on display in the collections in Oltenia or in
Bucharest, cannot be unreservedly used in a rigorous, scientific study,
so as to establish a certam chronology, as it does not provide sufficient
stratigraphic or other kinds of evidence." Ceram. p. 21.

3
 CHAPTER 1

DACIA AND THE EMPIRE BEFORE THE CONQUEST

The clashes between the Roman Empire and the Gaeto- Dacian populations
begin in the second half of the 2nd century BC1 and are more often than not
actuated by thei r inroads, eithe r alone or in temporary alltances , into the
Roman possesston,
Under Augustus, 2 when they made the south bank of the Danube the boundary
of the Empire, the Romans began to be concerned with checking and neutral-
izing the free development of those populations that endangered the exercise
of Roman authority south of the Danube. As archaeologtcal research into the
fortifications lying south of the Danube are scarce, and as is natural, have
not yet reached the early Roman levels, generally lying under subsequent
settlements , we are not in a position to infer the principl es that underlay the
fortification of the Danube limes; but sin ce it is Tiberius3 who actually
started the construction of the strategic road along the Danube, and since we
know from Florus4 that Lentulus presidia constituta after having routed
Cotiso's Dacîan s , we consider that fortified points held by auxiliary troops
already exlsted at an early date on the right bank of the river. Boris Gerov5
considers that it is possible to locate, by means of epigraphical evidence , a
number of alae in the vicinity of the castrum at Oescus, even before the reign
of Claudius.
Concurrently with the actions intended to impose cliental6 relattonshtps, a
'security zone' was created north of the Danube by prohibiting the founding
of civil settlements. 7 Thi s must have occasioned the siting of outposts opposite
the line of the Iimes, With the exception of the Banatian and (to a les ser
extent) the Oltenian sectors, the left bank of the Danube has not been exten-
si vely sea.rched and so few fortification remains have been traced on the ground,
and fewer of them are under archaeological survey.
One has to postulate the existence of a number of (temporary) bridgehead s
on the north bank of the Danube, at the more accessiblef crossing points.
But, given the fact that the north bank was generally subject to flooding and
erosion and, in the last decades, has been enormously affected by hydro-electric
construction, the detection of these places on the ground is no easy task.
The development stage of the Dacian state under Decebalus cal led for new
offensive actions that materialtsed in the first place in the two distinct cam-
paigns led by Corneltus Fuscus and Tettius Julianus. Field surveys and
archaeologtcal research carried out up to now have not succeeded in identifying
etther of Domitian's campaign camps, and presumptions concerning the location
of these campaigns in Dacia9 largely depend upon literary sources. Radu
Fiorescu10 considers that at Drobeta (the modern Turnu-Severin) the remains
of some wooden barracks and pavings prior to the stone fort built by Trajan
beţween 102-105, date back to the Flavian period.
4
 Though the archaeologtcal finds unearthed on this site in the course of
years have not been publtshed, the discovery of a terra sigillata vase (which
could not have been brought here later) stamped ~plI also lends support
to the idea that a Domitianic defence work existed at this point. 12
In Romanian lite ratu re , 13 the idea has been advanced that part of the
Daclan ter ritortes remained under Roman occupation after the peace of AD
89. This clatm was largely supported by the dating of a pridianum of cohors
1 Hispanorum, proposed by O. Fink,14 to the year 99. The surveys conducted
have traced a number of forts15 in northe rn Wallachia. Between these points,
to which Buridava (Birseşti, Stolniceni) and Piroboridava (somewhere at the
mouth of the Siret-Poiana or Bărboşi), 16 can be added, some others must
have existed whose archaeologtcal evidence could date to Domitian's day.
But, for the moment, the excavated areas at Tfrgşor, MăIăieşti, Drajna de
sus and Rucăr have not yielded convincing evidence for or against this claim.
With respect to Buridava (Bîr seştt) and Drajna de sus such a theory could
only be confirmed by the existence of a phase previous to the one in which the
stamps of legio XI Claudia were turned up, as the legion carne to the Danube
line only at the time of the Trajanic campaigns. 17
Of course , we cannot possibly reject a priori the theory that a number of
regions occupied by Domîtian continued to form part of Moesia EUperior and
Moesia Inferior, simply because written evidence about them in ancient
sources18 is wanting, particuhrly when mentions that bave carne down ta us
are so hostile to that unfortunate empe ror,

5
 CHAPTER 2

.' TRAJAN'S WARS FOR THE CONQUEST OF DACIA

The First War 101-102

The faulty description of the wars waged by Trajan with Decebalus as it

has been handed down to us, has had to be completed by further data derived
from epigraphic and a.rchaeological+l' sou rces, But interpretation of the
available data leaves open to discussion, in this case also, the question of
the route s followed by the Roman troops in the two campaigns fought for the
conque st of Dacia. The fragment from Priscianus20 assures us that the
column led by Trajan advanced along the road Viminacium -Berzobis-Aizizis,
through western Banat-Tibiscum-the Iron Gates of Transylvania-towards
the capital of the Dacian state. 21

While admitting the existence of a Flavlan phase in the life of the Drobeta
defence work we must implicitly admit that, as early as 101, a Roman column
cros sed the Danube at this point, taking the natural road that passed through
the east of the Mehedinti mountains, and led to the Streiu Valley through the
VÎlcan and Merişor Pass, This road is marked by the forts at Cătunele,
virţu, Bumbeşti and virtop.

On the site of the Cătunele fort, recently examined , the 2nd-century

pottery found in the ~22 leads us to think that this fort was built after the
Dacian wars. 23

The discovery at the fort with muri caespitici, 24 traced at Bumbeşti , of

stamps25 cohortis IV Cypria-a troop based in Moe sia &lperior and later,
for a short while, in Dacia26-indicates that this fort was built du ring the
Dacian wars. Excavations conducted in the surviving remains of this fort,
after its obl ite ration by the floods of the Jiu, could not determine the stages
that preceded the construction of the stone structures. 27 The only exi sting
clue is that the internal buildings faced a different direction from the rampart
wall-the south side28-which was thought to reflect a modification in the
cou rse of the stone rampart, which is distinct from the one of the wall in de
caespites.29 Unfortunately, excavations within the fort were not aimed at
determining the primary phase of the defence work-which deprtves us of the
possibility to know exactly how this murus caespiticius was really built, and
prevents us from recove rmg the plan, however incomplete, of the earltest
Roman fortification on this site.
At 1 km distance from this fort, is another one, at the point called virtopj30
research undertaken on the ground has not determined the date when this
defence was in use , and now it is completely obliterated by modern construc-
tion (information from E. Bujor). We consider that the two neighbourtng forts
functioned simultaneously, and only during one campaign. A. Bărcăcilă

6
reports the discovery in this fort of a stamp of legio V Macedonica. 31 The
vexiUatio of this legton could have acted here only during the Dacian campaigns
or after the abandonment of Dacia. 32
The existence in the mountainous region-Jigoru, 33the pătru Peak , 34 the
Comărnicel35 (three forts) and the Muncelu136-of a number of large-sized
earthworks, was associated from the very first with the surprise encircling
movement from S-E of the fortress at Grădişte-Sarmizegetuza. 37 r. Glodariu
and H. Dalcoviciu conducted field research specially designed to determine
the route taken by the troops of Lusius Quietus, 38 and they have ascertained
that the latter abandoned the route followed by the bulk of the column, swerving
towards the mountain slope s, of cour'se accompanied by a native e scort , in
order tu take unawares the unfortified rear of the Dacian capital. It is certam
that in 102 Decebalus, compell.edby the Roman armies , had to give up western
Oltenia and the Banat with the Haţeg Plain, because a number of troops had
r'emained in the area of the future Ulpia Trajana38a and the heroe s that had
fall en in the battles38b were commemorated at Tapae (probably the Iron Gates
of T'ransylvania) every year. These territories, occupied by the efforts of
the troops concentrated in Moesia Superior, will have been formed into a
military command38c subordinated to that province until 106.
The troops based in Moesia Inferior, and commanded by Laberius Maximus,
are sure to have acted in the sector which subsequently became part of that
province. There is no indication whatever as to the road or roads along
which this second front was deployed. But, as during the first Dacian war
the legions were stationed in the forts at Novae and Oescus, we think that they
foUowed the road along the Olt Valley and the one in western Wallachia,
running from Flamlnda by Roşiorii de Vede-Jidava-Rucăr and the Bran
Pass, to Transylvania.
In pre-Roman ttmes , the Olt defile was not used and the road leading to
Transylvania generally kept to the higher land. 39 The Roman road was built
only after the conquest of Dacia and was partly cut in solid rock, like the
road along the Danube that crossed through the Iron Gates. 40 The alternative
road running along the Upper Olt, and crossing the eastern part of the Cozia
Mountains seems to have been used much later, as all the defence s in the
area were originally built in stone and, as is shown by thei r shape and plan,
only in the reign of Hadrian. 41 The fact that the Roman troops penetrated as
far as the Olt defile is testified by the toponym Castra Traiana42 preserved
in the Tabula Peutingeriana. Likewlse , troops are sure to have been stationed
at Izlaz, 43 Slăveni44 and probably at Acidava. 45
Excavations condueted at Buridava , namely at Btrseşti-La Priză and La
Plută-have revealed agreat number of Roman remains.
Basing his assumptions on epigraphic evidence , D. Tudor evolved the
theory that the headquarters of the governor of Moesia Inferior46 were sîted
in this area when preparations was being made for the second war with the
Dacians. As digging were mainly conducted by rescue teams in great haste
and in an are a partly obliterated by modern construction the authors failed to
obtain sufficient evidence concerning the level of T'rajani c settlement and
neithe r plans nor sections of these significant remains47 were presented after

M
j
the survey of the site. The PS stamp was turned up at the point "La priză"
and that of coh. II FI Bessorum at "La plută". Given the existence of a
powerful 2nd and 3rd century settlement at stolniceni, it may be that the
stamped tiles and bricks were re-used in the construction of civil settlements
and, therefore, are not indicative of the location of the fort (or forts) on the
ground.
The second road to T'ransylvania , by western Wallachia, is marked, as
early as the times prior to the conquest of Dacia, bya seri es of cain dis-
coverfes , 48 and seem s to have been the main trade route in Getic times :
it also se rved as the line along which the defence works along the river Olt
(limes transalutanus) were subsequently built. Our excavations in the large
earthwork fort at Flaminda are stiU in progress and so we are not in a position
to fix its exact date ;49 we can only say that its large area (approx, 6-7 ha)
leads us to think that it was designed to se rve as a starting base for a large
number of troops.
No extenstve survey of the transalutana line has been carried out, with
the exception of the point at Jidava- eimpulung ;50 but even there, most of
the results are as yet unpublished. Excavations have traced the exi sterice of
four level s of habitation in the fort, which was abandoned in the second half
of the 3rd century.51 No conclusive evidence as to the troops that garrisoned
this fort have been revealed. However, a number of inscribed tiles provide
valuabl e information about the stay here of a vextllatio, possibly one of legio
XI Claudia. 52 On the basis of these data we are inclined to bel ieve that there
was at Jidava an earthwork fort which can be traced back to the time of the
Dacîan wars.
At Rucăr is the site of a small fort (fig. 2)-a quadrangle with unequal sides,
the long side s facing East-West-that was occupied, as shown by the stamped
ttle s, by a detachment of cohors II FI. Bessorum. The stamps found at Rucăr
are identical with those unearthed at Buridava-which made us think that that
particular detachment was displaced to Rucăr from Buridava and not from
the fort at Cincşor53 which was occupied at a later date.
Further north, at Drumul Carului54 in the area of the Moeciu viUage a
similar defence work was identified by excavation in 1977, which, from the
inte rim report, appears to be contemporary with the one at Rucăr. AlI these
discovertes confirm the hypothesis that the Roman troops used the easiest
route of access to Transylvania. The results of the recent excavations con-
ducted at Rişnov55 (fig. 3) were promptly published, as soon as each field
season carne to a close, Even though, as a rule , hasty publication might
impair the quality of the reports, this particular case is significant in itself
in that it rai ses questions that have long escaped observation or have remained
unpublished after previous excavations. Essentially, the sections cut across
most of the elements of the defence work have demonstrated the existence of
an earthwork fort and of a replacement in stone, 56 Moreover, the traces of
burnt matter in the vallum of the earthwork fort leads us to think that there
actually were two earth constructions. Examining the section across the
north-east side of the fort it can be noted that the ditch of the earthwork
fort was not filled up when the ~ was laid over the layer of burning, which
again, enables us to claim that a fortification of the Holz-Erde-Mauer pattern

8
had exlsted before, which was Ievell ed when a new construction with an agger
revetted in timber was built, as indicated by the unusually steep slopes of
this agger.
The data published57 in the report containinformation which enable us to
date these phases of the fort back to Traj an 's retgn : as far as we are con-
cerned, however, we think that the commencement of a defence work at
Rişnov goes back to the time of the wars with the Dacians,
The se ries of defence works found in the sub-Carpathîan range of Wallachia
al so appear to bel ong to Trajan' s time ; of these only those at TÎrgşorul
vechi, MăIăieşti, Drajna de sus and Pietroasele have been systematically
examined , Excavations have revealed that defence works in the sub-Carpathian
zone had a short-lived existence and were built during Trajan's reign only;
the possibility is not excluded that some of the works58 traced in the area
belonged ta different periods. Excavations at Plet roasele , 59 resumed in
1973, proved that the fortress that was thought to date from the early 2nd
century was actually a Roman construction which, according to the findings
of the archaeologists, may be said to have been founded in the 4th century
A.D.
Interpreting the archaeological evidence Grigore Florescu60 makes the
claim that the defence works in the Sub-Carpathian zone of Wal.lachia are the
work of the troops of Moesia Inferior, being built after the Dacian-Roxolanic'U
diversion south of the Danube, in the cour se of the first 'I'rajarric campaign
fought in Dacia.
The fact that, on the eve of the second Dacian war, Decebalus was willing
to set free Longinus in exchange for the country stretching as far as the
Danube, confirms the idea that after 102 the Roman armies remained in the
sub-Carpathian zone of Wallachia , East Oltenia and South Moldavia, 62 to which
the south-east corner of Transylvania63 should be added. It is very posstble
for these territories to have been conquered without significant resistance;
for it was from among the Getic localleaders, who had establ ished ties of
friendship with the Empire long before, that those who deserted Decebalus
and yielded to Trajan64 were recruited.
The truth is that there is no more evidence which would enable us to trace
the route followed by the Roman troops as far as the Sub-Carpathian zone;
unidentified marching-camps might have existed along the Ialornita Valley65
or the Argeş Valley , that have not been identified yet; but, on the other hand,
it seem s most Iikely that the Romans avoided taking the longer route through
the Bărăgan Plain, The large fort at Filipeşti,66 not examined yet, may well
belong to that period and, in that case, it might have served as a link between
the Danube and the sub-Carpathian zone.
It seems to us that the claim that the Roman troops penetrated the Sub-
Carpathian zone from the east, through Barboşi,67 and from the west along
the Olt and the transalutanus road from Buridava by Castra Trajana and
Jidava is much more reasonable as it fits better the geographical and strategic
context; obviously, the forts described up to now dating from the time of
the Dacian wars, were surely designed to facilitate the march towards

9
Transylvania. The points Tirgşor,68 Mălăieşti69 (fig. 5 and 6) and Drajna
de &1s70 (fig. 7) mark the road that leads to the Birsa Country, through the
'I'eleajen Valley, while Jidava and Rucăr is the one crossing through the
Bran Pass.
The building methods used in the fort at Drajna de &1sare quite the same
as those used in the construction of the forts at Breţcu71 (fig. 8) and at
Hoghiz72 (fig. 9 and 10). The doubl e walls, typical of all forts in this zone
and found in no other part of Dacia, 73 are also apparent at the fort of the
Leg ion at Vindisch (Vtndontssajî+ which already in 53-54 had been replaced
in stone, as at the fort at Hoghiz.
We think that the use of the same building technique , with slight differences
in the shape of the gate and the angle towers, argues in favour of the contem-
poraneous existence of these forts and for thei r being within the range of
action of one and the same legion in the province i. e. legio XI Claudia which
during Domitian's reign was based at the fort of Vindonissa. 75

The Second Daeian War

The second war, that annihilated the stout resistance of the Dacians , was
waged against the nucleus in Transyl vania; for, by admitting the p resence
of the Roman troops in the sub -Carpathtan region and along the Transylvanian
Olt76 we restrict the general goal of the warfare to the occupation of
Sarmizegetuza and to the neutralisation of the other points of resistance, the
la st of which was Ranistorum. 77

Archaeologtcal investigations conducted in Moldavia have shown that the

Roman actions were aimed at occupying the Dacian territory as a whole and
have also proved that some other regions that were never included in the
Roman Empire 78 were also oceupied by the Roman troops.
When the war ended the conquered territories were absorbed into the
newly-createdîf Dacian provin ce and into Moesia Inferior. The province of
Dacia will incorporate all the territories that formerly belonged to Moesia
sopertor and the Transyl vanian territories conquered during the second war;
while Moe sia Inferior comprised the regions conquered during the first war-
the east of Oltenia, Wallachia and the south of Moldavia, and the South-
Eastern corner of Transyl vania. The fact that the territories lying in the
south east of the Carpathians remained intra provinciam Moesiae Inferioris,
seems to suggest that after the second Dacian war that zone preserved the
form it had acquired following the peace concluded in 102.

10
 CHAPTER 3

THE EARL Y ORGANISATION OF THE DACIAN SYSTEM

OF DEFENCE-WORKS

By incorporating Dacia into the Roman Empire Trajan compl eted an offeris-
ive action meant to secure the south-Danubian p rovinces , thus spl itting up
the front of the barbarians and keeping close watch on all thei r movements,
The creation of the province of Dacia posed two crucial p roblems=-the defence
of its own territory and communication with the Empire across the Carpathians
and the Danube.

Examination of the sites and archaeologtcal excavations are as yet too

limited to enable us to determine the phases of the construction of the Dacian
Iimes, We would propose Trajan's reign for its start, it being the period when
a number of forts, for which excavattons ha ve already produced a rchaeologtcal
evidence , started to be built, and when in some othe.r forts troops recorded
in the military diplomas of 110, unlocated elsewhere, are known to have been
stationed, as attested by epigraphic evidence. As a general rule , it has been
noted that the castra and the forts existing at the tirne were located on the
strategic roads, The defensive system of the new provin ce in the subsequent
years betrayed the fact that it was intended to neutraltze Dacian resistance
and to secure proper frontier barriers. After the conquest, at least two
legions continued to remain in Dacia and it is to be presumed that the p rovince
was divided into two territorial units each subordinate to one of two legati.

The Territory within the Range of Action of Leg. nn Flavia Felix in 106-117/118

The earliest stone camp ever built in Dacia, is at Drobeta-its erection by

cohors 1 Antiochensium betng simultaneous with the building of ApoUodorus
of Damascus ' bridge:-

IMPj CAESAR DI [VI NERVAE F] NERVA TRAIANUS

AUG GER]M DACIC P[M TRIB]POTEST COS
P P PER COl H 1 ANTIO[CHENSIUM]
Large-scale excavations, covering the entire area of the camp and all its
pha ses , 80 have been carried out.

Radu Florescu sums up the data concerning the various stages when this
fort was in use. 81 Despite the fact that Drobeta is one of the most intensely
excavated forts in Dacia, no scientifîc monograph has yet dealt with the over-
aU results of the archaeological survey of its site; which would be of very
special interest as evidence reveals that life in this fort, which underwent the
modifications required at every stage, goes on until late in the 6th century.

11
 There is no certainty over the placement of troops: it appears that cohors
III Campenestris and cohors 1 Sagittariorum were the troops that stayed in
this fort for a longer time,

Excavations conducted at Pojejena Sfrbească (fig. 12) have not gone beyond
the stage of determining the plans and the stze of the fort, and only a brief
account82 ha s been published. The fort Iies about one kilometre north of the
Danube and occupies a commanding situation over Vel iko Grădişte and the
defile of the Danube. It has been ascertained that this defence had two pha.ses
of existence but on account of the limited scope of excavations and for Iack
of evidence we cannot date them exactly. The authors consider that the earth-
work fort is late 1st century-early 2nd century, when the earltest epigraphic
records attcst the presence of cohors V Gallorum at Pojejena. 83

We think, however, that further research on the site, and more extensive
work on the ground, are required before we can say exactly whether it is an
early Roman defen ce and when it started being built.

The indications given by B. Milleker, 84 and our own observations based

on the study of air photographs, entitle us to presume85 the existence of two
and even three defences belonging to different periods, that could be Roman
or Roman-Byzantine, 86 given the particular strategic importance of their
position.

North of Pojejena , on the Lederata-Tibiscum road , C. Torma has identi-

fied a fort at Vărădia-Arcidava 87 (fig. 13); its rampart wall is marked by
p rotru sions beyond the line of the wall, both at the angl es and at the curtains,
which form a system of platforms. The gates are flanked by rectangular88
towers much receding from the line of the wall and making up inner court-
yards.89

At the porta praetoria-a double gateway--apart from the rectangular towers

there will be noted extensive platforms along the rampart wall. It is not
out of the question for these platforms to be a replacement in stone of the
Wehrgang that had been supported by wooden pillars in an earlier construction.
The troops in garrison here were presumably cohors 1 Vindelicorum, as
indicated by a small tablet reading Coh. 1 Vindelico(rum) Iuli Martialis
C(enturia) Clementis; this troop carne to Dacia as a milliaria, 90 but the area
of the fort at Arcidava is too small to ha ve held such a unit.

It appears that the life of this defence work carne to a close early in the
reign of Hadr ian. Among the finds uncovered by excavations at various times
are a number of coins dating back to the time of Ne ro , Vespa.slan , Domitian
and 'I'rajan (excavations conducted by Milleker and Bohm, information re-
corded by T. Simu Arhivele Olteniei, IV, 1925, p. 391). The last coin dis-
covered dates from 117.91 We think that the re sults published so far do not
entitle us to suppose the existence of a primary fort of earth and timber; we
rather think that it was originally built in stone 92 early during the Dacian
wars. Although Grigore Florescu considers that it continued to function
until the 3rd century93 there is no evidence relating to it after cohors 1
Vindelicorum was transferred to Tibiscum, possibly early during Had rian+s
reign.

12
 At Slrducul Mare (Centum Putea) (fig. 14) an earthwork fort was discovered
in whose site stamps of legio nn F. F.94 were recovered. Resea.rch on this
site is far too limited to enable us to come to definite conclusions; but judging
from the section across the north-west side (already published ) it is highly
possible that the vallum 1 was laid over an earlier construction.95 Obviou sly ,
the internal buildings traced in the sections cut were barracks designed to
house the men of a vexillatio of legio nn F. F. moved to here from Berzobis.
The remains at Berzobis (fig. 15), on the bank of the Birzava, have been
known for a long time now, but it is only in the 196Os96 that systematic
research, though not extenstve enough, started being conducted. The brief
reports published are just accounts of excavations, It has only been as cer-
tained that it was an earthwork fort with vallum and ditch 97 and that both via
sagularis and principia exhibit two pha ses of existence , the second construc-
tion carne after a destructive fire; chronological details are wanting in the
published reports but special mention is made of the early abandonment of
the defen ce and the founding of a civil settlement on its site.
, 8tudying all the reltcs of legio nn F. F., D. Prota se 98 maintains that
this fort was in use throughout the stay of the legion in Dacia i. e. until the
beginning of Hadrian's reign.
Though ancient sources mention the points Aizizis and Caput Bubali along
the road to Sarmizegetusa, no systematic resea rch had been carried out to
determine thei r location. 99
Tibiscum (fig. 16)-located in the netghbourhood of Jupa village, on the
river Timiş, is an obligatory crossing point affording access to the Haţeg
Plain, through the 'I'ransylvanian Iron Gates. In 1964, systemati c research
started both in the castrum and in the municipium. 100 From the suggestions
contained in the papers dwelling solely upon the question of the troops that
were in garrison here, 101 it can be considered that a fort was already in
exi stence at this point during the time of the first war waged by Trajan.
However, as in our opinion cohors I Vindeiicorum102 carne here as late as
the beginning of Hadrtan ' s relgn we have to conclude that during the period
of the Dacian wars and in the early years of Roman rule a different troop had
been stationed here. We must eagerly await the conclusion of the excavation
and its results, given the existence of several phases in the life of this fort
and the fact that it was rebuilt in a more extensive area. 103
At Zăvoi, identifled with Agnaviae, the exi stence has been ascertained
of a large fort summarily examined , with results remaintng unpublished.
Considering that this fort lies at the very opening of the Transyl vanian Iron
Gates and that chance finds seem to indicate that it did not function very long,
we are inclined to share the general opinion that it was a marching'-camp in
use during the Dacian wars. 104
It appears that following the peace of 102 a Roman garrison was left in
the territory Ulpiae Traianae coloniae Dacicae. 105 The stamps of legio IIII
F. F, found in this Roman colony, were thought to indicate that this legion
was quartered here from 102 till the founding of the Roman city.l06 But,
the presence of these stamps in the constructions of the city cannot be proof
that the entire legion was based in this area ; we think that architects and

13
soldiers of this legion, within whose range of action the colony was founded,
were used in erecting the public buildings of the new metropolis. And, after
sorting out the stampsl07 the fact appears quite clearly that this legion 's range
of action covers the south of Dacia only, and so, it wa.s natural that its men
should be involved in the construction of the colony. The zone of the Dacian
fortresses in the Orăştie mountains also belonged to the territory within the
competence of legio IIII F. F.
If the forts lying in mountainous countryare sure to have been in use
during campaigns alone, being subsequently abandoned, those si tuated close
to the Dacian fortresses must have been occupied by troops for a longer
period of tirne , possibly until the great "reconcil.iation ", initiated by Hadrian. 108
We refer to the forts at Costeşti, 109 Prisaca, 110 Lucani-T'Ir'sa , Muncelul l U
and to the fact that Daciars capital city was re-u sed by a vexillatio of legio
IID FF as a temporary camp. 112 The fortification found at Orăştioara de Sus113
(fig. 17) is the only Ollefrom among those marking the road to the capital of
the Dacian state along the river Apa Oa şului , that continued to exist until the
3rd century. From the preliminary reports concerning this fort the extstence
of three pha se s in its life can be inferred-two earthwork forts and a third
construction in stone (see fig. 18). The ~ of the first pha.se consists of
brown-yellowish soil and has a base only 6.40 m wide-which leads us to think
that it had a facing of caespites115 or a wooden fencing (that could not be
traced by digging). It is likely that in Trajan's time the Germaniei exploratores
that were to become numerus Germanicianorum l lf garrisoned this fort.
One of the problem s that was never wholly sol ved is that of the western
boundary of the provin ce of Dacia. The only excavated fort along the cour se
of the Mureş is Micia (the modern Vetel) (fig. 19)-whose function was to guard
the cour se of the river and the natural road linking the Pannonian plain with
the province of Dacia. This fort (fig. 20) was investigated by Professor C.
Daicoviciu117 in 1929-1930 and we think that his observations are accurate
and still valid. The existence has thus been ascertained of an earthwork fort
which, in Professor C. Daîcoviciuts opinion, could have been small er than
its replacem ent in stone. 118 According to data supplied by the section cut
across the north side, the agger (fig. 21)-of the earthwork fort is of the
Holz-Erde-Mauer type-4 m wide-and has a horizontal timber superstructure
that conriected the enclosures; a ditch with comparatively equal escarpments
carne after a berm about 2 m in width. Inside the earth and timber construc-
tion, two successive layers of burnt matter were found, apparently the effect
of the deva station by fire of some wooden bUildings119 on its site.
The existence of two different ditches on the south side (1 and la) (fig. 2, a)
suggests a similar conclusion as regards the two distinct periods in the life
of the earth fort. Actually, the preliminary excavation reports are too
incomplete to enable us to turn to good account all the elements that have
been brought to light so far, and it is to be regretted that no concern has been
shown with fixing dates. In our opinion we can date the beginnings of the
Micia fort provided that we agree that it is hard to believe that the defence
of the Mureş Valley and of the access road to the gold-bearing region could
have been neglected. The fact that no other fort of Trajanic date is known to
have held cohors II FI Commagenorum, attested in Dacia in 110,120 and
quartered here already in Hadrian'sI2Idays, Ieads us to think that this cohort
is responsible for the construction of the earth-fort at Micia. If it is a sce r-
tained by excavation that the original fort had the same area as its replacement
in stone, we will ha ve to postulate that a troop, 122 other than cohors II FI
Commagenorum , wa s in garrison here together with the latte r 0_ Further
field research and systematic excavations will ha ve to find out whether or not
during the reign of Trajan the lower cou r se of the Mu reş was guarded by
fortified points. What appears certain, however, is that the range of action
of legio IIII FF extended this far and it is not unlikely that at Aradul Nou, 123
on the road along the river Mureş, a small fort might ha ve exi sted,

Pedites singulares Britannici124 whose p resence in Dacia, in 110, and

later in Dacia Superior is attested , are mentioned on inscriptions found at
Cigmău--GermisaraI25 which they had probably garrisoned since the ir coming
to Dacia. Judging from its position the castellum must have been located on
the Ulpia Traiana-Apulum road.

The Range of Action of Legio XIII Gemina in 106-117/118

When the wars ended legio XIII Gemina occupied the castrum at Apulum.
It appears that in Trajan' s tirne the legion exe rci sed its authority in the northern
half of the province. 126 There is no certain evidence about the form of this
fort, which subsequently became a mediaeval fortress and is now the site of
the modern city of Alba Iul ia. Apulum lay at the junction of the imperial road
crossing the north-south of the p rovin ce and of the trade route along the
Mureş Val l ey leading to Pannonia. Its position in the centre of the p rovince
and the latter's relations with the barbarian tribes determined the legion to
settle here from the very first and to r'emain in this place until the abandon-
ment of the province. The legion's close vicinity to the gold-bearing region
ensured its rapid intervention whenever nece ssa ry. Although there are not
enough data ava.ilabl e , it is considered p robable that in the years following
the organisation of the province of Dacia Apulum was held also by legio I
Adiutrix. 127

North-east of the castrum found nea r Ighiu128 (fig. 24) the r'ematn s of a
stone road were uncovered by excavation-2. 5 m wide-presumed to be the
remains of the road leading to Brucla and farther on to Potaissa- Napoca.
This road was built soon after the province was forrned. 129 A small earth-
work fort130 with single west gate was identified along this road , which also
has an additional rampart. We are not in a position to date it but as the
results published mention, among the few finds the re is a hasta dating from
the 1st-2nd century. It could be suggested that this was a small temporary
fort built at the point where the road to Zlatna (Ampelum) and Abrud (Alburnus
Maior) branched off during the early years of organisation of the Dacian
p rovince.

Owing to epigraphic evidence and especially to archaeological finds the

territory that u sed to belong to the province of Dacia can be more distinctly
outl ined to the north-west.

Excavations at Bologa, the ancient Resculum , 131 started by Profe sso r

M. Macrea have provided some of the most ample and most accurate data
concerning a Roman fortification in Dacia.

15
 A fort in excellent preservation overlooks the narrow valley of the Crişul
Repede river, 132 one of the most accesstble roads from the north-west, from
Barbaricum to the interior of the province. It is Iikely that cohors 1
Brittonum133 built this earthwork fort at the time of the pacifying actions
suhsequent to the suicide of Decebalus after the Dacians ' complete defeat.
In its original form the fort was smalle r than its later reconstructions. The
defining of the area of this fort in its early Trajanic form is the more valuable
sin ce it appears that part of its internal buildings have already been traced. 134

The only publication (Milttrtrg renzen, II, p. 320, fig. 6) made after re-
examinat ion of the site, is the section showing the south side of the enlarged
fort. But, from the observations of this section it is only reasonable to con-
clude that the extension of the area of this fort took place in its early phase.
A study of the section indicates that the agger has two phases , defined by a
layer of burnt matter, ashes and charcoal , we think that this layer-which
does not appear all along the Iength of the south side-is the effect of a fire
that destroyed a wooden building prior to the total replacement in stone. The
extension of its area shortly after 108, to when the coming of cohors II
Hispanorum (Scutata cyrenaica) to the north of the provin ce , at Bologa, 135
has been dated, can be accounted for by logical arguments. But larger-scale
investigations and greater concern for a more accurate description of the
constructions of Trajanic date will bring to light more detail s about the forts
and thei r component structures. 136

Poarta Meseşanâ=the second access-way from the north-west-seems to

ha ve been p rovided with strong defences as early as the beginnings of Dacia.

At Porolissum, at the point Pomăt, a camp was built in the time of

Trajan. Excavations carried out on the Pomăt HiU during the 1959 sea son
b rought to light, on the south-west side, the existence of an earth-work fort
with a rock-cut ditch on whose 1. 50-wide berm a fairly high layer of humus
was Iaid , The form of the agger, proposed by the authors in the section
already published, seem s unacceptable to us (Materiale VIII, p. 492):
"The agger of the earth-work fort, consisting of rock chippings in a variety
of colours, yellow or red soil, well+set (fig. 26), is separated from the
stone-fort agger by a layer of blaek soil mixed with a large amount of ash,
pottery fragments, animal bones , etc." Therefore, according to the authors,
the agger, extending between 89-95 m, is about 5.50 m wide. We are inclined
to bel ieve that it is likely that the layer of burning that defines the agger feU
on the slope giving access to the watch-walk, possibly when the timber and
earth wall was replaced by an ~ of chipped stone. The position of such
an ~ behind a solid stone wall seem s far more reasonable to us. The
clear-cut vertical delimitation of the rock layers, as distinguished from
those of red soil, entitles us to consider that a Holz-Erde-Mauer existed at
Porolisum in the first phase ; the existence of this type of defence can be
accounted for by the fact that being erected at the very edge of the highland
slope it formed a resistance to landsl ides far better than a vallum made of
caespites. Of course, recently resumed excavations of the site at Pomăt
have revealed more exact data in this respect, which are being worked on
and are to be published. Though the data made avatlable so far do not enable
us to establ Ish a certain chronology of this earthwork fort at Pomăt, the shape
of the ditch seems to argue in favour of an early dating.

16
 On the neighbou ring hill, called Cite ra , excavations have reveal ed the
exi stence of an earthwork fort generally ascribed to Trajan as well (Materiale,
VII, pp. 374-375, M. Macrea, Viaţa ... , p. 231; M. Macrea, Enciclopedia
classica, sv. Porolissum). Though it was possible to determine the earth
pha se on the south-west side and on the east angle no complete picture of the
a rchaeologtcal context revealed has been made avatlabl e, Mention is made of
the fact that the layer is poor in archaeological material. The fact that several
troops attested in Dacia in T raj an 's time are epigraphically recorded at
Porolissum or in its immediate vicinity calls for more r esea rch into the ques-
tion of when and where these troops pa ssed through or were stationed at
Porolissum. Unfortunately these finds cannot be a.ssessed chronologically
as in recovering them no reference has been made to the archaeological
context in which they were found. They refer to troops mentioned in the
earliest diplomas in the p rovince , which were to stay in these forts for a
long tirne : attested at Porolissum are: cohors I Hispanorum B. p. f. ,139
cohors V. Lingonum, 140 cohors VI Thracum, 141 and the stamp CHSIJS.142
AlI these troops released veterans in 110. Cohors I Brittonum and cohors
I Hispanorum are attested at the forts at Bologa143 and Rom~aşi144 respect-
ively (fig. 29-30). It is hard to say whether or not, already in the first two
decades, Porolissum played as important a part as it did in the mid-2nd
century, and whethe r it occupied, from the very start, a p rom inent position
in the strategic zone north-west of the province.

The northern section of Dacia' s boundary begins at the point named Tihău
(fig. 31). Though seve ral forts stand on etther bank of the Someş Valley, it
might be considered to have been the natural boundary of the territory of the
Empire strictly speaking , from this point eastwards. Excavation of this
castellum in 1958, demonstrably showed that it was originally built in stone
and that it inîtially held a vexillatio of legio XIII Gemina145 (fig. 32) within
whose range of action was, un til the provin ce Porolissum was founded, the
entire territory of northern Dacia. Owing to the fact that the inscribed
foundation stone was Iaid by a detachment of the legton , we can be certain
that it wa s responsible for the construction of this stone fort after the Dacian
wars.

It is g ene ral ly asserted that the fort found at Căşei 145a was originalIy
built in stone in Hadrian 's reign at the earliest. Work here early in this
century, could not, on account of the techniques employed , determine al l
the phase s in its construction. No archaeological evidence has been published
for this site either. We only know, 'rrom epigraphic sou rce s, that cohors I
Brittanica146 and, in the 3rd century,ala electonum lived at Căşei.

After taking part in the wars with the Dacians, cohors I Brittannica
remained in the north-Danubian p rovince , 147 and was apparently stationed
to the north of the province from the very first. The dating of the fort at
Că'şei-Samun (fig. 33) 'to a later pe riod has been accounted for by the typically
late form of the gate towers and the fact that it has no ~ but a Wehrgang
supported by stone abutments. Indeed, the towers are built to the pattern
used in military constructions of later date, 148 but we can ask whether or
not the replacement it self , which took place accordtng to the inscription in
the time of Caracalla, 149 altered the very form of the gates. A photograph
of the decumana 150 gate seems to indicate precisely such an alteration, as

17 I/:
!i I
there is a difference in the construction of the wall of the semicircular frag-
ment and the one inside the tower. Anyway, the problem as to when this fort
was built-at the same time as the T'ihau fort or in Hadrian' s days-awaits
solution, which may well be provided by new excavation on the site. Actually,
this sector as a whole seems to have been little fortified in Trajan's reign,
even though ala II Pannonicum151 was in garrison at Gherla152 at that time.
The north-eastern corne r of the provin ce wa s defended by the fort at Livezile, 153
identified and excavated : it was designed to guard the Bistriţa Valtey from
the very start of Dacia' s organisation. The authors hold the view that it is
prior to the fort at Orheiul Bistriţei (fig. 34),lying about 2 km to the south;
there is no eviden ce relating to the troops that built the Livezile fort, but
relying on the above claim it is considered that it is the work of cohors I
Hispanorum 00 later stationed at Orheiul Bistriţei.

D. Prota se advances the opinion that it is not possible for the two forts
to have functioned at the same time , even for a short time , but we think that
this cannot be fully accounted for given the fact that the area of the fort at
Livezile is far too smalt to have accommodated a cohors milliaria. 154
Excavations carried out at Orheiul Bistriţei between 1957-1960, traced the
remains of the earthwork fort, which covers quite the same area as the con-
struction in stone;155 we therefore suggest that the cohort was stationed
here from the very first; as far as the Livezile fort is concerned we think
that further evidence in support must be collected by excavation which should
help determine the exact period of its exi stence and the troop that erected it.

An inscription dated to A. D. 129 attests the pre sence of cohors VIII

Raetorum, in Dacia in 110,156 at the point named Inlăceni, 157 +whi ch led
M. Macrea to the conclusion that this cohort was responsible for the building
of the earthwork fort, exeavated in 1950. 158

Further archaeological data or epigraphical records about Trajanic

defences on the eastern sector of Daciats frontier as a whole are not avatlable;
it seem s strange, however, that the upper Mureş Valley was not provided
with defence works after the organi sation of the province. Though at
B'rÎncoveneati , the two phases of the fort have been cl earty revealed, there
is no chronological evidence as to its commencement159 and the troop shown
to have been housed here appears much later in the Dacia a.rmy ; without
denying the possibility of one of the as yet unlocated troops forming part of
the Dacian army having been stationed at this point or nearby, it has to be
noted that the troops displaced to the eastern border160 were not in great
strength.

Conclusions on the System of Trajanic Defences

Studying the map showing the fortified points that could be assigned to
Trajan (fig. 1), we will note the existence of fortified roads such as the imperial
road Lederata-Tibiscum- Ulpia Trajana and the alternative road Drobeta-
Bumbeşti-Ulpia Trajana-Apulum-Napoca. It can also be noted that as early
as the time of the Dacian wars or immediately after, Roman troops occupied
strategic positions close to the line of enemy resistance.

Relying on a vatlabl e information about this first stage of military organis-

ation, we think that one cannot argue that the Romans were preoccupied with

18
closing or keeping under control all the points giving accesa to the provin ce.
We would rather observe a concentration of troops on the south-west and
north-west sectors-a region exposed to the attacks by the Yazygi and the
free Daciaris. 161
Furthermore, noting that the Romans were particularly concerned with
holding under control the western regions, the idea that they might have left
defencele ss the access to the gold-bearing region in the Apuseni Range on the
Crişul Alb Valley , sounds strange to us, to say the Iea st , Actually, this
zone has been little studied, scholar s being rather concerned with tracing the
existence of a system of Roman deferrces in the mountains, along the theoretical
line Bologa (Resculum)-Abrud-Micia. 162 True, it can be laid down as a
general rule that the Romans used to set thei r boundar'ies behind mountain
ranges , which were regarded as a substantial natural barrier; but, the case
of the Apuseni mountains, whose eastern zone was particularly rich in gold,
must have been an exception to the rule. It seem s more logtcal , therefore,
that the province should have included the whole range of the Apuseni mountains
and that the valleys to the west , leading to the gold-bearing region, should
have been guarded. And the Crişul Alb Valley was the eas'iest way of access
to this region.
Incomplete research car rted out in this area by Sever Dumitraşcu, 163
detected an earth wall doubled by a ditch to the west along the Comâneştt-
Ier coşeni route (fig. 36), a wall that barred the way to the Crişul Alb Valley.
We think that more detailed surveys are necessary which should find new
evidence for the way in which the gold-bearing west region was defended.
The particular importance of this objective leads us to think that it must have
been strongly held already in Trajan 's time,
Examining the map that shows the points that are sure to have been occupied
in the first two decades of the 2nd century it can be noted that Trajan did not
build a defence line along the frontier; he merely held the strategic points
that had been occupied during the wars and occupied new positions that were
designed to repel or prevent any enemy attack. Though the comparatively
small number of Trajanic forts in the northern and eastern sectors of the
Dacian frontiers might well be due to the limited scope of field research, we
think that they suggest the absence of stiff opposition on the part of the
neighbourtng tribes-the Dacians, the Costobocci and the Bastarnae. These
tribes had been eithe r neut ral ized from the military viewpoint during the
wars164 or incorporated into the system of client states. 165

The Dacian Territories Assigned to Moesia Inferior

As far as the Danube territories assigned to Moesia Inferior in 'I'rajan' s
reign are concerned, we have already described, in general terms, the
defence works of Trajanic date in Wallachia, Southern Moldavia and the Olt
line.
In order to set these forts within the f'ramework of the defence system of
Moeaia Inferior it would be necessary to have a complete picture of the defence
works that obtatned north of the Haemus and in Dobruja early in the 2nd
century. But, owing to the lack of research on the Roman epoch there is no
r'eliable evidence avatlabl e for the early defences or the troops that garrisoned
them.166
19
 The latest work devoted to the military organisation of Moesta Inferior
'Armata romană fi Dobrogea', Bucureşti, 1977, and BAR, 1980, by A. Aricescu
deals only with the eastern region of the province, pointing precisely to the
scarcity of archaeological research as well as to the fact that no comprehensive
study had been compiled yet regarding the province of Moesia Inferior and that
problema have been approached in relation to present-day administrative
units.167 Consequently, we confine ourselves to noting that following the
annexation of the territories north of the Danube to Moesia Inferior during
the Dacian wars, part of the Roman troops in the province were stationed in
the forts that obtained along the road that traversed the territory from north
to south and connecting it with the south of the river. 'I'he pre.sent stage of
research cannot provide a truthful picture of the military organisation of
Moesia Inferior during 'I'rajan 's reign and of the changes that occurred after
Hadrian' s reorganisations; though we do not intend to analyse this problem
thoroughly, it seem s to us that the troops displaced to the north of the Danube,
except for the vexillationes of the legions that were withdrawn when the forts
in northern Waltachia stopped functioning, continued to stay within the newly
created province of Dacia Inferior.

20
 CHAPTER 4

HADRIAN'SCONTRIBUTIONTO THE ORGANISATION

OF THE DACIAN LIMES

The Emperor Hadrian reorganised the territories to the north of the

Danube and continued the building of a system of defences in the Dacian
provin ce , most probably compelled by the wars with the tribes of Yazygi and
Roxolani, which broke out after Trajan' s death, 168 but also because actual ly,
during Trajan' s reign, the same organisation as that when the Dacian wars
were at their height was carried ono During the first administrative reorganisa-
tion carried out by Hadrian, Dacia was turned into Dacia Superior169 and
Dacia Inferior is organised as a procurator' s province. Ancient accounts,
to the effect that the emperor intended to abandon Dacia were interpreted as
a reflection of the withdrawal of the Roman troops from WaUachia and southern
Moldavia, which were left outside the boundaries of the empire. 170 It is gen-
eraUy admitted that the forts at Drajna de sus, MăIăieşti, Tlrgşor and Rucăr
were destroyed by the Roxolani during the fighting in 117-118; but the pos-
sibility is not excluded that the layer of burnt matter uncovered in all these
forts was the effect of their being systematicaUy abandoned by the Roman
troops.
Hadrian could not leave Wallachia and Southern Moldavia disorganised.
In a previous study,171 we have already advanced the hypothesis that, while
withdrawing his troops from these regions, Hadrian encouraged the revival
of a political formation which , in exchange for its protection, was under
obligation to keep the peace and to promise to render assistance to the Roman
army. That the Gaeto-Dacian political formation secured protection can al so
be inferred from the fact that the penetration of Wallachia by the Sarmatians
and the Roxolani-obviously, with the Romans ' previous consent-took place
outside the area where they had been located.
The reorganisation of the Dacian territories had two stages , 172 very close
to each other, 173 and was aimed at ensuring maximum efficiency of thei r
role in relation to the Barbaricum and at the same time, at securing the
welfare of the provin ce.
In Dacia Porolissensis, organised north of Dacia, was a comparatively
restricted area given a large number of troops. The province as a whole
resembled a strongly held defence in depth.
Particularly under these circumstances, brought about by a new strategic
outlook of a marked defensive174 character, the frontier sectors reflected
""-'t'Iie-miHtarypotenttaltttes of the neighbouring populations. 175 Furthermore,
we think that it is in this light that we should interpret the fact that from 117-
118, when most of the fortifications along the Lederata-Tibiscus road are
abandoned176 till the reign of Antoninus Pius , the Banat was not so strongly
defended : as far as the forts along the Dierna-Tibiscus line are concerned

21
they were built afte r Had rianvs reign (see below). Nor do we think 177 that
the absence of defences in the Banat at that time could be an argument in
support of its abandonment , 178 .a s t races of Roman civil settlements179 are
constantly revealed in the area. More systematic survey may throw new
light on the situation in the Banat; in any case, it seem s that the Mureş and
the lower Tisza were the south-western boundar ies of the province of Dacia.
The effect of the peace imposed upon the Yazygi by Hadrian18O was a period
of comparatively peaceful relations which, we belteve , account for the re-
duction in military forces deployed along this sector of Dacias frontier line.

Tibiscus continued to be a powerful military centre appa rently holding

larger numbers of troops than before. It is generally admitted that the
palmyrenh sagitarii 181 were stationed at this fort, which they later sha red
with cohors I Vindelicorum182 and possibly with cohors I Sagittarionum. 183
Closer study of the stamps belonging to various troops found in this area will
help fix the chronological order of thei r movem ent ta this fort. It is worth
noting that gene ral ly, a fort covering 5.44 ha could accommodate the men of
two units at most, but if it can be p roved that more than two units occupied
the fort at the same time it is to be presumed that they lived and acted as
separate detachments, at different points, being quartered in small burgi
whose existence has not yet been attested.

The fort at Micia is another key point along the western boundary , where
at l east two troops-ala I Hispanorum -Campagnorum and coh. II FI. Comma-
genorum184 were quartered.

Yet another important point on the west boundary of Dacia Porolissensis

was Porolissum, were two forts were used , as has been noted, by several
different units. 185 As far as we are concerned, we are inc1ined to bel ieve
that the west frontier was divided into three sectors, two of which belonged
to Dacia Superiorand the third to Dacia Porolissensis. This can account
for the p re sence , as shown by epigraphic evidence , of large numbers of
troops which are known to have garrisoned other forts.

Dacia Superior

Hadrian's generals completed the defence system of the province by

erecting new forts which barred the access roads towards the interior.
Doma szewski ' s theory regarding the closing of the roads along the river
valleys186 holds true only from the reign of Hadrian. However, the principle
of preserving ttes with the provinces lying south of the Danube is carefully
observed. A. D. Xenopol, endorsed by V. Christescu (IMDR, p. 60), con-
tested the accuracy of the point rai sed by Cassius Dio, namely that Hadrian
destroyed the upper part of Appolodorus' bridge at Drobeta; moverover, Xeno-
pol is inclined to think that this passage was an interpolation made by Xiphilinus.
In any case, the destruction of the bridge does not appear reasonable since
archaeological evidence lends support to the idea that the Romans were con-
cerned to establish permanent relations with the Dacian provinces across the .
Danube.
To the troops deployed on the eastern boundary of Dacia Superior were
later added more alae and cohortes such as: the ala I N TIlyric187 at
Brincoveneşti, cohors I Alp188 at Călugăreni, Sarăteni and the ala I Bosporan-
orum 189 at Cristeşti.

22
 At Brineoveneşti excavations have revealed an earthwork fort with an
~ of beaten elay, with a 10 m wide base (Milttârg ren zen , II, p. 380,
fig. 2). The authors have agreed that the stone fort is larger than the earth-
work fort beeause the latter+s east side is not the same as that of the stone
fort. The published section shows that the wall of the stone fort eonsiderably
outstrips in length externally that of the earth agger. The report published
before examining the arehaeological finds does not date the eonstruetion of the
earthwork fort: as no unit previous to ala 1 N(ova) or N(umeri) Illyricorum
is attested the earth pha.se has to be dated to Hadr ian ' s day at the earliest.
On account of the far too limited scope of excavations carried out up to now
the building technique of the earth castrum has not been the subject of much
study but observations have revealed a pal isade in the upper part of the agger.
The funetion of this fort was to guard the wide valley of the Mureş.

The garrison at the CăIugăreni190 fort, lying to the left of the river,
patrolled the line along the Niraj-a tributary of the Mureş. Examining the
section of its north side (fig. 38) we have come to conclusions different from
D. Protase's.191 In our opinion, the agger of the earth fort was backed up
by two ditches , both of whieh were filled up before the stone wall was erected
in the internal escarpment of the first ditch. The agger is made up of a sertes
of supertmposed layers of clay and blaek soil ; the traces of the wooden f'rame-
work are not visible.

The fort at sărăţeni (fig. 39) bloeks the upper valley of the Tirnava Mică.
Excavations conducted by the Archaeological Museum of SfÎntu Gheorghe have
recovered the plan of the stone fort. Nothing is ?t.et known about the earthwork
fort which is merely supposed to have existed,l 2 but judging from the data
contained in the published account we think that the existence of an earthwork
fort cannot be definitely ascertained. Actually, the plan of the stone cons-
truction itself, which has already been published, contains elements pertain-
ing to successive periods in its construction. We think that further research
may provide solutions to the problems posed by the test diggings made so far,
such as for instance whether the abutments noted on the curtain wall between
the gates and the angles-towers form platforms. As nothing is known about
the agger we are entitled to enquire whether the Wehrgang was supported by
wooden pillars, at 2.5 metres distance from the wall; the stone abutments
being replacement in stone of some platforms-towers on the curtain.

There is a striking analogy between the sărăţeni fort and the forts of the
upper Olt-the Coz ia range zone-, which would justify the question whether
the stone fort at Sărăţeni was eontemporary with those forts, having inscrip-
tion of Hadrianic date. 193

In Romanian literature it has been agreed that eohors 1 Alpinorum-eg was

stationed at Călugăreni and sărăţeni at the same tirne , but as the area of eaeh
of these forts is large enough to have aceommodated such a unit, 194 the
possibility is not excluded that the cohort was successtvely housed in eaeh
fort, or me rely took part, alongside a unit as yet unidentified, in building one
of them.

23
 The Thirteenth Legion Gemina, whose range of action after the creation of
Dacia Porolissensis is restricted to the territory of Dacia &1perior, continued
to be stationed at Apulum. No systematic resea.rch has been conducted on its
site because a feudal fortress and the modern town were built over the remains
of the Roman castrum. Evidenee relating to this ehief military centre has been
adduced by the epigraphical records brought to light195 by excavation. In his
recent study196 of the feudal fortification, Mircea Rusu has resumed the plan
recovered by Visconti197 (fig. 40) which preserves the basic elem ents of the
Roman fort, almost square in shape, each side measu ring about 470 m. The
feudal fort uses only the east and west gates. The plan also includes parts
of the roads within the fort and, in relation to them , it can be inferred that
the porta praetoria was to the west, and that the via principalis separated
the east-west axis into two thirds. As M. Rusu checked the plan on the
ground , we are in a position to suggest that this version of the castrum,
recalling the republican principles of building castra that were Iargely made
use of under Hadrian, was built in stone soon after the founding of Dacia
Superior.
The specifically Hadrianic form of the castrum could result from the fact
that under Trajan it covered a larger area, required by the need to accommo-
date at the sam e time legio I Adiutrix and legio XIII Gemina, whose range of
action now extended along the course of the Mureş where among the Roman
remains its stamps have been unearthed at Bulci, S"mriicolaulMare, Cenad,
and Szeged. 198 These points have not been searched yet and we cannot say
whether any forts or stationes actually existed in the area, or whether the
stamped til es discovered were merely used as building materials floated down
the Mureş in the subsequent pertods.
Ala I Batavorum and ala I Bosporanorum, attested for the first time in the
diplomas of Dacia Superior, had apparently been brought to Dacia under
Hadrian.199 stamps belonging to these alae were discovered at Războieni200
and Cristeşti201 respectively. Though the stamps are not the onlyepigraphical
evidence for these troops, the forts where they were quartered have not been
identified on the ground, only remains of civil settlements being uncovered.
Until further excavations , employing new research techniques, are carried
out we will have to admit that earthwork forts probably existed in the above
Iocaltties , which nonethel.ess have not been foundas efforts were generally
directed to trace the constructions in stone. In our opinion these forts belong
to the same category as the one at Sighişoara, identified by Ion Mitrofan. 202
These three forts lie in the interior of the province, making up a second
defence line that runs parallel to the forts along the frontier line. Their
function was to keep under control the population of the province203 and at
the same time to ensure an efficient link between the eastern and western
sectors along the banks of the Mureş and the Ttrnava.
The Sighişoara defence work was built on a previous Daeian and Roman
settlement. The vallum was almost completely Ievelled or obliterated by
the remains of the suhsequent Roman settlement. Two ditches of unequal
dimensions run close behind the wall at unequal distances. 204

24
Dacia Inferior
As regards its military organlsation the newly-created Dacia Inferior is
more markedly Hadrianic in character. The territory of the province was
centered around the river Olt, 205 and the provin ce as a whole ensured the
link between the south of the Danube and intra-Carpathian Dacia and, jointly
with Moesta Inferior, held under control the WalIachian plain and southern
Moldavia. The bulk of the troops-three legions in Moeaia Inferior and the
auxiliary troops in the two provinces-were not concentrated with a view to
countering the stout resistance of the tribes in Wall achia. 206 The massive
fortification of Moeaia Inferior and Dacia Inferior was thought out as a means
of resisting the possible inroads upon the Empire from north-east, through
WalIachia and Dohruja.
East of Dacia Inferior, two almost parallel fortified lines207 were created-
the line along the Olt and the one east of the river, at a distance that vartes
between 10 and 50 km. It is considered that Hadrian208 was the organiser
of the limes along the Olt, known in literature of modern tim es as limes
alutanus=-an inappropriate name, 209 as it happens.
A large number of Roman sites have been revealed along the Olt (fig. 41),
in the region between the Danube and the Carpathians. Among the Roman
places traced were the Iocaltttes that appeared in the ancient itineraries. 210
It was ascertained from the very start that all the places mentioned in those
itineraries had once been forts on the road along the Olt; without denying
the possibility that each and every one of theseancient Iocalittes was provided,
at some tirne , with military defensive works , we feel bound to call attention
to the fact that, until they are adequately determined on the ground, it is poss-
ible that these particular sttes might well have been civil settlements that
were developed in the area. This cautious view is due to the absence of re-
liable evidence attesting the existence of forts in some of these localtties,
and to the fact that later on, Tabula Peutingeriana records the main road
linking Drobeta with Apulum and not a fortified line. 'I'hepoints where forts
have been identified for certain are: Izlaz.211 SIăveni,212 Enoşeşti,213
Inoneştii Govorii,214 Stolniceni-Boroneasa,215 Bivolari,216 Racoviţa,
Copăceni,217 Rădăcineşti, Titeşti and Boiţa. The fortified line continues
along the Olt in Transylvania at the points: Feldioara,218 Cincşor, 219
Hoghiz. 220 Olteni, 221 Among those where such forts222 might have extsted
are also Tia Mare, Romula , Drăgăşani, ~lTIlbotin,223 Perişani-Pripoarele.
At Tia Mare224 the remains of Roman civil settlements have been found
both west of the Olt and on its east bank where a tower presumably existed.
On the basis of a sketch drawn by Marsigli225 it has been suggested that
at Romula-Reşca three forts were in use. But anyone comparing Marsigli's
sketch with the general plan of the city published by D. Tudor will agree that
this observation cannot be unconditionalIy accepted. It is certain that the
main fortification, recently examined , was the city precinct in earlier times. 226
Research on the site and air-photography (fig. 42) reveal two defence works
shaped Iike irregular polygons-a small rampart and another one extending
to the south. It is hard to say which of these two defences was referred to in
the inscription of Philip the Arab227 but from the situation on the ground we

25
are tempted to think that the fort to the south of Tealui , drawn by Marsigli,
is a summary interpretation of the two successive ltnes of the city's walls
(M K U Z Y X on D. Tudor+s plan) (fig. 43). The third fort in Marsigli's
drawing is located in the highest part of the highland. As chance dtseovertes
in this area brought to light a large number of statuettes representing Roman
deittes as well as dedication-tablets, 228 we think that the seat of the cult of
Romula had once been here and that Marsigli could not but identify the site
of this sacred area. The fact that epigraphical records229 of the legions in
Dacia Inferior and also the vexillationes which were here on various occasions
have been revealed at Romula does not certainly prove that this was the site
of one or several defence works. They rather illustrate the fact that at
Romula the defences were erected manu militari, especially in the middle of
the 3rd century.
Therefore we think230 that, according to p resent knowledge, there was
just one early231 civil fortification at Romula, which was subsequently
extended , and that this place cannot be thought of as belonging to the defence
system on the Olt.
At Drăgăşani, Momoteşti suburb, extensive remains of Roman settlements232
were unearthed; until further research determines the existence of a Roman
fort we would rather consider that these are the ruins of a civil settlement.
Therefore, the only certainly attested forts along the lower cou rse of the
river Olt are at Izlaz, 233 SIăveni and Acidava.
At Acidava-Enoşeşti, diggings for the Bucharest-Piatra Olt railway have
largely distroyed most parts of the fort identified there, By 1975, when we
conducted a field research project in the area, the unexcavated part of the
south-west (fig. 44) angle was obliterated and a section across the preserved
fragment on the west side was cut. On that occasion we noted234 that to the
west the earthwork fort extended beyond the one made of brick. This fort was
held by cohors I FI. Commagenorum.235 As no clear evidence was found for
the early phase in the construction of the earthwork fort, the di splacement
of the unit from Drajna de Sus to Enoşeşti remains uncertain. If the cohort
was transferred to the Olt line after the abandonment of Wallachia and is re-
sponsible for the building of the Acidava fort, then we must date its beginnings
to Hadrian's time,
Few Roman remains236 have been disclosed by excavation north of
Acidava-Enoşeşti as far as Buridava; the only building observed is a fort
at loneştii Govorii (identified with the ancient Pons-Aluti), whose plan was
presented in a sketch by P. Polonic. During 1963 the remains of its north-
west angle, obliterated by new constructions, were also cleared. D. Tudor
thinks that this fort extsted soon after the Roman conquest. 237 Tocilescu
records its garrison as cohors In G (allorum)-attested by stamps-a troop
which at first belonged to the army of Moesta Inferior and then to Dacia
Inferior. 238
. A thriving civil settlement developed at Buridava, probably owing to the
salt-works239 in its neighbourhood, Air photographs of this a.rea (fig. 45),
not taken for archaeological purposes , revealed the Roman road, remains of
Roman habitation at the point "La Plută", and an amphitheatre, possibly in

26
wood as no traces of mortar240 were found, the fourth Roman amphitheatre
discovered in Dacia. 241
Remains of a civil Roman settlement have also been traced north of the
castrum, towards Rlureni. We consider thatwe are in a position to postulate
the p resence of flourishing civil settlem ents at Buridava: an autochthonous
one , and one within the fort. The coins242 provide ample proof that the
development of these settlements continued at least until the 6th century.
starting in 1965, the Museum at Rlmnicu vilcea undertook archaeologtcal
research conducted by D. Tudor; except for the excavation of the thermae
carried out systematicalIy by G. Bichir243 but not published yet, all the
other research projects were conducted by r escue teams. No systematic
diggings were car rted out at the site of the fort traced in the vicinity of the
manor Boroneasa (fig. 46), so that there is no evidence relating to the forti-
fication which, in alI probability, must have been held by cohors 1 Brittonum
milliaria. 244 Further research wilI have to ascertain whether the fort
identified close to the Boroneasa manor is one and the same with the one
dating baek to Trajan 's day or whether it must be related to the organisation
of the frontier line of Dacia Inferior.
Castra Traiana initialIy located at Gura Văii by Grigore 'I'octlescu , was
re-Iocated by D. Tudor at Simbotin, where the results of preliminary excava-
tions were reported. 245 Judging from its plan (fig. 47) and the section already
published, it is only reasonable for us to enquire whether or not the construc-
tion was a fort, as is generally believed, or a civil settlement, Actually,
the excavations on the site were meant as mere test diggings without tackling
the problem s in a way that could make possible an appreciation of the plan of
this fort. We think that larger-scale investigation will help locate exactly
the site of the fortifications that lent thei r name to the ancient locality recorded
in Tabula Peutigeriana.
At Jiblea, 246 the point where the road along the Olt, west of the Cozia
range, branches off, a fort has likewise been identified but enqui ry was, here
too, far from conclusive.
The road along the Olt, rock-cut at the points Masa lui Traian, C1rlige
and Ursoi, in order to carve its way through the narrow gorge, was guarded
by two smaller camps, Arutela and Copaceni , dating back to Hadrian's time.
The Arutela (fig. 48) camp lies left of the Olt, near Cozia Monastery. Its
west side was obliterated by the Olt and by railway Imes. Large-scale
exhaustive excavations carried out between 1967 and 1970247 revealed its
square shape, with sides 6 O, 8 O m long, The rampart wall is 1. 6 O m wide
and "le socle repose directement sur la terre sans un amEmagement special
du terrain". 248 In a few places, the wall is stand ing to a height of 1. 7Om
and is built in quarry-stones held together with mortar only at the foundation. 249
Bonding the rampart wall , the 'abutments'-l m in width and 1. 50-1. 60 m
in length-are built in the interior at varying distances of 2. 15-4. 40 m from
one another , to support the Wehrgang. In front of the gate towers, and at the
angles , the rampart wall becomes thicker externally. The porta praetoria,
to the east , is flanked by two square-shaped towers while the porta principalis
dextra and sinistra by one tower forming a doubl e gate.

27
 Until the final results of the investigation are published, the most complete
data are a vailable in the accounts of the first two field sea sons (SMIM, 2-3,
1969-1970 pp. 8-46) that supply observations relating to stratigraphic (fig. 49)
evidence. The anthorrs concluston is that there was one level of habitation.
We have noted, however , that the diggings were incomplete and that they
were not aimed at clarifying major issues; thus, excavations of the north
and east sides did not reach the level of bare soil where the ditch normally
lay, and on the south side what seems obviously to be a ditch has been taken
for a ravine. It appears that nea r the via praetoria a patch of uneven ground
had existed-possibly a bar-rack=-subsequently filled up with 'yellow sandstone ' ,
overlaid by ashy black clay. The researchers did not pay enough attention
to the identification of the remains of the wooden buildings, either, and most
of the internal buildings appear to have been uninhabited. The only certain
construction is the one at the praetentura sinistra which was considered to
ha ve been the schola of a collegium250 but it is obviou s that it is a horreum.
Of course, the location of this horreum is not approprtate, but the smithy
found at the praetentura dextra is placed at least as inappropriately as it. 251

The stones marked on the plan must have served as foundations for the
wooden barracks; even the elevation at the principia was also built in wood.
The inscriptions found by Gr. Tocîle scu at the porta praetoria and at the
porta principalia dextra fix the building date of the fort in 138 by the surii
sagittarii. 252 The question why a detachment or just one soldie r of cohors
I Hispanorum veterana was lodged in the fort has r'emained unanswered, 253
and so has the problem of the date when the fort was in use254 for, if the
dating of the three tombs discovered on its site to the mid-third century is
correct255 then the troop had left Arutela before thi s date.

North of Arutela are two smal l+stzed castella at only 500 m distance from
each other, known in literature as the modern Copaceni and Racoviţa.
According to an inscription, the fort at Copăceni256 (fig. 50) has been dated
to Hadrian's time. 257 The evidence brought to light by excavations late in
the last century does not indicate that the fort was reconstructed within two
years on a larger area and was provided with towers. 258 Numerus vereda-
riorum et burgariorum259 which put up both building inscriptions (Bauin-
schriften) was designed to control traffic on the road which they had probably
carved in the rockly Olt Defi le,

Two layers of burnt matter were found in the fort, separated by a Ievell ed
layer of yellow clay. D. Tudor and his pupils ffxed the date of the first burnt
layer before 140, considering the replacement of the fort at that date as due
to a violent destruction which, however, is not confirmed by the text of the
inscription. Further study of the evidence adduced by recent excavations ,
as yet unpublished, will make possible a chronological assessment of the
phases attested stratigraphically and thetr coordination with the data supplied
by epigraphic records. 260

The fort at Racoviţa (fig. 51) was wholly excavated by Gr. 'I'oci.le seu 's
collaborators; the research te am of the Central Military Mu seum has
recently re-started research on its site.260a D. Tudor and C. VIădescu
hold the view that this camp appears to have been in u se for quite a short time ,
being a late construction as "omissions and faulty measu rements " have been

28
noted. Actually, as far as itsplanning is concerned, Drobeta shows great
resemblanee with the early second-century forts and its exact chronology
will only come from working out the results of excavation,
On the eastern alternative Roman road two small forts were identified and
excavated at Rădăcineşti and TIteştî. 261 The Rădăcineşti (fig. 52) fort is
wholly preserved262 and, in general terms, quite similar to those at Arutela
and Praetorium and to the fort at Titeşti. 263 It appears that both the fort at
Titeşti (fig. 53) and the one at Rădăcineşti had only two gates. The plan of
the fort at Titeşti264 already published (Frontiere romaines , Mamaia, fig.
7, p. 253) evidently shows that the east gate was blocked up at a late r period,
and its plan in the first phase could be easily recovered by analogy with that
of the west side, on the basis of the remains detected.
To the extent that the results of excavations conducted at Rădăcineşti fort
have been made avaîlabl e , it can be said that its gates were not guarded by
towers, 265 and that the angle towers were very small and almost circular
in shape.
Except for the principia, the inte rnal buildings of all Hadrianic forts were
built in wood and they did not enjoy much attention on the part of researchers;
unfortunately, nothing is yet known of the contubernia and the annex buildings,
and therefore we are not in a position to assess the number of men quartered
there and the specific functions of these small forts located on the road along
the Olt.
In 1974, with our colleagues from the Institute of Archaeology and the
National History Museum , 266 we conducted research into the upper Olt
Valley, starting at Hoghiz, as far as ciineni, where the ancient locality of
Pons Vetus267 was identified. aur investigations did not res~lt in the identi-
fication of a Roman camp there.
Actually, the natural road running east of Mount Cozia branches off at
Titeşti -an alternative road leading towards Copaceni and another one
towards Grebleşti-a village south of ciineni-where a smal l fort might have
existed.
The next locality mentioned in Tabula Peutingeriana is Caput Stenarum
(fig. 54) identified with the ruins found at the point called Boiţa. 268 A fortlet,
known to have had at least two phases of existence, guarded the junction of
the imperial road to Apulum and, along the Olt Valley , to Angustia,
The fort excavated in 1957-1958 had no double walls as was sometimes
believed. We think that the difference in the aspect of the fortification elemente,
resulting from the section cut across the four stdes (fig. 54-56) should be
taken as a reflection of the successive transformations this fort underwent
in the course of its existence. It appears that a stone fort originally existed
(marked by us on fig. 55) which was destroyed when the double wall fort was
erected on its west and south sides. In N. Lupu's opinion, the exte rnal wall
was built after the internal one (Materiale, VII, p. 416). Examining the coins
N. Lupu considers that this small fort was built not earlier than the time of
Marcus Aurelius. The important strategic position of the point where the
fort was located justifies the hypothesis that the wall at the southern end of
the terrace belongs to a larger civil or military fortification that may have

29
been in use at a certain time, For the fragmentary stamp inscribed COH1---,
found inside the fort, N. Lupu propcses the completion Cohors 1 Tyrorum,
an as yet unlocated unit in the army of Dacia Inferior.
The stamp of legio XIII Gemina, found on a brtck used in building a bath-
house , was considered by C. Daicoviciu27Oto be a proof that the locality
belonged to Dacia Superior; reconsidering the data concerning the discovery
of the stamp, N. Lupu observes that the detachment of the legion will be
stationed here only after the administrative reform carried out in the reign
of Ma.rcus Aurelius.
The forts at Hoghiz continued to exist in Hadrian's time , when the defences
along the upper cour se of the Olt were probably completed with the Cincşor,
Feldioara and Olteni forts. The fort at Cincşor has not been excavated yet ;
the lettering used in the inscriptions discovered inside the fort leads us to
think that cohors II Flavia Bessorum carne here after being moved from
Buridava and its dependent burgi, Rucăr in the first place.
It was only in 1973 that the excavation started of the castellum at Feldioara 271
that lay an the Olt riverside, now partly destroyed; the unit coh II Numidarum
attested ta have been stationed here, called Antoniniana, belonged ta the army
of Dacia Inferior, being attested in both diplomas relating ta this province. 271a
The fort at Olteni, lying on the right bank of the Olt, was partly272 exca-
vated and it has been ascertained that it was in use from the beginning of the
2nd century until the middle of the 3rd century.273 The name of the unit that
garrisoned it has remained unknowndespite the existence of a chance find in
the necropolis-a sarcophagus made of bricks, bearing the stamp of t, 111. 8~
which has not been properly read.274
Excavations carried out by the research team at the Museum in the town of
sfmtu Gheorghe have led to the discovery of a fragmentary inscription in
Titulus operis publici indicating that Hadrian erected a construction at
Boroşneu using ala 1 (?) A; Z. Szekely reads it as ala 1 [Lla(tobicorum)274a
while D. Tudor, studying a photograph, considers that it is about ala I[B]a
(tavorum)-a unit attested in Dacia Superior in 144, which had probably
previously come from Pannonia to Războieni. Little has been published274b
about the fort at Boroşneul Mare and so we cannot say when it was built. If
the fort at Boroşneu really existed in Hadrian's time it is likely for the ala
1 Batavorum to have sent a detachment274c here from Dacia Superior. But
this cannot Iend support to the idea that this camp was part of Dacia Superior,
even for a short time, and netther can the presence at Hoghiz of Legio XIII
Gemina274d during the time of Hadrian, too, counteract the evidence testifying
to the fact that the south-east corner of Transyl vania formed part at that time
of Dacia Inferior.274e It was evidently a temporary cooperatlon rendered
necessary eithe r by military developments or by the administrative changes
that occurred in Hadrian's reign.
Therefore, Hadrtanic fortified points along the Olt line, have been identified
as follows: Izlaz , Slăveni, Acidava, Rusidava (?), Pons Aluti, Buridava,
Castra Trajana (?), Arutela, Copaceni, Rădăcineşti, Titeşti, Pons Vetus (?),
Caput stenarum, Feldioara , Cincşor, Hoghiz, Olteni and at Breţcu-just
at the entrance to the Oituz Pass, It is worth mentioning that the prime function

30
of all these forts was to block the access way from the Wallachian plain to-
wards the interior of the province.
Gr. Tocilescu was the first to consider (Fouilles, pp. 119-120) this line
of fortifications as the boundary of Dacia Inferior, created by Trajan and
organised by Hadr'ian (pape r read at the Romanian Academy Session of May
3, 1902). V. Christescu points out that the road along the Olt had already
been used by Trajan, proof thereof being the name of Castra Traiana and
the fact that Buridava is mentioned in the Hunt Papyrus. D. Tudor, investi-
gated , in the main , the Roman epoch in Oltenia; hence his exclusive concern,
in all his works275 dealing with Dacia Inferior, with the Oltenian sector of the
Roman province. According to D. Tudor, limes alutanus had al ready started
operating in Trajan's days. 276 In stating this, he is obviously inconsistent
and he overlooks the fact that after the first war with the Dacians , more
precisely after 106, Wall achia and southern Moldavia were part of Moe sia
Inferior and, therefore, the Olt could not have been, fruntaria răsăriteană~,
to u se his own words (Oltenia Romana'[ p. 153). The fortified line along the
Olt river did serve as a limes in T'rajan ' s time if we use this term in its ba sic
meaning of a strategic road leading to the front l ime (G. Forni, Limes ,
1086) but to avoid confusion the above observation seem s required.
Examining the conclusion drawn from the critical revision of archaeologtcal
information on the alutana line, we notice the uneven distribution of the
defences across its sectors, namely the great number of small forts in the
sector stretching from Castra T'raiana to Boiţa, and thei r rare occurrence
in the one from Islaz to Castra Traiana. The sector between Acidava and
the Danube, that does not give visibility towards the east (fig. 57), must have
had outposts placed on the east bank of the Olt considerably earlier. At any
rate, the thriving agriculture at Romul a could account for the necessity of
efficient defence measu res in the eastern area. In a previous study on the
use of imperial coins in Wallachia , 277 we have already remarked that this
reflects the absence of a normal circulation of coins in the stretch east of
the Olt as far as the transalutana line and even a few kilometres further east.
Likewise , the fact that no a.rchaeologtcal evidence wa s found to suggest the
existence of a civil settlement that could be dated to this time, 278 has led us
to consider that this area was a military territorium along the frontier line,
where civilians were not allowed to settl e. It is only such a legal rcstrtctton
that could account for the absence of human settl ements in the area in the
2nd century, considering that its soil was equally well suited to agriculture
as that west of the river. R. Vulpe argues that Dacia Inferior extended from
the start to the east in Wallachia as far as the line on which the limes
transalutanus was to be built (Dacia, NS, V, 1961, p. 372, note 32).
The transaluta defences consisted of both small and large forts at the
points: Fl ăm!nda , Valea Totiţei, 279 Putineiu , Băneasa, Valea Urluii,
Roşiorii de Vede, 280 Gresia, Crîmpoata, Urluieni , Fflfani (Izbaşeştt), săpata
de Jos, Albota , Purcăreni, Jidava and Rtşnovand of a vallum in the plains
that had no natural barrier.

}f the ea stern frontier line

31
 Gr. Tocilescu sums up in Fouilles ... 281 the results of a systematic
investigation conducted under his guidance ; this work embodies the available
archaeologtcal evidence , selected with particular care, cautiouslyand com-
petently interpreted, and cor related with the information coming from ancient
literary sources. These preliminary data-that underlie all suhsequent in-
terpretation and research-are completed by a large quantity of notes that have
remained unpublished and are to be found in the library of the Romanian
Academy.282 After Professor Tocil escu+s death, the pace of enquiry became
slower, being resumed, for a short time though, on the eve of the Second
World War by V. Christescu283 and Gh. Cantacuzino.284 It was only in the
1970s that systematic investigation was resumed at Jidava and Rişnov; quite
recently, we have started to excavate the forts at FIămmda, Putineiu and
Urluieni.
Besides D. Tudor, who comptled the work Oltenia Romană, the Polish
researcher H. Gaewska285 and more recently C. Vlădescu286 have been
concerned with the defence system in eastern Dacia Inferior. E. Kornemann,287
C. Patsch,288 have interpreted the Olt line and the line along western
Wallachia as a double limes whose construction presumably began under
Hadrian and ended late in the 2nd century. E. Fabricius, 289 and later D.
Tudor, argue that the limes transalutanus was "al s Ersatz fUr die Aluta linie
ent stand en " and that not all of the points along the Olt were necessarfly
abandoned.
At any rate, if historical evidence lends support to the hypothesis that the
construction of the fortifications across the Olt started as early as under
Hadrian, until the middle of the 2nd century, 290 the findings of exeavations
carried out by V. Christescu, part of which have been published, apparent1y
showed that they might be dated to the time of Septimius Severus.291

The basic argument is the discovery in the burnt matter at săpata de Jos
of a large hoard of Roman coins starting with the reign of Septimius Severus
and ending with Gordian ill. But B. Mitrea292 refutes the soundness of
V. Christescu's argument and dates the beginnings of the transalutana line
to the days of Septirnlus Severus. Actually, the above -mentîoned treasure
could be taken to have belonged to a military chest , as the moment when
coins started being hoarded does not coincide with the date exhibîted by the
earl iest coin in the treasure.
It must be honestly admitted that no conclusive evidence is as yet available
to carry absolute conviction as regards the chronology of the defenstve line
across the Olt. The known epigraphic records are insufficient as stone is
wanting in the plain zone and excavations were far from extensive.
The archaeological evidence293 found in the forts at Bâneasa and săpata
de Jos has not been studied, being lost during the Second World War;
therefore, further research employing new techniques and equipment is
required to obtain the necessary data which will make possible a chronological
assessment of these forts. It is expected that the diggings at Jidava whose
results are to be published soon, will provide ample information for the dating
of the transalutana line.

32
 Within the last 8 years we have been engaged in the investigation294 of the
defences on the transalutan system starting with the re-identification on the
ground of archaeologtcal objectives , as we noted that the recently published
accounts misinterpreted the evidence provided by direct sources and that
some confusion had artsen as a result of unchecked information.
We have been primarily concerned with re.search into the cour se of the
earth vallum which is presented in literature as a wall of burnt soil, 295
running uninterruptedly between the Danube and the Carpathians.
We have already reported296 our conclusions drawn from the study of air-
photographs and of our investigation on the ground ; we feel certam that the
vallum was built only in the plain zone, where there was no natural boundary o
of the territory of the empi re , i. e. between the Danube, at Flaminda and the
Vedea river-at Gresia297 and then again between Urluieni and Albota.
The (three) sections cut across the vallum clearly show the existence of
two distinct phase s. We feel inclined to interpret them as the remains of an
original construction in earth and timber, which was burnt in seve ral places298
and that it was only late r that an earth vallum was constructed which included
the remains of the original wall internally. Though we should make an
attempt to differentiate the "paltsade wall " from the vallum strictly speaking,
the latte r will continue to be referred to as vallum transalutanum and the chron-
ological data required are as yet insufficient.
Nowadays, the vallum has been levelled by agricultural activities (its
maximum height is 7. Om); the sections cut across it in three different
geographtcal areas (Limes, Szekesfehervar, p. 352, fig. 6 and 7), confirm Gr.
Tocilescu' s observation that there was no ditch in front of the vallum and that
it did not serve as a road299 in Roman times,
The fact that our diggings in the area did not reveal t races of the Roman
road parall el with the vallum that must have veered west leads us to think
that it was built a little further away, at a di stance of 150-200 m, which
actually sepa rated the forts from the vallum.
Among the mounds to be found in the immediate vicinity of the vallum (fig.
58) we have started to uncover the one that ensured a visuallink between the
high land crossed by the stretch between the points Roşiorii de Vede and
Scrioaştea and the Gresia fort, lying in the Vedea riverside. We have already
cleared here part of a tower built in wood and revetted in clay. This tower,
too, has two distinct phases ; the original, large tower was burnt, its remains-
a mass of burnt earth and charcoal-were Ievell ed and anothe'r tower, smalle r
in size, was constructed. 300 The limited scope of excavation carried out so
far does not enable us to establ'ish the date of the vallum transalutanum. As
it is not expected that excavations will bring to light fully convincing evidence
to help us date the vallum, we undertook the task of examining two points
which we consider to be essential to its existence. the point at Flămillda
where the vallum starts from the north-east angle of the large earthwork
camp , and the one at Urluieni where it is certain that the vallum and at least
one of the two forts were stmultaneously erected. In 1977-1978 we started
examining the stratigraphic relationship between the earth vallum and the
large camp at Flămillda (fig. 59). The course of the vallum continue s the

33
line of the agger along the east side of the earth work camp. At its east
angle the ditch of the castrum was cut behind the vallum as well , which .lends
support to the fact that the vallum was not constructed at the same time as
the camp.
Excavations conducted at this point, much more limited than we intended
on account of shortage of labour, have not yielded conclusive evidence as to
the stratigraphic relation between the vallum and the ditch of the castrum.
In fact, as we have already pointed out, no archaeologtcal evidence was found
to establtsh a chronology in the construction of the camp. A number of pottery
fragments and some objects found in the filling of the ditch301 behind the
valIum are the only finds obtatned, Without claiming that this argument pro-
vides absolute conviction it is worth taking into account, however, that the
ditch was purposely302 filled up in the stretch behind the vallum , which might
suggest that the camp already extsted before the valIum was built. We hold
the view that the vallum was not necessarily built concomttantly with all the
forts and the watch towers of the defence, It might have originalIy been used
to delimit the territories of the empire or, later, to determine, in a concrete
way, the limites imperii, that had been previously set in front of certam
outposts.
The early dating of the vallum to Had rian I s time is accounted for by the
squa re plan typical of most forts along the transalutana 303 line and it is
generally admitted that the construction of this fortified line was an imperative
requirement as early as the third decade of 2nd century.304
As we have already mentioned , we think that the camp at Jida va can be
traced back to the time of the Dacian wars; as no definite statement was
made concerning the gaps that might have existed in its four Ievel s of existence, 305
it may well be assumed that the fort continued to exist even after the rest of
the troops were withdrawn from northern Wall achia, In the brief reports pub-
lished no data concerning the construction of the stone fort is avatlable , and
no mention is made , either , of the changes which occurred in the life of the
fort in the course of its life.
No elear evidence was found in the area excavated at Rişnov to suggest a
Iull in the life of the fort,306 and, it may therefore be p resumed that the fort
existed between Hadrian and Septimius Severus, and that it conneeted Jidava
with Hoghiz. When exactly the earth phase or, in our opinion,307 the second
earth phase came to a elose is as yet unclear; but the plan of the stone fort
suggests the type that frequently occurs in the time of Hadrian-Antoninus
Pius.308
The open ground of the Călmăţui Valley, lying in the south of the Oltenian
platn, is the best way of access towards the interior of the province leading
to the area where the Slăveni fort is to be found, The valley is guarded by
the small fort at Putineiu and by the camps at Bâneasa.
We -have started a survey of the castellum at Putineiu (fig. 60) because we
think that it is typical and the best preserved in the southern sector, in the
plaîn area.

34
 The vallum runs at some 150 m east of the fort, slanting down to the
Călmăţui waterside, and after crossing it, setzes the high ground running
west up its northern steep face; from here its eou rse can be easily followed.
It is about 1 m high up to the area of the Bâneasa forts, where it is obliterated
by the Turnu Măgurele-Roşiorii de Vede roade At about 50 m distance from
the vallum, the point that ensures proper visibility between the forts at
Baneasa and the low ground of the Călmăţui Valley, and with the Putrn:eiu
fort as well , is a mound, 25 m in diamete r , that probably served as a sig-
nalling tower.
The fort at Putineiu is square in shape, its eastern half being covered by
vineyards. We have sectioned its north and south parallel sides as well as the
west one and we have begun to uncover the south-west angle. The profile of
the south side (Limes, Szekesfehervar , 1978, p. 349, fig. 3B) provides a
picture of the fortification elements around the gate where the ditches get
narrower to allow a gap in front of the gate, Considering that the gate was in
the centre of the south side, the latter is 53 m long (including only the agger)
and being equal to the west one. The agger is made of brown-reddish soil,
having here and there layers of yellow soil; on its top was a elay-faced
timber palisade which was destroyed by burning and its remains were deposited
on the slope of the agger. We can safely state, for the moment, that the
fort had two gates on the north and south side, as no remains of the west side
gate or of the road have been identified as yet. The south gate is framed to
the east by a structure of hard timber which was burnt and which unfortunately
could not be properly examined , being partly covered by vineyards.
In the castellum there is just one cultural level and one l evel of habitation,
although on small stretches the successive existence of two phases for via
sagularis have been ascertained. As excavation s are in progresa, the dis-
covered material has not yet been studied; no fragment of terra sigillata
or imitation of it has been discovered; a rushlight of the Firmalampe type
and an Antoninus Pius sestertfus (so badly preserved that its date could not
be exactly dete rmined )-are so far the earliest evidence to be used in dating
the fort. Pottery material will be more precisely dated after examination,
At Băneasa, in the southern sector of the fortified line across the Olt are
two forts-the large one lying south-west the small one and having some
characteristic features which the small=scale diggings conducted by G.
Cantacuzino, 309 could not clarify. Actually, it is a vallum that separates
the fort into two almost equal parts from north to south (fig. 61). One of
the sections was cut across the ditch around the north side while the other
was across the agger only.

The published data have revealed that both the sides and the angles were
provided with a vallum of beaten earth, 0.70-0.95 m in height (fig. 62).
Over and above it was a wall built in earth and timber with a variable width
of 3-4 m. 310 But more particular evidence which should allow the construc-
tion system of the camp to be determined will only come from further exca-
vation; however, what seems to be most certain is that the earth "wall " is
actually the ruins of a burnt Holz-Erde-Mauer. 311 The inner slope of the
agger is tough, and at its top was the via sagula.rts , therefore, the agger
served as a base to the wall built of earth and timber. It appears .that the

35
timbers served as a horizontallink between the two "fences" of the wall (that
is the external pal isade and the Internal base for the watch walk). 312
At Băneasa, at Ur'luieni and săpata de jos, at each of which two forts are
to be found, the major task is thei r dating and the establ ishment of thei r
chronological relationship. We think that the very existence of double forts-
whose simultaneous use cannot be explained-provides ready confirmation of
the fact that the line transalutana has more than one phase of habitation and
that it is risky, to say the least, if not altogethe r unscientific to say that
these forts coincided exactly in one single pe riod , before examining them,
The large-sized fort at săpata de Jos was excavated by V. Christescu in
1929-1930,313 when the plan of the site (fig. 65) was approximately ascertained
and some data concerning the building technique were obtained. Though the
excavations were careful enough they did not reveal significant evidence on
account of the digging technique employed at the time and so little information
on the life of this camp314 is as yet avaîlable, The wall appears to have
been built of brick, though just three cour'ses have been found, and V.
Christescu considers that its upper part was built in earth and timber, 315 as
these bricks were not bound with mortar but with blackish clay. The binding
qualities of this kind of black clay that replaced the mortar lead us to think
that the solidity of the structure was not affected.
What appear's to be a peculiariţy of this fort-a wel l=beaten , smaU-sized
~- will be encountered as .we have already seen, at the Bâneasa fort and,
in all probability, at Urhrieni , too.316 Further research will surely examine
more carefully this kind of "agger", specific to these three forts on the
transalutana line. From the appearance of the section published by V.
Chrrstescu it appears that the "agger" did not serve as a watch walk so that
the possibility is not excluded for it to have been supported by wooden pillars
whose carbonised remains have been discovered th roughout the excavated
site.317 The fact that the reinforced support of the brick wall is not dis-
continued in the stretch where the gates318 are supposed to have exi sted con-
firms the idea that it did not serve as an agger.
The plan of the area A of the site cleared on the north-west side of the
camp, at the point where a gateway is supposed to have existed , is far too in-
complete to help us reconstruct its shape. In case a gateway reaUy exi sted
at this point, which seems highly probable , then the porta praetoria must
have been on the north-east side. The towers occur at the angles of the fort
but they were dismantled, as was the rampart, and ohse rvations by digging
did not trace the course of the wall s ; only the east angle was better preserved
with a view to recovering its plan. In order to clarify the considerable un-
certainty that has remained319 on account of the excavation technique used
much more careful research is required, so much so as most of the site of
the fort has already been dug.
Though the sides of the second fort, 320 lying south-east of the large one,
run parallel with the latter, it must have faced a different direction and we
think that the traces of burning ~ on the plan) found in the centre of the north-
west side are the ruins of the porta decumana. Unfortunately, at both these
camps the details concerning the timber structures, about whose plan and
construction technique evidence is as yet insufficient, have been overlooked.

36
 The fact that both forts are surrounded by a common ditch321 would suggest
that they were in use at the same time, at least at a certain time. V.
Christescu considers that the two forts were contemporary throughout thetr
exi stence , which he establtshes, on the ba sis of the hoard of coins discovered
in the praetentura of the large fort, dating from AD 205-242. As we have
already stated, this treasurecannot be indicative of the early life of the fort.
The rest of the coins found in the south-east part of the large fort322 must
be related to the use of the structure having a brick paving, searched on this
site. The published data so far do not allow us to date this fort to earlier than
the middle of the 2nd century; but, on the other hand, we should add to our
knowledge about these two forts to be able to establish their chronology and
their historical evolution.
At any rate, it must be recall ed that B. Mitrea323 denies , and with good
reason, the soundness of the argument that the beginnings of this fortified
line could be related to the hoard of coins discovered at săpata de jos; we
think that the discovery of new archaeologtcal data is required before we try
to determine the chronology of this line of fortifications the more so as we
have noted that actual search of the archaeologrcal sites has been replaced by
hypothetical assessments.

Dacia Porolissensis
The creation, early during the reign of Hadrian324 of the province of
Dacia Porolissensis had primarily to meet a military requirement. The
province as a whole was an "early warning zone" fortified in depth and, in
our opinion, its remarkable military potentialtttes were designed to support
the empire's policy of offensive defence against the populations in the
Barbaricum.
In 123325 Dacia Porolissensis was stiU the base of ala II Pannoniorum,
ala 1 Brittonum CR and of cohors 1 Britannica-that had taken part, under the
command of Q. Marcius Turbo, in the battles waged west of Dacia in 118-119.
The list of the troops stationed in Dacia Porolissensis were eompleted by
those whose soldiers were given the honesta missione in 133: ala Siliana CR,
ala 1 Tungrorum Frontoniana, cohors 1 Britannica ,cohors 1 Hispanorum,
cohors 1 Batavorum ,cohors 1 Aelia Gaesatorum, cohors II Brittonum and
cohors 1 Ulpia Brittonum . Of these, it appears that ala 1 Siliana,326 ala
1Tungrorum Frontoniana, cohors 1 Batavorum, cohors Aelia Gaesatorum,
cohors II (Nervia) Brittonum were brought to Dacia under Hadrian. The
available epigraphic evtdence indicates the camp where the bulk of these
troops were stationed. It is not yet indicated precisely in which camp was
garrisoned ala 1Brittonum-Britanniea327 and I. I. Russu assumes that it
preceded the ala II Pannoniorum at Gherla 328 (fig. 66); but, as the latter
had come to and had remained in Dacia, presumably at Gherla, 329 immediately
after the wars, the question of the fort held by ala 1 Britannica has to remain
unsolved. Cohors 1 Batavorum is attested in the proximity of Potaissa (the
modern Turda) by the evidence from two tombstones330 found at the Sinmihai;
another inscribed tombstone mentions the troop at Romita;331 we consider
that further discoveries are required to provide confirmation of the presence
of this unit at the two points mentioned by these inscriptions.

37
 The ala 8iliana was the garrison of the fort at Gilău, on the road Napoca-
Bologa, at the confluence of the Someşul Cald with the Someşul Rece. The
site of this fort was re-used in the Middle Ages as well as in our times,
Today, the park of Rakoczy Castle is over this site. The first systematic
excavations were carried out in 1949;332 in recent years, the research
group of the University of Cluj-Napoca has resumed large-scale excavattons,
but the results are as yet unpublished333 (fig. 67). The stratigraphic evidence
and observations related to the pottery finds uncovered in the area p roved
highly promising. The sections cut across the eurtain walls c1early showed
the extstence of a sertes of replacements of the original forts on the site.
There is general ag reement that the primary fort made of earth started in
T'rajan ' s reign. In this phase its agger was made of homogeneous black
c1ayey soil334 and, apparently, traces of caespites and of beams set horizon-
tally have been identified. The earthwork fort does not appea.r to have been
in use very long ; its ditch was filled up with debris of the fort and later
with agger material. The rampart wall will have been built after the levell ing
up of the vallum which would serve as a berm of about 4.5 m , 335 with a singl e
ditch. The stone construction will have been re-used when this particular
ditch was filled up, the berm heightened and another ditch dug. This is the
only way to interpret the outline of section C (fig. 68); where the filling of
ditch IIa and ditch ID:> is wrongly non-differentiated.
Inside the camp (fig. 67), sections have been cut across the barracks336
and on this occasion two coins337 were found beneath a Ievel of yellow soil
just over the layer of baked adobe , which are considered as a terminus post
quem for the building of the stone fort. The section appears to indicate,
however, that this was the third reconstruction as underneath the thick layer
of baked adobe is one of burnt matte r laid over the level of humus. 338 It is
probable that the prefect of the ala Siliana , based at this point throughout
the Roman rule, had under his command a sector of the Iimes at least until
the arrival of the Fifth Legion Macedonica. We think that the fort at Bologa
(Resculum) belonged to this sector and maybe al so the Buciumi fort whose
beginnings could date back to the end of 'I'rajan+s reign , some tirne before
119339 during Marcius Turbo's actions, in whieh ala 1Brittonum, ala II
Pannoniorum and cohors 1 Britannica also took part. It was after 114 that
cohors II Nervia Brittonum340 stationed at Buciumi341 carne to Dacia.
Excavations on the site of this fort began under the guidance of Professor
Macrea who, apart from some brief reports, 342 did not succeed in working
out the data obtatned ; his former collaborator-s, who are continuing research
on the si te (fig. 70), have published a monograph account containing the
results obtained until 1971. 343 Excavations indicate the existenoe of an
earth construction344 which must be dated either to the end of Trajan' s or
the beginning of Hadrian's reign, being connected with the coming of the
cohort from Pannonia.345 Examining the profil e of the fort at Buciumi we
note that the elements belonging to the earth phase 346 have not been made
c1ear enough.
In the section cut across the north angle (8 IX), (fig. 72) inside the tower
traces of burning were found, which may be interpreted as the remains of a
burnt wooden tower, corresponding to the stone tower but smaller in sîze ;
as a matter of fact, traces of a burnt wooden building, possiblyan intermedt-

38
ary platforrn on the curtain wall, have also been found in the section (not
given in the plan) cut parallel with S XI and 6 m north-west of it. We deem
it nece ssary to suggest that aur eoll eagues who are carrying out research at
the site of Buciumi fort should examine more carefully the component parts
of the earth construction. If the stone camp was built only late in the 2nd
ar early in the 3rd century347 at least two phases of the earth camp must be
presumed to have exi.sted,
The northern boundary-Iine was completed when the ala 1 Tungrorum
Frontaniana was sent to Ilişua. The fort lay on the Măgura plateau and
commanded the entire hilly area north of Someşul Mare,348 a typically open
land created by its trfbutartes. Our knowledge of this camp come s from the
systematic research carried out by C. Torma349 more than a century ago.
The area between Ilişua and Orheiul Bistriţei is easy of acce ss by a natural
roade We have already pointed out that we do not share the claim, as yet
insufficiently argued, that cohors 1 Hispanorum was initially based at Livezile
and only late r at Orhei. Research on this latter fort was far too limited as
just test diggings were carried out and its plan was merely sketched. 350
Inside the fort, the principia was only partly excavated and so was another
building considered to be a balneum , but which, to our mind, is rather a
praetorium. From the sketch of the plan it would seern that both constructions
had several pha ses of existence and that a number of transformations in the
original plan of the structure occurred, which are not identified.
Sutor-Optatiana351 is the only fort in Dacia Porolissensis whose date of
construction is not exactly known; but as a number of stamps were found
on its site belonging to a N(umerus M(aurorum) O(ptatianensium) and to an
ala milliaria, 352 which were dated to the mid-second century and the beginning
of the 3rd century, we are tempted to consider that this camp must have been
built under Antoninus Pius at the earliest.
Reviewing the present knowledge of the Roman defences in Dacia in the
first half of the 2nd century we cannot help noting that research is as yet too
limited to al low any final concluston to be drawn.
As we have shown above, very few forts have been dated on the basis of
archaeologtcal arguments , having resort, as a rul e , to epigraphic or
numismatic evidence, which, more often than not, are not worth processing
on account of thei r lack of precision.
In a b rtef study, N. Gudea made an attempt to examine the earth phase
of the forts353 making up the defence system in Dacia, coming to the con-
clusion that it was organised "unde r the form known today immediately after
the eonquest. Subsequent alterations and later additions seem probable but,
at any rate, none of them is known today with the exception of the fort at
Turda (Potafssa) held by legio V Macedonica ". 354
This conclusion could be accounted for by the preltminary nature of the
investigation since the avatlable data, far from complete, of course, show
quite clea rly that the defensive system in Dacia was subject to changes
throughout the almost two centurtes of its existence.
The results of investigations concerning the earthwork forts are not
relevant either, 355 as it is considered that "the wooden framework (if any)
was used during the period when the earth vallum was formed",
39
The Earthwork Forts

It is a certain fact that most of the investigated forts were initially butlt in
earth and timber. Both research in the past and more recent inquiries did
not attempt to harness the informatton providedconcerning the type of earth
and timber construction. Even when traces of the timber structure and
caespites were unearthed these were not reproduced in the plan so as to make
reconstruction possible and to provide information relevant to the construction
technique. For the moment, only the plan sketched following the excavations
we carried out at Rucăr contains enough data which could help us to recover the
vallum reinforced with timber of the fortlet; when completed by additional
information coming from further investigation this plan will allow precise
reconstruction of the structure. From our observations at Rucăr it is notlce-
able that the turves did not serve as facings of the vallum : they were used
in making up the core in the stretch between the external pal isade and the
supporting pillars of the watch wall.

Radu Florescu has recently produced a synthetic study of the Dacian

defences built in caespites,356 making good use of the results of archaeological
work at Drobeta, MăIăieşti, Bumbeşti , Baneasa , săpata de jos and Buciumi.
Even if caespites were really traced at MăIăieşti, and a murus caespiticius
is attested epigraphically at Bumbeşti, we do not think that the rest of the
above+mentioned forts might have employed the same technique. Reviewing
the data known so far we hold the opinion that there were seve ral different
types of wood and earth constructions in Dacia. Caespites have been identified
for certain at MăIăieşti and at Rucăr but the possibility is not excluded for
them to have been used in the constructions whose ~ consists of black
soil- (humus) alternating regularly with yellow soil such as the one at
Orheiul Bistriţei, or of black soil only as at Gilău. 357 Though the avatlable
data do not afford the opportunity of reconstructing the vallum built in turf-
work, we consider that there is a considerable difference in the way in which
turves were used as a mere facing of the vallum, or in the case when the latter
was wholly built of caespites.

If a turf agger of the The Lunt358 type may be reconstructed at MăIăieşti,

it would seem that at Micia the early phase consisted of a Holtz-Erde-Mauer,
and the two external frameworks were connected by horizontal beams. 359 A
similar system is suggested by exeavations at Hoghiz and Bâneasa. The earth
wall at Baneasa was built upon a flattened vallum or on a specially laid out
terrain.360 At Porolfssum Pomăt the filling between the beam structure361 ed
consisted of stone rubble.
A eommon feature of the earth phase .in most of the excavated forts is the
~ made of soil comtng from the ditch, faced externally with boards or
with caespites; for the moment, however, no traces of timber or turf were
found either at Brincoveneşti, Românaşi, Buciumi or Putinetu. At this last
camp , where on account of the dark grey colour of the soil the traces of the
pillars in the plan are not visible, thei r marks are apparent in the burnt soil
deposited in the ditch and at the base of the agger when the fort was destroyed. 362

That there are differences in the construction of earth camps can be noted
even where excavations are stiH in an early stage or where incomplete obser=
vations ha ve been made available in excavation reports-which entitl es us to say
that additional and more careful digging is called for.

40
The stone Forts
Without excluding the possibility that too little information on the original
constructions in wood has been forthcoming from the archaeological work
conducted at the castella at Arcidava (Vărădia), Angustia (Breţcu), Drajna
de sus and Tihău, we think that the first version of these works may well
have been a stone construction.363 As the fortifications in the area of the
Cozia Range, along the Olt, were originally built in stone, late in
Hadrian's reign , we think that it is possible that the forts at Căşei and
Sărăţeni were of stone construction "from the very start.
According to the results of research conducted on the sites of the castella
at GherIa364 and Gilău365 it is considered that the subsequent replacements
in stone of the earthwork forts in Dacia started under Antoninus Pius. 366
On account of the deeply rooted idea that every single fort in Dacia had
just two phases-earthwork and stonework-the latter being possibly repaired
in the 3rd century, -it is generally considered that the earthwork forts lasted
for a long time and the fact is largely ignored that by therr very nature,
constructions of this type had to be re-built relatively often. 367
As there was no special concern for careful examination of the archaeological
finds, even in the cases where observations relevant to the existence of more
than two phases were obtained, it was not possible to fix thetr exact date.
More often than not, stone replacements were dated according to inscriptions,
but always building inscriptions, which has given rtse to situations such as
the one at Căşei where the camp was dated to the reign of Caracalla on the
basis of the dedication-tablet to Julia Domna368 found in the principia; it is
obvious that this inscription can by no means account for construction activlties ,
and even less so for constructions in stone.
Running the risk of being mistaken in some cases, we would not accept the
generally admitted dates of building of the stone forts, as it seem s to us that,
in most cases , the argumentsare not sound enough and have no meaningful
relation to the archaeological context exhibited by the site under investigation.
It is our wish to raise this issue for proper discussion and to foster interest
in the whole range of problema posed by archaeological work and in fixing
the chronology of the various pha.ses in close relation to the context provided
by archaeological, epigraphic and numismatic evidence.

41
 CHAPTER 5

THE ANTONINECONTRIBUTIONTO THE ORGANISATION

OF THE DEFENCE WORKSIN DACIA

The replacement in stone of the Dacian camps has been associated with
the destruction brought about by the wars with the free Dacians fought under
Antoninus Pius.369 It appears that the partial obliteration of the fort at
Gherla can be accounted for not only by the rebuilding of the principia but
by the fact that a hoard of coins dating to the period from Vespasian to
Antoninus Pius370 was but-ied in its site.
Under Antoninus Pius the Roman armies in Dacia beeame stronger-a fact
probably necessitated by the warfare both on the frontier Iines and inside the
province. The presence of cohors IIII Hispanorum, cohors I Ubiorum371
and of vexillarii Africae et Mauretaniae Caesariensis is attested for the first
time in the diplomas of Dacia Superior; the camp at (fig. 74) InIăceni372
was the ba se of cohors IIII Hispanorum, which replaced the troop of raeti
that had been displaced to along the road Dierna-Tibiscum. Cohors I
Ubiorum373 was also garrisoned on Daciats easte rn boundary.
The question whether the displacement of these two cohorts to the eastern
frontier line is proof of the Romans' intention to complete the frontier defence
works on this line will only be answered by future research. What we know
now is that starting with the Antonine period every single access-way to the
province was bloeked by forts.
The defence of the Banat sector of the frontier ltnewas also a principle
concern in the retgn of Antoninus Pius. As we have already noted, the road
Lederata-Tibiscum was no longer defended by troops as they had been dis-
placed from the camps at Arcidava, Centum Putea and Berzobis and, probably,
virşet. The road from Dierna to Tibiscum, by Mehadia and Teregova, was
not used, as had been thought, during the Dacian wars, precisely because
it crossed a narrow opening guarded by mountain ranges, which would have
been to the Dacians' adtantage. Anyway, if no early Roman fort374 is known
to have existed at Dierna, the camps at Mehadia and Teregova must be of later
date as cohors VIII Raetorum, which was brought here only in the mid-second
century, 375 took part in its eonstruction. It is unfortunate that the results
of the excavation at the site of the eamp at Mehadia , carried out by M. Macrea,
have remained unpublished ;376 at the Teregova camp, partly obliterated by
a tributary of the Timiş, test diggings were carried out in 1969377 which
nevertheless fafled to clarify the date of the earth constru ction ; therefore,
untillarger-scale excavattons are carried out we consider that cohors VIII
Raetorum was responsible for its construction. It appears that the construetion
of defenee works on the Dierna-Tibiscum road must be a ssociated with the
fact that a number of latrones were at work in the zone of the Mehedinti

42
 mountains, as attested by inscriptions on tombstones found on the sites of the
forts at Mehadia, Zegaia and Slatina Timişului. 378
Wedo not think, however, that the construction of camps along the Dlerna-
Tibiscum road eould be taken to imply that this line was made the western
boundary of Dacia &lperior; it would seem that it was the lower course of
the Tisza that marked this frontier line and that only shortage of data rendered
the question of the western boundary of the province of Dacia difficult to sol ve.
The castrum at Micia will have had to be strengthened with a new unit;380
the diploma of 144 is the first to mention ala I Hispanorum Campagonum-
whose preaence here is amply attested epigraphically. It is probable that
the coming of this ala to Micia coincided with the construction of the stone
fort. Recent exeavations on the east side revealed a brick bearing the stamp
of Legio XlITG381 in the filling of the ditch of the earth fort, which demon-
strates that it was only after Legio Im Flavia Felix was rel ieved and Legio
XIII Gemina started acting in the southern regions of the provin ce of Dacia
&1perior382 as well , that the replacement in stone eould be started. There
was enough room in this castrum (180 by 360 m in size) for a large number
of troops; the fragmentary inscription (CIL m, 1343) found at Micia reading:
ala I Hispanorum Campagonum, cohors II Fla via Commagenorum, coh. I
Alpinorum (?), coh. I Vindelicorum, numerus Campestrotum, numerus
Germanicianorum, and Numerus Maurorum Tibiscensis, suggests temporary
'buildtng or military activities participated by the troops stationed at Micia and
by those at Tibiscum ;383 therefore, the presence in the castrum of ala I
Hispanorum Campagonum, cohors II Flavia Commagenorum and, at a certain
moment, of a Numerus Maurorum Miciensium, appears certain.
Excavations of the camp at Micia, partly obliterated by modern buildings,
have brought to light stretches of the rampart wall, the south gate (fig. 23)
and the south-west angle, The wall is 1. 8Om in width, being built externally
in opus quadratum (1. 40 m) and internally in opus incertum384 (0.40 m), The
south gate-tower is in opus quadratum on a base of rough boulders. This
seems to us to be of very special interest and we suggest that, by cutting a
seetion across the wall , the possibility be studied for it to have been wholly
built in opus quadratum and to have been subsequently consolidated by an
extension of its width with a section in opus incertum. The sections cut
across the south and east sides (fig. 22) have revealed that the ditch along the
rampart wall was used in two different phases ; in the second phase the berm
was heightened byaprox. 30 cm, and was covered by fallen rampart material
when the wall was demolished-which, however, could not be considered to
be the final destruction of the camp as a whole.
Recent excavattons (L. Peteulescu, Cercetări în castrul roman de la
Micia, 1976-1977, in preparation) have brought to light barracks with walls
parallel with the short sides of the camp. These barracks had been originally
built in wood-pillars and boards faced with clayand came to an end when
compl etely demolished by a drastic fire. The latest eoin dates from 165-166
(BMC 1290) and this demolition has been accordingly associated with the events
during the Marcomannic wars. In this case, the principia and the praetorium
appear to have been of stone or perhaps of timber, on a stone foundation.
These observations concerning the barracks were used in explaining that the

43
camp was rebuilt in stone only after the Marcomannic wars. For economic
reasons, the construction in opus quadratum was abandoned in Septimius
Severus' reign at the latest (Luglf, Tecnica edilizia romana, 1957, p. 332);
we consider however, that the stone wall of this camp was built prior to the
Marcomannic wars and we advance the hypothests of the existence of the camp
with a wall in opus quadratum, principia and praetorium of stone, and wooden
barracks. We think that the possibility is not exeluded that the component
parts of the stone fort were also rebuilt after the Mar comannic wars (L.
Peteulescu noted two versions of the via sagularis of the stone fort) and for
the demolished barracks to have been rebuilt, this time, in stone. Despite
the shortage of data coming from excavations the few observations concerning
the life of the fort of Micia are of a nature to upset the oversimplified theory
of just two phases in the history of the largest fort holding auxiliary troops
in Dacia Superior.
The victortes won over the Dacians were p robahly celeb rated at Sarmizege-
getusa Regia, 385 too; but it remains to be seen whethe r these celebrations
could be taken to imply that the war was waged as far as this part of the
province. Excavations carried out at Orăştioara de Sus386 did not reveal
sufficient evidence which should provide a complete picture of the local
historical background.
The stone phase of this camp would seem to be relattvely early and, given
the shape of the gate387 it is believed to precede the events of 157-158.
It was at this time , or possibly later, that a Numerus Maurorum Hisp.388
was in garrison at Ampelum=-Zlatna, in a camp as yet unidentified on the
ground, probably destgned to secure defence of the gold-bea ring region.
Information from epigraphic and literary389 sources coordinated with
the data exhibited by the latest coin from the hoards discovered at Viştea
(Cluj County) and sălaşuri (Mureş County)390 suggest that the battles of 156-
157 took place both in the province of Dacia Porolissensis and on the east
frontier-line of Dacia Superior.
Excavations conducted at Porolissum, on the site of the fortlet of the
Citera hill, have revealed a coin dated to the thne of Marcus Aurelius
Caesar, found in the mortar of the pediment of the north tower of the east
gate,391 which made it possfble to date the construction in stone ; without
relying on archaeologteal or epigraphic evidence it is assumed that the larger
camp on the Pomăt HUl was built in stone in the same period. 392
At Gh&rla393 the principia was re-built in 143 and excavations under wayat
GUău must be directed to the confirmation or invalidation of the hypothesis
that the stone camp was buflt under Antoninus Pius ;394 A. Buday thinks that
the replacement in stone of the earthwork defence at Ilişua was the work of
Antoninus too.395
In Dacia Inferior Antoninus Pius continued the construction of frontier
defences begun by Hadrian. The diploma of 140396 records a number of
three alae and nine cohortes plus one numerus equitum Illyricorum. Epi-
graphic evidence found in Dacia Inferior also shows that Numerlis Maurorum,
Numerus Surorum and Numerus burgariorum et veredariorum were in garrison

44
here. As only two military diplomas referring to the armies stationed in
Dacia Inferior were found we are not in a position to follow the movements
of troops to and from Moesia Inferior and Dacia Inferior and to determine when
exaetly coh. 1 Tyrorum sagittariorum, cohors II Gallorum and coh. 1 Aug.
Nervia Brittonum started being in garrison north of the Danube, in Dacia
Inferior. Recently, a number of stamps of ala Gallorum were found at
Boroşneul Mare which could be taken as ala 1 Claudia Gallorum Capitoniana
in Dacia Inferior rather than ala Gallorum et Bosporanorum stationed in
Dacia &lperior. 396a Actually, at Boroşneul Mare where the site of a camp
smalle r than one appropriate to hold an ala quinquagenaria was unearthed,
some stamps of the ala Palmyrenorum were also found. 397
The wars with the free Dacians-Costoboccii were al so waged in Dacia
Inferior and it was probably on that occasion that, in 142-143 and later in 157,
T. Flavius Priscus Gallonius Fronto Marcius Turbo was nominated prolegatus
et praefectus Daciae Inferioris. 398 1. Piso399 points out that Gallonius Fronto' s
authority in his capacity as praefectus was exer'ciaed outside the province,
as well as in Wallachia or even in southern Moldavia, considering that the
army of Dacia Inferior might have been engaged in the war waged in eastern
Transyl vania alongside the troops stationed in the castra lying along the
Transyl vanian Olt.

45
 CHAPTER 6

THE REIGNS OF MARCUS AURELIUS AND COMMODUS

(The Marcomannic Wars)

The war fought during the reign of Antoninus Pius was, probably, a
prelude to the major conflagration that broke out on the northern frontiers
of the Roman Empire in the days of Marcus Aurelius. 400 Large--scale
military actions were carried out in Dacia between 166 and 169/170, affecting
the frontiers and disturbing the peace within the provtnce. 401
The hoards of coins unearthed indicate, geographically, the directions
from which Sarmîzegethusa Ulpia Traiana402 was menaced, According to
archaeologtcal evidence the destruction at Micia and, maybe, at Tibiscum
can be dated to around the year 17Oas naturally any penetration from the
west could hardly avoid an encounter with the troops stationed in these two
camps. The sites at Inlaceni , 403 on the east border, and at SlnpauI4U4
yielded two altar-a dedicated to Lucius Verus which have been a ssociated with
the military actions carried on in the area.
Test t renches in the east side of the fort at ~mpaul405 (fig. 75), measuring
approx. 133 by 150 m , revealed two phases in the Iife of the fort-the earth-
work fort and its replacement in stone with the (fig. 76) wall planted into the
agger of the earthwork defence, The camp used to form part of Dacia
Inferior, as Numerus Maurorum S was in garrison here. 406 Excavations
at Sinpaui also revealed a hoard of coins the latest being issued in 167407
which provides certainty over the relation between the altar inscribed pro
salute Luci Veri and the events of 167-169 in Dacia.
The deva stating fire that destroyed the camp on the Citera-Porolissum
has been associated with the fact that barbarian invaders had set upon Dacia
Porolissensis. With a view to consolid ating the defence of the northern
province, mena ced from the east and from the west , the Legio V Macedonica
was brought to Potai ssa-Turda, The castrum held by this legion408 had a
defensive wall 1. 70-2 m wide, faced with ma sonry externally and in opus
incertum in the interior. When the bastion at the north-east angle was
revealed, the two construction periods of the fort were evident as well as
the thickening of the internal side of the walls of the original fort (from 1. 70 m
to 2,250 m), of uncertain date. 409 It is interesting to note that excavations
in the south-east angle bastion in 1958 showed that its walls were only 1. 10 m
in width. 410
The west gate, partly uncovered, is guarded by two rectangular towers;
both the rampart wall and the lateral wall of the towers are 1. 7Om thick.
On the north side of the castrum is a 'platform-abutment", apparently a
subsequent addition to the rampart wall, perhaps after the Roman epoch.411
 AU these preliminary data, bring to the fore only part of the great problems
posed by the investigation of this fort whose commencement has been dated
for certain to 167/168. Further research is called for before any conc1usions
can be drawn regarding the existence or non-existence of a primary fort at
Potaissa, as it is presumed that cohors 1 Hispanorum and, possibly, a
detachment of legio xm Gemina were its garrison immediately after the
Dacian wars.
Actually, the battles went on even after Dacia ceased to be threatened
directly. In the north, the troops in Dacia, retnfo rced with men brought
from other provinces412 waged war against the free Dacians and, possibly,
against the Bastarni. 413
Excavations on the site of the fort at Potai ssa (fig. 77) have revealed an
altar414 whose inscription indicates legio V Macedonica alongside with legio
VII Gemina. Stamps of legio VII Gemina were found also at Porolissum and
the presence of a vexillatio of this Iegion, or of the legion as a whole, in
Dacia Porolissensis was associated with the Marcomannic wars, 415 possibly
after 180, if we take into account that legio V Macedonica was surnamed pia
constans. The fact that detachments from Hispania took part in the fighting
in northern Dacia is also attested by the inscription C. Sulpicius Ursulus
praefectus symmachianorum Asturum.416 It is probably now that the Dacians
living on the borders (Caasius Dio LXXII, 3, 3) are requested to keep to
orders, while Commodus prohibits thei r settling in the territories lying near
the frontiers (Cassius Dio, LXXII, 3) and starts being concerned with the
constructton of burgi and presidia. 417
 CHAPTER 7

THE SEVERAN PERIOD

The thriving Roman life in the three Dacian provinces during the reign of
the Seve ran emperors p roves that the measu res taken to neutralise the after-
math of the Ma.rcomannic wars had the desired effect. Moreover, this is
the time that marks the apogee418 of the system of defences,

There is ample epigraphic evidence that vast prog rammes for rebuilding
forts in a ll the sectors of the Dacian limes419 were carried out. In 201,
the walls of the camp at Bumbeşti42O vetustate dilapsos were rebuilt in stone.
It is generally considered that the fort with muri caespitici that lay on this
site was in operation until that time; we wonder whether after cohors IIII
Cypria was relteved , the fort was occupied by a different troop before its
replacement in stone by cohors 1 Aurelia Brittonum 00 Antoniniana. 421 The
fort has a rampart resting on an ~ of compact422 clay of undefined
shape (fig. 78).

Late in the 2nd century an earthwork fort423 was p robably built on the
Drobeta- Vllcan Pass road, lying on the left bank of the river Motru, at
Cătunele (fig. 79). Taking this into account, we are tempted to think that at
the turn of the 2nd century the rebuilding of forts designed to guard the road
Drobeta and Sarmizegetusa Apulum-Potaissa, became a necesstty.y.

In the west sector of the Dacian border, military construction work is

under way ; epigraphic evidence shows that the thermae at Micia424 were
rebuilt in 193. In the north sector, the large fort at Porolissum (Pomet), 425
and the forts at Bologa, 426 Buciumi427 and Căşei, 428 were also rebuilt.

The stone fort at Porolissum-Pomăt wa s dated by M. Macrea only to this

period according to inscriptions on the gateways. We think, however, that it
is much more Iikely that these particular inscriptions refer to the replacement
of the fort or, possibly, only of the gate towers. Moreover, we think that
the same holds true for the sites at Bologa, Buciumi and Căşeiu, where the
camps were refurbished for functional purposes until, little by little, they
turnedinto real fortlets late in the 3rd and early in the 4th centurtes.

We have said nothing, up to now, about the so-called limes Porolissensis

or about the network of burgi and towers discovered along the north-west and
north-east bounda.rtes , between Bologa and Orheiul Bistriţei, because investi-
gations are well under way and there is no precise evidence as to their
chronologyand function. Of courae, the commencement of this system of
defences or of some of its component elem ents , as they stand today, could
go back to the days when the Dacian Itmes was built; but it is certam that
it acquired its final form during the reign of Caracalla429 at the latest.

48
 The ea.rl iest data concerning the system of walls and towers erected
opposite the strong fo rtified centre of Porolissum were (fig. 8 O) brought to
light during the excavations of 1959. 430 In front of the castra and of the
municipium, 431 a vallum was built along a length of 4 km; the earth rampart432
alternates with sections of wall, 433 and in place s stone towe rs and two burgi
becom e apparent; in the large burgus, 434 a coin from the time of Nero was
found in a burnt barrack-which enabled M. Macrea to consider that these
defences made up a well-ordered system p robably constructed during the
first years of Roman rule. 435 For a stretch of 225 m, the wall runs along
two diffe rent cou r ses , at a distance of 18 m from each other (fig. 81); the
internal and external vallum each has a tower in opus incertum. 436 This
complex defence system facing the forts on the Pomăt and the Citera, as
well as the complementary earth rampart, made M. Macrea think that "Its
immediate function was to block the main gateway giving access to the interior
of the province from the north-west i. e. the Ortelec Valley or Poarta
Meseşana. It was a real keystone in the defensive sy stem of north-west
Dacia as a whol e , articulating its two component parts-the lim e s along the
Meseş and the Oile along the Som eş. ,,437 ---

The Me seş line438 of deferices consisted of 61 towers, varying in shapes

and dirnen sions , lying at uneven di stances , in relation to the terrain, and
sited at points that en su red good visibility or p rovided a connection between
the forts or among them sel ves , The stud ied towers are square in shape and
built in opus incertum; most of them do not exhib it an occupation l evel in
the interior, the material being spread around-which suggests that the level
of 'habitation ' was at the upper level s of the towers. Next to the square
towers, circular ones were identified also bu ilt in opus incertum (Bonciul
Hill ). Though the small quantity of pottery material found on the sites of
these towers was not studied to establ ish thei r precise date, it is certain
that not all of them are contemporary , at Poieni, 439 for instance, two towers
were succes sively built in the same place. It is p resumed that most of the
excavated towers had a stone base and a timber superstructure, but it is
likely that some of them , those whose visible remains are particularly high,
had an upper storey also made of stone. 440 With a view to secu ring control
over secondary valleys, a number of burgi were created, that could accomodate
a few soldie rs , 441 whil e on two shorter stretches an earth rampart442 was
apparently built. Resea rch carried out by S. Fe rencz i ha.s identified two
signalling-towers next to the camp at Gilău ;443 therefore, the line along
the Meseş was not necessarily connected with the castella in its immediate
vicinity; actually, the connection was ensured in depth as far as the two
camps at Gilău and Gherla, 444 held by alae, and it is to be presumed that a
system of sending signals existed at Potaissa-the camp where the legion was
based- too.

In keeping with the project of systematic research in the Dacian limes

S. Ferenczi undertook investigation of the north sector. The results obtained
during his field seasons 445 were publ ished , and the observations on the ground
are to be checked with more particular archaeological surveys. It has been
thus ascertained that in the foreland of the forts at Tihău, Căşei and Ili şua
towers and burgi were built intended to intercept every enemy movem ent
along the frontier line and to send signals to the troops lodged in the camps.

49
Likewise, it has been remarked that there was a difference in the way towers
and burgi were located in relation to geog raphic features which we re also
taken into account when the troops that were to garrison each and every
sector were chosen.

In the sector between Tihău and Căşei, the towers and the camps for
auxtl iary troops (generally held by infantry troops; it is only in the 3rd
century that an ala electorum is based at Căşei) are spaced at an average
distance of 10 km at the most but in the area opposite the Ilişua fort the
distance is 10-25 km:

" ... Beinahe alle Elemente der Ve rteidigung so verteilt (waren),

dass jedes g leichzeitig mit mehreren andern Posten optische (und wenn es
moglich war auch aku sti sche) Verbindungen haben konte .... Auf Grund der
Beobachtung en , die wir wăh rend unserer Unter suchungen im Gelănde machen
konnten, ergibt sich, dass es, wenn es in dem von uns bisher durchwanderten
Abschnitt von 185-190 km Iăng e auch keinen du rchgehenden WaU und Graben
hat, deren Anlage wegen dem mehr ader weniger unebene Terrain grosse
physiche und wirtschaftliche Anstrengungen erfordert hătte , t rotzdem offen-
sichtlich ist, dass NW und N Dazten ein gut organisiertes, in die Tiefe
entwickeltes Verteidigungssystem verftthgt hat , das aus Wacht-und Siegnal i-
sierung sturmen , aus burgi und castella bestand und sich auf eine mllttartsche
Verkehrsartere stutzte, die inmbgltchst gerade Linie im Rtlcken der vorder-
sten Linie verlief. " 446

Excavations of the north-east and east sector of the site are under way but
following the discovery of some burgi at Domneşti, 447 Băile Homorod448
and of the tower at sărăţel449 as well as field resea.rch carried out by 1.
and G. Ferenczi, in all Iikel ihood a system of interception and control similar
to that on the north and north west frontier also existed on the access way to
the province.

The dating of these additional fortifications remains to be established by

further archaeologtcal work; it must be pointed out aga in , however, that
not all of the forts were concurrently built and that they were not in operation
all at the same time, A fact we could be quite certam about is that in thei r
efforts to develop an offensive defence system during the Principate the
Romans made the best use of the territory of the province of Dacia. The site
at Căşei has yielded among other inscriptions no fewe r than seven altar s
dedicated by the beneficiari consulares of legio XIII Gemina or legio V
Macedonica, with inscriptions reading: "agens curam stationis, 450 iterato
agens statione, 451 agens in munere stationis, 452 or agens Samo cum regione
Ans(amensium) sub signis453 and agens sub s~nis Samum cum re~ione Ans
(amensium)454 and agens sub signis reg. Ans.55 C. Daicoviciu4 6 compl eted
1. 1. Russu' s remarks concerning the significance of these inscriptions and
considers that statio was an outpost sited in front of the castrum at Căşei
in the territory inhabited by the Dacian tribe of Ansamenses457 -which
"moreover was a dependeney of the province (being closely cont roll ed by it)
rather than part of the territory of Roman Dacia strictly speaking : statio
Samensis was a 'p reamble ' to the annexation of the Ansamenses: land and of
its ma.in city, Samun, to the province. ,,458 This particular statio was
identified with the castellum at Negrileşti, 459 and a parall el was drawn with

50
the statio at Negreni , located opposite the Bologa fort, where a Resculum,
vicus Anartorum460 is apparent. We think that the fact that a statio Resculi-
from the time of Marcus Aurelius-is mentioned on a wax tablet found near
Alburnus Maior largely contributed to make this problem clear, The mile-
stone at Almaşul Mare testtfies to the exact distance to R(esc)ul(um) vicus
An(arjtorum , that has thus been identified with Bologa. Statio Resculi must
be regarded as a military station463 in the vicinity of the mining centre of
Alburnus Maior; if we are sure that the identification464 is correct, then
the fortlet at Negreni , 465 15 km west of Bologa, could be r'elated with a
statio of the type of the one at Samun, in the (non-atte sted) regio Anartorum.

For lack of archaeological arguments nece ssa.ry for dating the initial
phase of the fortlets at Neg reni and Negrfleşti we cannot possibly say when
exactly the ar rangement of an advanced line of stationes on the north and
west frontier started; the tablet found at Alburnus Maior could be taken as
an ante quem for their exrstence. The difference between the terms in the
inscriptions prior to Gordian and those of his own time , brought to the fore
by C. Datcoviciu, has been ascribed to the changes brought about by the
administrative organisation of the area where the statio was sited, when
soldie rs were also given land. 466 But it may be going beyond the avail abl e
evidence about the Dacian populations settl ed opposite the line of forts along
the north frontier to say that they were the Ansamenses , indicated by inscrip-
tions, and to define thei r territory. We consider that the territory whe re
statio Samun was sited was included in the Empire. We are rathe r tempted
to bel ieve that the case when a bf. cos. was in action here is different from
that in which it administered a regio and the difference consists in the fact
that until Al exande r Severus civil settlements were prohibited in the area
which was a military territory on the frontier-line, exclusively held by the
troop. However, after the reign of Alexander Seve rus, 467 more exactly in
the 3rd century the settling of civil populations was al lowed , probably in
exchange for service in the army, and the territory will become a regio
under military administration outside city organi sation. 468 If systematic
research is carried out in the zone at Câşei and Bologa it will be possible
to prove on the basis of archaeologtcal evidence whether the Ansamerises
population were settler s coming from outside the frontiers, who had penet rated
this military zone with the Emperor's con sent , or just a tribe incorporated
into the province from the very start, and compel led to leave the territory
which was turned for a time into a military frontier zone. 469 The thriving
economy of the regions lying south of the Carpathians is supported by the
activity for improving the system of frontier-defences; the road along the
Olt is rebuilt; the fort at S1ăveni (fig. 82) is replaced by a stone471 construc-
tion erected by ala I Hispanorum and a basilica castrensis is added to it
(IDR, II no. 499). The stone fort is 198 by 176.60 m in sîz e and a special
kind of soil is prepared at hand (?) for a hard platform made of rubble courses,
c1ay, limestone and bricks. 472

The results of the large-scale excavations carried out at S1ăveni have not
been published yet and we know of no document concerning the stratigraphy
of the strongest castellum on Dactats south-east frontier line; we are,
therefore, compell ed to take for granted, the existence of two phases=-earth
and stone. At a certain moment, the fort had a Wehrgang supported by a
brick wall without a base , 0.90 m wide, 473

51
 As no accounts of the field notes have been published we can say nothing
about the relation between the watch-walk paved with bricks on the crest of the
earth~, 474 and the one made of beams supported by a brick wall. Any-
way, the fact that the foundation ofthe ~ is laid upon a layer (0.10-0.15 m)
of debris of brokeri stone475 poses the question when the stone wall was
constructed and to which construction phase this ~ belongs. It appears
that the camp was built in opus guadratum, at Ieast the gates and towers
where a few stone bloeks were found, the rest of the wall being obliterated.
It is of average size , to hold an ala quingenaria; it has 12 barracks, 8
contubernia and 4 stables476 of quite similar dimenstons, about 42.7 m.
The purpose of the fort at SIăveni was to give access to the province from
the east, on the Călmăţui Valley, which was guarded, on the transaluta line
by the three castella at Putineiu (1) and Baneasa (2). It was al so intend ed to
keep order along the south sector of the road along the Olt.
We think that the line of defences across the Olt, generalIy assigned to
Septimius Severus, 477 now reached its apogee. The fort at Jidava (fig. 83),
built in stone in an as yet unknown period, is held by a unit including mounted
soldte rs, too, as one of the inscribed bricks reads Aurelius miles turmaris. 478
In fact, this is the only indication relating to the troops that were in garrison
in the forts along the road across the Olt. It ha s been said that detachments
of the troops stationed along the Olt were displaced here.
Apart from the forts located on the two pa.rallel fortified Iines along the
Jiu river, another fort is known at Răcari (fig. 84), repeatedly excavated
but insufficiently studied480-and we take the liberty of making this remark
as long as it has been dated only on the basis of the presence here of a
N(umerus) M(aurorum) ~ (aldensium).480a This fort can be dated on the basis
of logtcal arguments even to the first decades of the Roman rule in Dacia, but
it is only more particular study of the evidence and further research that
could determine its purpose and its certain chronology; for the moment
the road on which this fort was constructed is not known, either, the more
so as no systemattc research has been carried out on the ground to allow
final conc1usions to be drawn concerning all the Roman remains found in
central Oltenia. Anyway, the unit that left its stamp on the bricks found in
the Răcari fort seems to have been in garrison for a time in the camp at
Sinpaul. 481

The system of defences in the three Dacian provinces , that was now at its
height , was not really imperilled during the early decades of the 3rd century;
we only know indirectly about a state of unrest under Septimius Severus482
and about a posstble conflict with the Carpi in the reign of Caracalla. 483
Actually , as testified by the great number 0[484 inscriptions, Caracalla took
special interest in the armtes of the three Dacias, while Alexander Severus
"carries on the work of military consolidation of the province north of the
Danube, started by Septimius Severus. "485

52
e

1)
CHAPTER 8

THE LASI' DECADES OF DACIA

The repeated in roads by the CaI1Ji and the Goths486 in the fourth decade
of the 3-rd century caused great anxiety in the Dacian provin ce. A hoard of
cotns unearthed in a burnt barrack at săpata de jos indicates that the transalu-
tan line was forced throughout, and given up in 245-247, when the bands of
invaders penet rated Oltenia, a fact testified by the discovery at Ioneştii
Govorii488 of another hoard of coins bu rted in the layer of burnt matte r in the
eastellum. 489 The main crties were fortified. 489 The latest inscriptions found
in the castella in Oltenia are from the reign of Philip the Arab and the latest
coins are issued by Trajan Decius, These data entitle D. Tudor to consider
(8
that Dacia Malvensis was in as critical a situation as Moesta Inferior. 490
On the othe r hand, the intra-Carpathian region of the province does not appear
to be imperilled, although 18 hoards of coins were buried in the area, and at
Apulum (CIL III 1054) C. Vale rfus Serapius extends his thanks for being a
Carpis liberatus.

Naturally, during the troubled time of the successive barbartan waves and
of the crisis brought about by the military anarchy, the situation in the three
Dacian provinces dete'riorated ; but shortage of data affords little opportunity
to conelude that the crisis had really reached an acute stage. The fact that
no post-Trajan Decius coins were found in the Oltenian forts could not be
taken to imply that those forts were not rebuilt; Roman coins are known to
have generally been introduced into Oltenia from south and east, as otherwise
proved by the prevalent trends in commer'eial activity492 and the channels by
way of which cultural influence493 penetrated the province. Actually, ancient
literary sources and archaeological finds prove quite clearly that the main
target of the Carpo-Gothic raids were the Balkan provinces , whence they
headed , passing through Dobruja and eastern Wallachia. 494 In the conditions
of a general monetary crisis, 495 rendered ever sharper by the repeated Inroads
from the south-Danubian provinces , a slowing down even to the highest degree
in the circulation of new coins was but natural. Therefore, only further
archaeologtcal research and more minute study of every single find will clear
up the problem of the replacement of forts in Dacia Malvensis and in the other
two intra- Carpathian provinces. It has been established that the date of
abandonment of the site at Slăveni was the year 249-250, because the last
inscription dedicated to Philip the Arab was not hammer-wrought and the
latest coin in a hoard found in one of the barracks was issued in 247/248.496
It must be recalled, however, that the abandonment of the fort at Slăveni-
the strongest fort on the entire Olt-within the wider context of the abandon-
ment of the line across the river, gives free access along the road leading to
Romula and to the interior of the province as a whole. We venture to enqui re
whethe r all the replacements of the fort, at least until 271, have been traced

53
archaeologically and whether the rich 4th century pottery material, the coins
and the Christian ritual objects497 discovered do not carry in themselves an
indication of the replacement of the fort or of the establtshment of civil settle-
ments at that time. Our question is all the mor.e justified as it has been
stated that "no traces of burning exist on the site of the fort which proves that
the timber structure used in building it rotted on the spot without being burnt. "498
As a matter of fact, the same holds for most of the forts in Dacia, because
the coins found on the limes, and those in the intra-Carpathian region as well ,
do not go beyond Maximinus' reign.499 As far as the east border is concerned ,
it has been suggested that its abandonment occurred as early as the tirne of
GaUienus.500 An idea that has increasingly gained ground lately, following
archaeologtcal surveys in the Iimes , is that the province of Dacia was not
abandoned as a result of the victorious barbarian raids, 501 as most of the
studied defence works did not end by being violent1y destroyed502 by the
invaders. At Porolissum, when the gate of the camp at Pomăt503 was forti-
fied, an inscription dedicated to Trajan Decius ' vvife was set up-which suggests
that this fort was rebuilt even later. In fact, the last Iarge -scale rebuilding
of the roads,504 and a retrteval of the military situation in the province,
are strongly supported by the epigraphic evidence dating from the time of
Trajan Decius=-surnamed restitutor Daciarum505 and reparator disciplinae
militaris, firmator spei Romanae. 506
The inscription Iaid by cohors VI Nova Cumidavensis Alexandriana in
honour of Julia Mamaea at Cumidava was built in the walls of a late building,
while the gates were bloeked up at some time. 507 At Inlaceni , the gateway
bastion was successively rebuilt untillate in the 3rd century as here, too,
the debris coming from older monuments508 was used as building mate rial.s,
At Buciumi509 and at Bologa, 510 archaeological diggings have brought to light
evidence testifying to some alterations in the internal organisation of the fort,
which herald suhsequent changes in its basic traditional functions as well ,
possibly even its being used by civilians. 511 The stamp common to both
Iegions based in Dacia512 found in the site of the fort at Mehadia could be
dated to the per-iod preceding or Immediately suceeding the abandonment of
the province. The reconstruction of all these forts, apparently inspired by
the purpose of adjusting the eamps and constructions inside the ramparts to
new requtrements , are generally dated to the time prior to the ultimate
abandonment of the disused forts; but Iife comes back to normal in the 4th
century as some of them contain evidence definitely belonging to that time,
For Iaek of thorough study of the archaeological finds discovered at the limes
and of observations concerning the upper levels we are not in a position to
know for certain about the last decades of existence of the province of Dacia.
studying the available archaeologtcal data relating to south-east Dacia
K Horedt, brings out some crucial elements concerning the construction of
defenee works in this region in the second half of the 3rd century.513 Thus
he points out that "muss man sich allerdings von der Vorstellung freimachen,
dass die Preisgabe Dakiens zwischen 268-275 ein unfassender und vernichtender
Vorgang gewesen ware. Zweifellos bedeutete er ein einschnetdendes staats-
politisches Ereignis das sich bereits vorher in einem langsamen Niedergang
ankttndigte, aber das Geprăge und dte Zeitstellung der rtnntschen Sachkultur
nicht in dem Masse beetntrăchtigte, wie man mei sten s anzunehmen geneigt
ist. "514
54
 -
ins Considering the claim made by E. K. Chrysos515 that the abandonment of
an Dacia does not imply that the Romans renounced the territory of the former
ttle- province from the legal standpoint, and that the Goths continued to live in the
territory between the Danube and the Carpathian s as foederati a chapter of
.hat particular interest for future research is opening up; the more so, as the
nt. 11498 idea of the everlasttngness of the Roman sway over their former provinces
use (Proeopius , De bellis, VII, 32-33) prevafled over forelgn policy relationships
even after the setting up of the German Kingdoms.
-u,
rned,

tests
,
T

r
"

it
"

er

55
 :t\OTES

1. C. Patsch, BeWtge, V, passim.

2. It has been considered that the province of Moesia was created in the early
years of the Ch rLstian era (A. D. 15), that it covered only the western regions,
which were afterwards to form Moe sia Superior, aud that the eastern
territories between the Haemus and the Black Sea formed part of the
Odrysean client state. In a recently published study entitled The Client
Populations in Wall achia , we have tried to p rove that this hypothesis is
g roundl eas , pointing out that we were incl.ined to think that those particular
territories were formed into a military command dependent on Moesia,
probably cal led praefectura ripae Histri-a title that occurs as praefectura
ripae Danuvii during the reign of Domitian, some time even before it was
turned into the province of Moesia Inferior. Em. Dorutiu-Botlâ ,
Mil Itarg ren zen , II, p. 289-296.

3. CIL III, 1698 = ILS, 2281.

4. Florus, bellum dacicum, II, 28 (IV, 12), 18.

5. B. Gerov, Epigraphische Beităge zur Geschichte des moesrschen Limes

in vorclaudischer Zeit, AASH, XV, 1-4, 1967, p. 91-10l.

6. Res Gestae, V, 49; V. Pârvan, Getica , p. 733; R. Syme, Danubian

Papers, 1971, p. 148-149.

7. Strabo, VII, 3, 10; Floru s, II, 18; Tacit, Ann, IV, 1; CIL XIV 3608 =
ILS 986 V. Pârvan, Getica, p. 733; D. M. Pippidi, Contributii la istoria
veche a României, 1967, p. 306; R. Vulpe, Studia Thracologica, 1977,
p. 133; J. Klose, Klientel Randstaaten, p. 124-126.

8. Roman defence works ha ve been identified on the left bank of the Danube,
at: Pojejena ; Dierna, Orşova-rescue digging prior to the construction
of the storage lake of The Iron Gate s Hydropower station did not trace
the rematns of an early Roman fort in the area , but the research was
far from exhaustive; Insula Banului-a late Roman fort (4th-6th century)
has been identified (D. TUdor,OR4, p. 279); Schela Cladovei-a fort
now obliterated by the railway , it appears to be of 'I'rajariic date (D.
Tudor, OR4, p. 300-301); Drobeta ; Hinova-a fourth-century quadribur-
gium measu ring 38.6 by 25.4 m searched by M. Davidescu ; it has been
associated with the so-call ed Brazda lui Novac de Nord-a vallum running
from Drobeta to Ploieşti whose function is being investigated; Batoţ!..-

56
 late Roman fort functionally connected to the one at Hlnova : Izvorul
Frumos-a fort (If any,) compl etely obl iterated by the Danube ; Izvoarele-
a late Roman defence work (Materiale, II, p. 400-403); Desa= said to be
a late Roman fort (coins Augustus-Constans-D. Tudor, o. R. 4, p. 274);
Bistreţ-two castra and the remains of a bridge or harbour have been
identified; republican and imperial coins were discovered on its site
(D. Tudor, o. R. 4, p. 265); Zăvalu-a fort obliterated by the Jiu River;
The time when it was in u se cannot be ascertained ; Sucidava-no 2nd
or 3rd century Roman fort was discovered ; Izlaz=-one ar two large forts
on the Danube bank (D. Tudor, o. R. 4, p. 279) to be included on the list of
those whose chronology is to be established by archaeological research
they p robably served as fulcra for the limes along the Danube ; Flăminda
(Poiana)- a fort p:;rtly obliterated by the Danube; Reca-Petroşani-stamps
and tiles of legio I Italica ha ve been di scove red (CIL ITI 12522); starting
with Vespastanrs reign the legio was ba sed at Novae (RE, Ritterling, XII,
1410); Dichiseni; Gura Ialomiţei (V. Pârvan, Getica, p. 126).
9. Dio Cassius, LXVII, 6-10; Jordanes, Getica XIII, 76-78; Suetonius,
Domitian, 6; C. Patsch, Beitra.ge, V, 2, Der Kampf, pp. 1-44; V.
Pârvan, Getica, pp. 111-113; Gsell, Essai sur le regne de 11 empereur
Domitien, Paris 1893; R. Vulpe, Dacia, N. S. V, 1961, p. 370 and DID
II, p. 74; Istoria Romaniei, I, 1960, pp. 297-300'; D. Tudor, Podul de
la Orlea-Dolni Vadin folosit de Cornelius Fuscus, in Latomus XX, 1961,
501, sqq, and O. R. 4 p. 30.
10. R. Florescu, "Les phases de construction de castrum Drobeta" in
MiliUtrgrenzen Roms, 1967, p. 14~. Fig. 2.

11. G. Popilian, Ceramica romană in Oltenia, Craiova, 1976, p. 24. The

vase is dated to the time of Domitian- Nerva.

12. It seem s that terra sigillata products were only occasionally brought to
the Dacian Kingdom, as they are lacking in the Dacian fortresses. See
r. Glodariu, Relaţii comerciale ale Daciei cu lumea elenistică şi romană,
Bucureşti, 1974, pp. 213-215; N. Lupu, Apulum, XVI, 1978, p. 81.
- - .- -

13. R. Vulpe, Dacia, N. S. IV == Studia Thracologica, pp. 140-145 (with previous

bibltog raphy and archaeological argumenta). V. Ptîrvan , Getica , p.112-
120. Dom itian kept the Banat and Oltenia as V. Christescu claim s ,
Istoria Militară a Daci ei , 1937, p. 14.

14. R. O. Fink, JRS, 1958, XLVIIT, pp. 102-116.

15. Roman forts have been traced at the points:

Filipeşti, Răzvani (?), Oratia (?), Saringa (?), Ciolan (?), Năeni. (? ),
Răduleşti (?), Gherghiţa (?), Mălăieşti, Tirgşorul Vechi, Drajna de Sus,
Rucăr TIR, L. 35; during research on the site at Oratia we have identi-
fied a point that might be a Roman defence, but confirmation of its existence
will only come from further archaeological excavation,

16. R. Vulpe, Rev. Arch. 34, 1931, 2, p. 237; N. Gostar, Apulum, V, 1964,
p.164.
17. Ritterling, R. E. XIT, 1697-1698. R. Syme, JRS, XVIII, I, 1928, p.41
leg. XI CI. based at Vindisch during the war waged by Domitian with the

57
 Catti; but I. Szilagyi, AASHII, 1-2, 1953, p. 171, n. 314, considers
Legio XI Claudia' s coming along the lower Danube prior to 'I'rajan ' s reign.
Filow, Die Legionen. , p. 65 considers that it had come to Durostorum as
early as in 101.
18. The alluston that Fuscus's bones are no longer buried in foreign land
might be taken to lend support to such a hypothesis. Martial, VI, 76; 1-6:
Anyway, the occupation of some territories north of the Danube could be
envisaged, as the first scenes on Trajan' s column, till the battle of Tapae,
represent a peaceful advance of the troops and preparations for a longer
campaign=-V. Christescu, Istoria Militară a Daciei romane p. 14.
At Berzobis two phases have been ascertained archaeologtcally but
publ îshed accounts do not provide certain chronological data. It is certain
that Leg. IIII FF will come back to Mo esta Superior in 117-118 at the
latest, Within the fort, at the principia (we also took part in the excavation s
car rted out on its site in the summer of 1965) the two phases are clearly .
defined by a destructive fire that could have taken place etther in 105, or,
given the discovery of a mid-first-century legionary helmet (D. Protase,
L. Petcule scu , Banatica III, 1975 p. 85-89) after Domitian 's wars with
Decebalus. In this case, it could have been a (tempo ra ry) fort u sed during
the time of Domitian's wars in Dacia.
19. We are not going to enter into detail s about the wars; we only intend to
trace, as far as posstbl e, the course of the wars on the ground. Sources
giving references to the Roman wars:
- Cassius Dio, 67, 9
- Eutropius, 7, 23
The most complete interpretations:
- C. Patsch, Beitrage V, 2 passim
- Paribeni, Optimus Pr'inceps , 1. p. 214 sq.
- Istoria României, I, 1960, p. 301-316.
- C. Datcoviciu , La Transylvanie, p.77-91.
- R. Vulpe, D I D, II, p. 68-97.
- H. Daicoviciu , Dacia de la Burebista la Decebal p. 321-335,
20. Priscianus VI, 13, p. 205
21. Tabula Peut., VI.
22. D. Tudor, M. Davidescu , 'săpăturile arheologice din castrul roman de la
Cătunele, jud. Gorj', Drobeta , 1976, p. 62 sqq espeeially p. 77.
23. Though the authors consider that his fort is Iikely to have been built during
the Dacian wars, for the purpose of guarding the Lainici Pass, and to have
been rebuilt some time during the 3rd century, before agreeing with it we
await eonfirmation of the existence of a certain replacement within the
castrum. The pottery fragments found in the vallum might well come from
a civil settlement prior to the 3rd century fort.
24. Inscription CIL III, 14485,a.
25. CILIII, 14216, 27.

58
26. CIL XVI, 57 = I D R, 1, no. 2. W.Wagner, Dislokation, pp. 127-128.

27. The first diggings were conducted by Grigore Tocil eseu in 1897 and after-
wards by Niculaescu-Plopşor , D. Tudor, BCMI, XXXIII, 103, 1940,
p. 18 sq published the results of this research project and his own obse r-
vations.

28. Gr. Florescu, Materiale, IV, 1957, pp. 103-108.

29. D. Tudor, op. cit., p. 20. Although no test diggings were made to confirm
this hypothesis, R. Florescu, Ilfov, File de Istorie, 1978, p. 91, thinks
that the existence of trenches on either side of the ~ are indicative of
the steepness of its slopes.

30. Materiale, IV, 1957, p. 1l0andMateriale, V, 1958, p. 420; Thefort

measu res 126 by 115 m, its long sides facing N-S; porta praetoria on
the north side ; in 1897 it was ascertained that the vallum wa.s 14 m long
and the ditch 11 m long. C. Petolescu, Oltenia, 1980, p 103 sqq.
31. Information conveyed by Gr. Florescu in BCMI, XX, 1927, p. 44. C.
Petole scu ha s started to excavate an earthwork fort that lay west of the
Jiu, at the point ealled Pl eşa , most probably a fort for a marching
campaign; archaeological finds are quite f ew (information from C.
Petol.escu ).

32. Leg. V. Mac left Oescu s for Troesmis in 105-106 and from 167-168 to
275 was ba.sed at Potaissa; Ritt eri ing , op. cit., 1576, Filow, op. cit.
N. Gostar, Analele Univ. Al. 1. Cuza, laşi, sect. ID, t.XI, 1965, p. 5
and 109, states that the stamps of Leg. V Mac discovered at Bumbeşti,
Aliobrix, and Bărboşi (lst pha.se) are contemporary as thetr lettering is
cut in the same design.

33. The Jigoru fort-C. Daicovtciu , Al. Ferenczi, Aşezări Dacice, p. 43-
measu res 310 by 240 m, its long sides facing north-south; the east and
south gates can be seen on the surface and have a tutulus each; 1. Glodariu,
In memoriam C. Daicoviciu, pp. 154-155; C. Daicoviciu and Al. Fe rencz.i,
op. cit. , p. 54.

34. Virful lui pătru is shaped Iike a quadrangle with unequal sides 228 m
(north) by 211 m (south) by 203 mreast) by 192 (west). The gates, approx.
9-21 m in width, have a tutulus each consisting of vallum and ditch. 1.
Glodariu, op. cit., pp. 153-154 and C. Daicoviciu, Dacia, VII-VIII, 1937-
1940, pp. 311-312.

35. Comărnicel-Three castra are to be found in its immediate vicinity.

Judging from its position, it wa.s the meeting place of the troops coming
from mountain roads from two different directions. The first two are
actually a double fort lying in the north; it measu res 300 by 195 m, its
long stdes facing north-south. The third (300 by 260 m) Iies at some
500 m distance and faces east-west.

36. Muncelul-a fortlet stzed 60 by 65 m; H. Daicovîciu , A. M. N. , 1, 1964,

pp. 117-118.

37. C. Daicoviciu , Istoria României, 1, 1960, pp. 305-308.

59
38. 1. Glod a riu , 'Itinerarii posibile ale cavalertei maure in războaiele
dacice.' In memoriam Constantin Daicoviciu, 1974, p. 154 sqq.; 1.
Fe renczd, Apulum, XVI, 1978, p. 120 sqq,

38a. C. Daicoviciu , Dacia 1, 1924 p. 225 n. 1. H. Daieoviciu , In memoriam

Constantini Daicoviciu , 1974, pp. 111-114.

38b. Cassius Dio, LXVIII 8.

38c. H. Daicoviciu , Dacia de la Burebista la Decebal, 1972, p. 328.

39. 1. Gloda riu , AMN, VIII, 1971, p.86.

40. D. Tudor, Fronti'eres romains (1972), 1974 p. 243 and Dacia, NS, VIII,
1964 p. 350. C. Vlade scu , G. Poenaru-Bordea, Prontfere s romaines ,
p.255.

41. C. Vlade scu , G. Poenaru-Bordea , "Ca.strel e had rianee din valea car-
pati că a Oltului ' in Oltenia, studii şi comunicări, 1974, p. 47, sqq.

42. Shaped like Castra Tragana Tabula peut. VI, VII. At first it was
identified with the modern Gura Văii (Gr. Tocilescu, Fouilles, p. 120)
and more recently with Simbotin (D. Tudor, Materiale, IX, p. 245).

43. Three forts have been traced here (OR4, p. 279) two of each on the
bank of the Danube and the third on the bank of the Olt. We think that
one of the forts on the Danube, possibly built prior to Trajan 's reign ,
continues to se rve as a bridgehead for crossing the river at this point.
The troops stationed here are not attested epigraphically.

44. D. Tudor, 'Le role defensif du camp romain de Slăveni sur le Iimes
alutanus en Dacie Inferieur' in Militltrgrenzen, II, p. 399. The early
earth-work fort (the gates , the principia and six barracks were built in
br iek) has been dated to the inter-war pe riod , and is the work of ala 1
Hispanorum. Only conclusions of the long-term excavations in the fort
have been published. We are under the impression, however, that the
pha ses in the life of the fort were not as clearly defined as has been
stated; among other things, that in this early phase stamps of the troops
that took part in its construction were di scove red , namely: leg. V Mac. ,
leg XIII G. ala 1 Hisp. , ala 1 Claudia (Gallorum Capitoniana-N. Gostar,
Arh. Mold. , IV, p. 179-181), Coh. 1 FI. Commag. and Coh. 1.
Brittonum. But, Leg. XIII G. could not have taken part in construction
works here in Trajan's time, as it lived and acted in the territory of
Dacia; stamps belonging to this legion might have been brought to this
area after its withdrawal south of the Danube under Aurelian.

45. Salvage diggings carried out by our squad in 1975, a scertatned the
existence of an earthwork fort that was rebuilt in brick during the reign
of Marcus Aurel ius at the latest. No evidence is avallable concerning
the commencement of the life of this fort.

46. D. Tudor, Dacia, NS. VIII, 1964, p. 347-348. A stamp inscribed in

relief P Sin tabula ansata has been read P(edites) S(ingulares). Other
troops indicated here are 9oh. II FI. Bessorum and vexillationes of Leg.
XI CI., Leg. V. Mac. and 1 Italica; a fragmentary stamp scrv 16.1,
1965, no. Il 1 X B[ ha s been read by D. Tudor as Coh. Il X B [atavo rurm.

60
 In N. Gostar's opinion in Arh. Mold. , IV, 1966, pp. 183-184, it is
Coh.] B[rittonum) X being the sign of the milliaria attested here
(Tocfl escu , AEM, XIX, 1896, p. 8).

47. Data concerning the finds at Buridava are to be found in: D. Tudor,
Dacia, NS, VIII, 1964, p. 345-sqq; SCIV, 16, 1, 1965, p. 186; scrv,
17, 3, 1966, p. 393; scrv, 18, 4, 1967, pp. 655-660; SMMIM, 1-,-
1968, p. 17-29; Front{eres romatnes, Mamaia, 1974, p. 240;
Buridava, Vllcea , 1972, pp29-34 and 162-168 and Buridava, Vll cea , 1976,
pp.41-44.

48. B. Mitrea, "Penet razfone .. ', EDR, X, 1945, p. 148; Eug. Chirilă,
I. Pop. Apulum, VII, 1, p. 156.

49. Sections have been cut only across two sides of the castrum, its northern
part being obliterated by the construction of a pier and the southern one
eroded by the Danube. The few archaeological finds prese rved to this
day must be painstakingly recovered.

50. Results of excavations carried out in the 19th century ha ve been publtshed
by D. Tudor afte r the manuscripts prese rved in the Gr. 'I'ocil escu ffles,
Romanian Academy in Bucureştii, II, 1-2, 1936, pp.89-117; Bul. Muz.
Milit. , IV, 7-8,.1940-41, pp. 98-101; BCMI, XXXVII, 1944, pp. 77-
82; SCS, Iaşi, IV, 1953, 1-2, p. 483.
Accounts of recent excavations have remained unpublished except
for a brief report published by Em. Popescu and Eug. Popescu in
Materiale, IX, 1971, pp. 251-263; no stratigraphic section has been
publ ished.
51. Materiale, IX, p. 262.

52. Ioana Bogdan Cătăniciu, SCIVA, 25, 2, 1974, p. 285 no 19 can]didus

[mil(es] leg(ionis) [XI CL f]ec(it), together with a fragmentary inscription
on a different brick LX[I CI] (D. Tudor, Studii şi cercetări ştiinţifice,
IV, 1-4, 1953, p. 484). Our hypothesis ha s been recently confirmed;
at Voine şti , north of Cimpulung the ruins of a hypocaust , possibly the
rernains of a bathhou se were revealed ; M. Badescu and the pupils of
a local school have turned up the remains of a fort (?) nearby (we have
not checked the information on the ground so far) uncovering some til es
bearing the stamp of Leg. XI Claudia.
Until further systematic resea rch is done, the possibility is not
excluded for these stamps to ha ve brought here from the Jida va fort.

53. I. Bogdan Cătăniciu, loc. cit. p. 284. The a rchaeolog ical evidence is being
completed, therefore, it has not been exam ined and published yet ;
however, according to ob se rvation s made up to now the material appears
uniform and can be dated to the beginning of the 2nd century A. D.

54. Chance find, exam ined and reported as a pape r to the Debating Society
of the Archaeological Museum in Piteşti by Florea Costea, History
Museum , Braşov.

55. N. Gudea, I. Pop, 'Das R{jmerlager in Rişnov' Cumidava, Braşov, 1971

(includes all previous bibl iog raphy),

61
56. Ibidem, p. 13. The stone version Itself ha s several stages and successive
rebuildings.

57. The early dating of the stone fort, ibidem pp. 13-14 does not seem to us
to be exagg eratedj analogtes drawn between the archaeological mate rial s
found at Hoghiz and Breţcu suggest the existence of a connection between
the south-Carpathian sector and that along the upper Olt. The earth-work
fort measu res 114 by 11O m, its long sides facing north-west-south-east.
The base of the ~ (in the second pha se , to our mind ) is 10 m wide;
it is unfortunate that we cannot asses the width of the p resumed Holz-
erde--Maue r as no scale is given; the earthwork fort has one single
ditch 3. 5 m wide and ] m deep.

58. See 15.

59. G. Diaconu, a. o. Dacia, N. S., XXI, 1977, pp. 199 sqq. The Pietroasele
fort (158 x 124 m) lying on a hil lock overlooking the plain to the east as
far as the Danube , has a wall 3 m wide, a base made of riverstones set
in mortar, and its superstructure is faced in quarry stone and emplecton.
Inside this fort are two Ievel s of settlement , represented by constructions
set deep in the alluvial soil. Archaeologtcal finds might be exclu sively
dated to the end of the 3rd century.

60. Gr. Florescu, 'Problemacastrelor romane de la MăIăieşti', Drajna,

Pietroasele In Omagtu lui C. Daicoviciu, 1960, pp. 226-227. Now,
Pietroa sele has to be left out.
61. C. Patsch, Bettrage , V, 2, pp. 184-185.
62. O. Fink, JRS, XLVrn, 1959, p. 115, as early as Domitian's days, given
the dating proposed for the pridianum.

63. Ioana Bogdan Cătăniciu, AMN, VI, 1969, pp. 478-480.

M. Chiţescu remarked that throughout the p re-Roman epoch the re was
similarity between the life in this territory and in the ea stern regions,
'Unele aspecte ale relaţiilor dintre Dicomes şi M. Antonius in lumina
descoperirilor numismatice, SCIV, XIX, 1968, p. 660.

64. Trajan' s Column-e-the scenes prior to the outbreak of the second war with
the Dacians,
Cassius Dio, LXVIII, 11; R. Vulpe, Istoria României, 1, 1960, pp.
517-530; Ioana Bogdan Cătăniciu, Populaţiile clientela re din Muntenia;
R. Syme, JRS, XLIX, 1959, p.32.
65. The road along the Ialomita Valley was suggested by V. Pâr van , R.
Vulpe, Dacia, IV, 1960, p. 333.

66. ms. Acad. RSR, 5137, p. 132, Tocilescu; the fort Iies 2 km south
west from the village of Filipeşti; it measures 340 by 500 m and its
long sides faces east-west. It wa s a temporary fort that connected the
Danube, maybe through Ba rboşt, with the sub-Carpathian zone, along
the Buzău Valley. V. Christescu, IMDR., p. 111, considers that this
castrum is a linking point with Durostorum, but we think the direct
connection along the Buzău Vall ey more plausible. As there is no
evidence regarding the chronology of the fort we cannot hazard to assign
it to Trajan, as it could well belong to later periods of Roman history.

62
67. Bărboşi, a fort covering approx 5000 sq, m (0.5 ha), located on a mound
overlooking the Siret Vall ey ; its planning cannot be recovered being
obliterated by modern constructions. Its function was to guard the road
leading to Transylvania, by Poiana and Angustia (Breţcu), in the Siret
Valley. The fort lay on the place occupied by a Dacian dava , probably
destroyed during the reign of Nero (Plautius Aelianus); the beginnings
of the Roman fort could not be determined but the coins discovered on its
site span the whole period from Trajan to Claudius II Gothicus (one of
the coins goes back to Vespasian); these coins as wel l as the archae-
ological evidence for the ea rIiest Ievel , made N. Gostar establish its
date to not later than the beginning of the 2nd century (N. Gostar,
Cetăţile dacice din Moldova şi cucerirea romană la nordul Dunării de
Jos, Apulum, V, 1965, p. 146). Stamps of Leg. V. Mac and Coh. II
Mattiacorum in two va.rtants and Classis FI. Moessica were discovered
in the earliest level (N. Gostar, 'Unitţile militare din ca stellum de la
Barboşi! , Danubius, 1, 1967, p. 108). It is probable that the fort was
garrisoned by a vexil latio of the cohort of Mattiaci as early as the time
of the Dacian wars; the troops of the Roman legions reached this area
safely without encountering any difficulties. Diggings are underway.

68. Excavations in the necropolis at Tlrgşor have revealed bath-hou ses that,
on the basis of the archaeological evidence , could be dated to the early
2nd century ; stamps of Leg. XI CI were also unearthed; the fort,
obvioualy an earth-work construction, has not been identified yet. Dacia,
NS. ,V, 1961, pp. 375-376; Materiale, V, 1959, pp. 619-629; Materiale,
VII, 1961, pp. 637-639; N. Simache, Din Activitatea Muzeului 1,
Ploieşti, 1956 p. 103.
The fort lay at the foot of the hilly area in the vicinity of the Prahova
Vall ey and we bel ieve that it used to ma rk the road leading to MăIăieşti
and Drajna; no plans or sections of the fort were made avail.able ;
despite careful examination of the bath-houses no accounts have as yet
been published.

69. MăIăieşg, at the point 'Cetate', on the bank of the 'I'eleajen , making
easy contact to the west with the Prahova Valley and to the east with the
Buzău Valley, the fort, measu res 150 by 180 m and has north south and
east gates; the vallum, with a ba se of approx. 8 m, was wholly built
of caespites 0.40 by O. 20 by O. 25m in sîze ; the berm is about 4 m wide
and the ditch 6 m wide and 2 m deep.
Three coins were found in the castrum (C. Zagoritz, Castrul roman
de la MăIăieşg, Ploieşti, 1940, p. 8). Obv, Imp. Traiano Aug. Ger.
Dac PM Trp Cos VPP laureate head right.
Rev. SPQR Optimo Princiei-Concordia stand ing left ; a palm branch
right, a crown left. and a coin (2) from 116-117 Cohen2 325, Mattingly
IIIp. 222, no. 1043and (3), Cohen2356, Mattingly , p. 224, no. 1051,
116/117 (SCIV, VI, 1-2, 1955, p. 274 and 277).
Chance diggings unearthed the stamp of Legio V Mac; the archaeologtcal
finds have not been subjeet to particular study.

70. Drajna de Ebs. The fort measures 200 by 176 m and cove rs approx. 4
ha. It guarded two valleys, Ogretin and Drajna, defending the passage
to Transyl vania. A peculiar feature of this fort is the fact that the

63
 external stone rampart is doubled by a wall running parallel to the former,
at 1. 90 m, with a space filled with beaten earth in between; the internal
wall supports the Wehrgang. No previous timber and earth construction
has been found but it is presumed that the stone fort is a replacement of
the timber construction. The occupation layer is uniform and contains
pottery material, fibulae, and coins that could be dated to the early
2nd century AD. Numerous stamps have been discovered, of Leg. V.
Mac. , 1 It. , and XI CI.; the stamps of Coh. 1 Commagenorum in three
variants.
Even the north gate (porta decumana) seem s to be a replacem ent in stone
of an ordinary gate, typical of the timber and earth-work forts-with
platforms=Internal turrets. Gh. Ştefan, Dacia, XI-XII, 1945-1947, pp.
115-144.

71. At the Transylvanian end of the Oituz Pass, is a stone fort that measu res
178 by 141 m and cove rs 2.5 ha. Excavations carried out in 1925-1926
and in 1950. The external rampart, in opus incertum, is doubl ed at
4-6 m distance by a second internal wall which supports the watch walk.
The gate and the angle towers built as an integral part of the Wehrgang.
The ditch was at 4.5 m-5 m distance and is sharply curved. The north
gate is provided with abutments making up platforms like those at Drajna
(porta decumana). The rest of the gate towers are square. At the angles
of the rampart are circular bastions 5 m in diamete r internally and
equal to the Wehrgang in thickness.
The existenee of an earth-work fort has not been a.scertained here,
either. In the 16th century a diploma wa s discovered on the site of this
fort, with date, 14 June 92 (CIL, III, 37), awarded to a soldier of the
Classis Flavia Moeaica. stamps of Coh. 1 Bracaraugustanorum, CIL,
III, 8074, 9) and of Coh. 1 Hispanorum (Veterana eq) (CIL III, 8074, 17)
have also been discovered.
M. Macrea, SCIV, II, 2, 1951, pp. 285-296.
R. Vulpe, Augustia in Omagiu C. Giurescu, Buc., 1944, pp. 552-559,
locates the ancient city of Angustta at Breţcu, Ptolomeu , Georgr., m,
8, 4.
West of the castellum is a bath-house and a civil settlement.

72. The fort at Hoghiz lies left of the Olt at a fordable crossing point from
the south of the Transyl vanian Plain. It seem s that on the right bank of
the Olt the ruins of a burgus-bridgehead were .found (G. Bako, SCIVA,
1, 23, 1975, p.141). A mas sive block ofbrickwork was seen in the bed
of the river, probably the pillar of a bridge (Materiale, 1, p. 790). The
fort measu res 220 by 165 m, covers an area of 3.6 ha, its long sides
face north-south. The traces of a civil settlement were found to the east.
Unl ike the forts at Drajna and Breţcu a timber and earthwork fort of the
KUnzig II type (H. Schănbe rger , Limes Forschungen, 13, p. 15) existed
here. The timber-earth wall was 3 m thick. It appears that ,ala 1
Asturum (CIL, III, 8074, 1) is responsible for the construction of this
fort afte r taking part in the Dacian Wars (ILS, 1350); there was room
within its ramparts for an ala quingenarta, and its matn function was to
guard a wide depression, which seem s appropriate to such a troop. an
account of small+scale excavations no internal buildings pertaining to

64
 this phase were revealed. K. Horedt, Materiale, I, 1953, pp.785-789.
K. Horedt, SCIV, I, 1, 1950, pp.123-125. D. Protase, Lim es , Szekes-
fehervar, 1977, pp.303-319.

73. Apparently, at least one of the sldes of the fort at Boiţa had a doubl e
wal l , but as no data have been publ i shed we are not absolutely convinced-
se Materiale, VI, 1959, pp. 429-437 and Materiale, VII, 1961, pp. 411-
420.

74. T. Bechert, 13.J., 171, 1971, p. 214.

75. Vezi nota 17.

76. J. F. Gilliam, Hommages a

Albert Grenier, Brussels, 1962, II, pp.
747-756, e stabl ishes the date of the pridianum before the end of the
Dacian wars.

77. M. P. Speidel, JRS, LX, 1970, pp. 142 sq.

In the area opposite Gradtşte, on the Cioclovina slope, excavations have
brought to light a vallum of impressive dimensions that barred a crossing
point along a stretch of 2. 5 krn ; 1. Ferenczi, Apulum. XVII, 1978, pp.
127-130 as sum es that it was built by Decebalus , the battles waged here
are demonstrated by the existence of the vallum of a Roman marching fort
(loc. cit. p. 129, note 20) and a subsequent burgus (60 by 40 m) within
its ramparts.

78. N. Gostar, Cetăţile dacice din Moldova şi cucerirea romană la nordul

Dunării de Jos, Apulum, V, 1965, p. 147; discoveries made at
(Bltca Doamnei) Piatra Neamţ.

79. The province of Dacia included the Banat and weste rn Oltenia, owing to
the fact that the troops displaced to the forts at Pojejena Sirbească
(Coh. V Gallorum), Drobeta (Coh. III Campestris) and Bumbeşti (Coh.
IV CyPria) formed part of Dacia in 110 (CIL, XVI, 57), the central
part of Transylvania as far as the Someşul Mare Valley. M. Macrea,
AMN, III, pp. 132-133, C. Daicoviciu, I. R., I, pp.348-356.

80. Systematic resea rch started also unde r Gr. 'I'ocil e scu+s conduct
(Fouilles, p. 118) to be subsequently continued by Al. Barcacilâ
('Drobeta' in L'Archeologie en Roumanie, Bucureşti, 1938, pp. 7-50)
and Gr. Florescu (RIR, III, 1, 1933, pp. 32-53).

81. 'Les pha se s de construction du castrum Drobeta ' , Milita:rgrenzen Roms,

I, 1967, pp. 144 sqq.

82. N. Gudea, 1. Uzum , "Cast rul roman de la Pojejena , săpăturile arheologice

din anul 1970'; Banatica, III, 1975, pp. 333-343; Banatica, IV, 1977,
pp.181-185: earthwork fort 142 by 179 m : stone fort 148 by 185 m :
vallum of clay with a base12 m wide, a wall with a ba se 1.5 m wide set
on the externa! e scarpment of the vallum levelled to form a 1-1. 20 m
wide berm , the ditch ha s an opening of 9 m and is 2.50 deep compared
to the level of the berm , the north and west gates are provided with
square towers (3.85 x 4.50 in size) with the external outside wall slightly
projecting beyond the rampart.
 83. W. Wagner, Dislokation, 140-141, the unit is stationed in Moeaia before
AD 75 when it is mentioned in the diploma of Taliatae, M. Mi rcovici ,
Epigr. st. V, 1968, p. 180.

84. Delmagyarorszag regisegleletei, I-III, Timişoara, 1897, 1906, p.59,

traces a fort at the point 'Jidin' covering an area of approx. 12 ha
(identified by Marsigli, Danubius, II, 1 map); moreover , Marsigli
mentions (op. cit. , p. 247) a Roman fort in the proximity of the village
(near the Serbian g raveyard) and a feudal squa.re=shaped fortress on the
Danube bank.

85. Unfortunately, owing to the fact that we have changed the theme of our
re search p roject , we have given up our concern with the Banatian zone
of Roman Dacia and these observations ba sed on ai r--photographs have
rernained unchecked on the ground.

86. Apart from the stamps of Coh. V Gall orum , some other stamps belonging
to Leg 1 Minervia we re found within the area of the vtllage=-that can ,
of cour se , be dated to the ttme of the Dacian wars (Mil Ieke r , p. 59).
Leg. IIII F. F. and Leg. VII CI. These latter legions may have acted
north of the Danube even before the conquest and afte r the abandonment
of Dacia (see Leg. VII CI. ).

87. Ptolerneu , ID, 8, 4. Tabula Peutîng; , VII, 3.

Excavations were carried out late in the 19th century (see B. Milleker)
and in 1932. Here, too, they merely recovered the planning ofthe fort
and its component parts. Gr. Florescu, rstros, I, 1934, p. 60-72 'Le
camp romain dtArctdavat. Size: 172 by 154 m. The long sides face
north-south, and the front side faces north; the wall is 1. 10 m wide,
the vallum 2.5 m wide; the section (fig. 13) across the east side, though
summa r ily drawn, provides valuable indications as to the existence of a
type of Wehrgang probably supported, internally, bya ser ies of pillars;
this would explain why the vallum is only 2. 5 m wide. Actually, what
Gr. Florescu considers to be the slope of the vallum is rather the
fall en rampart material; it is the only way to understand his remark
about the archaeological material discovered in the slope of the vallum
which he interpreted as proof of the existence of an early earth-work
fort (op. cit. , p. 63). The pillars have not been traced by excavations
that were directed to foUow the line of the wall. The distance between
this enclosure and the waU is fiUed with earth-a technique specific to
any Holz-Erde-Mauer. Just one layer of debris has been determined;
the principia and the viae were examined, Nothing is said about the
barracks which leads us to think that they were not traced, betng built
in wood.

88. This type of gate occurs very early with aU Roman timber earth works,
see S. Jahrb, XIX, 1961, p. 57.

89. Porta praetoria (3.80 m wide) is flanked by two towers, 4.65 by 8.40 m ;
porta decumana is provided with a simple entrance with towers, 2.80 by
8.50 m; portae principales, 3.45 m in width, have towers 3.15 by 8.50 m
in size. The fact that the rampart wall is thicker at places is proof that
there used to exist some platforms that outstripped the Wehrgang in length.

66

---- -
91. Gr. Florescu, op. cit., p. 71, Cohen, 2 259-all the three coins turned
up during excavations in 1932 were bu ried in the layer of burning: The
fire might have been the outcome of an enemy attack but al so of a deliber-
ate abandonment of the fort.
92. M. Macrea, Viaţa romană in Dacia, 1968, p. 38-establishes the date of
the stone version of this fort to the early years of existence of the Dacian
province.
N. Gudea, AIIA, Cluj, 1975, XVIII, p. 73 ... mentions Arcidava among
the forts having ai"}earth phase without, however , supporting this claim
by new archaeologtcal evidence.
93. op. cit. , p. 72. D. Protase , AMN, IV, 1967, p. 68, advances the view
that the data published by Gr. Florescu Iend support to the abandonment
of the fort early during the reign of Hadrian.
M. Moga, "Ca strul Berzobis', in Tibiscus, Timişoara, 1970, p.57
considers unfounded the hypothesis that the 'castrum was abandoned
militarily as soon as Leg. 1111 F. F. was relieved;, we think that the
numismatic argument could not be taken to lend support to the idea that
the castrum was re-used "by a different troop" as it was natural for the
coins to continue to be in use as long as a civil settlement was growing
up within the castrum,
94. D. Protase , Banatica, III, 1975, pp. 345-348, section s were cut across
the north-west and south-west sides of the fort, as well as across its
internal part , these two sides are protected by two walls (?) and two
ditches ; the crest of the internal wall measures 132 by 128 m, the
second ditch is at 13 m distance from the first along the north-west side
and only 8 m along the south-west.
95. The barrack mentioned by D. Protase , p. 347.
96. D. Protase AMN, IV, 1967, pp. 49-51, fig. 6.
M. Moga, Tibiscus, Timişoara, 1970, pp. 51-58.
F. Medeleţ, R. Pet rovski , Tibiscus, Timişoara, 1974, p. 133.
97. The castrum measures 490 by 410 m, its long sides facing east-west ,
the vallum is built of yellow soil, coming from the ditch; preliminary
reports present profiles of sections, but they are not located on the plan.
Taking part, as a student, in the diggings in the principia, an old man
told me in 1965 that they had uncovered large stone bloeks both at the
principia and on the north side; on the basis of this information the
possibility should be considered for all the gates of the castrum, not
only the principia, to have been built in stone.
98. D. Protase , AMN, IV, 1967, p. 51 = Congress of Epigraphy held in
London, 1967; I. Glodariu, AMN, III, 1966, p.430:
99. TIR, L. 34 sv Aizizis and Caput Bubali.
100. M. Moga, Rev. Muz., II, 1965, special issue, a brief account of the
first excavations. The castrum is in very good preservation (it measures
320 by 170 m); four levels of existence have been determined, the
earliest belonging to the time of the first Trajanic war. At the 1968
debating society, where reports of excavations were presented, this view

67
 was reconsidcred and it was stated that the castrum had three phases ;
a small+si zed earthwork fort; a stone fort enlarged to the north over
the ruins of a civil settlement ; publf shed accounts also point out that
the la st replacement was built after 159/160 as a tombstone inscribed
with this date was found in its rampart (M. Moga, AMN VII, 1970,
p. 138 = IDR III, 1 no. 167). (Ma(uri) Sy(mmachiariil.
Comments upon the troops that were in garrison in the fort were publrshed ,
according to the stamps found, inscribed C 1 S, M 1 D, C 1 V, A 1 M,
MA SY.
Be sides the summary accounts of the 1964 excavations , no refe.rences to
them had been made before 1971 (BMI, XL, 2, 1971 p. 55-56). Detail ed
description of the internal wall s uncovered are of no avail because no plan
is given, this time either. The study presents the results of excavations
of the north side, and this is to account for the fact that only three pha ses
were determined. The description shows that a.ll the three pha ses refer
to the internal stone constructions and the refo re it is to be inferred
that the small+stzed earth-work fort did not extend as far as here.

101. M. Moga, AMN, VII, 1970, p. 135-147; idem , Tibiscus, 3, 1974, p.

129-131; N. Gostar, AMN, V, 1968, p. 471-476.

102. M. Moga, Rev. Muz., II, 1965, p. 433 speaks about a chance find, a
stamp of Leg. IIII F. Stamps inscribed C 1 Vand C 1 V N and Co(h) 1
Vi)ND, are known to belong to Coh 1 Vindel icorum ; 1 D R, III, 1,
pp. 225-226.

103. 1 D R, III, 1, p. 145-the north side extend s across the civil settlement ;
this enlargement of the area must be associated with the rel ieving of the
troops that had been displaced here.

104. TIR, L, 34. s. v.; in the a rea of the Zăvoi commune stamps inscribed
M 1 D and Coh 1 S(agittariorum) (1 D R, III, 1, p. 234) were discovered;
M. Macrea, Viaţa, p. 222-the fort covers 22 ha.
N. Moga and H. Daicoviciu-inf. D. Protase, SCIV, XIX, 3, 1968, p.539
carried out research in 1967. We have not excluded it from the list 01
forts subsequent to the wars, because we do not know how long it functioned.
In Banatica, IV, 1977, Bozu ('Cohors 1 Sagittariorum la Zăvoi') publ.ishes
the results of a survey at Zăvoi where the stamp Coh. 1 Sag(ittariorum)
was discovered.

105. H. Daicoviciu , 'Casstus Dio şi Sarmi segethusa", in In Memoriam

Constantin Daicoviciu, 1974, pp. 111-116.

106. Both N. Gostar, Apulum, IX, 1971, p. 318-320 and H. Daieoviciu (op. cit.
p. 116) consider that the possibility is not excluded for the walls of the
colony to be the same as the walls of the castrum of Leg. IIII Flavia
erected here in 102.
107. D. Protase , AMN. IV, 1964; fig. 17 p. 62.
M. Mac.rea , Viaţa ... pp. 118-119.

108. The surname Sarmizegethuza (capital of the defeated kingdom), given

to VIpia Trajana, was thought to show, and for good reason , a sign of
Ieniency towards the Dacians.
M. Mac rea , Istoria României, 1, 1960, p. 360.

68
 109. 1. H. Cr'i şan , "Cast rul roman de la Costeşti', in Materiale, X, 1973,
s·, p. 74-7 5-a fortlet (34 by 34 m internal dimensîons and 45 by 45 across
~r the ramparts). It is surrounded by an agger of beaten clay ; its peculiar
feature is a layer of burnt red clay and cha rcoal at the base ; possibly
a campaign camp or a civil settlement de st royed during the Dacian wars (?)
It is ce rtain that it was garrisoned by a detachment destgned to discourage
the Dacian forces from regrouping.
Iished ,
11O. C. Da.icoviciu a. o., Materiale, V, 1959, p. 381, at the point Prisaca,
south-west of Costeşti, the remain s of a fort with un equal sides were
is to di scove red , that had been traced on the ground ; it measu res approx.
iled 300 by 100-120 m, its long sides facing north-north-east-south-south-
) plan west , probably occupied as early as the time of the Dacian wars; it has
.ions
not beeri excavated yet.
ases 111. C. Daicoviciu , A. Fe rencz i, A~ezări dacice, p. 43.
efer
112. 1. Gloda riu , AMN, II, 1965, pp. 121-133; M Macrea, Sargetia II,
1941, pp. 130-149; the Dactan walls were rebuilt and bath-hou ses and
barracks were constructed.
p.
113. Sometim es referred to as Bucium. The largest part of the fort was
obliterated by the Apa Oraşului so that its size cannot be as ses sed.
Excavations have revealed fortifications on the west side. H. Daicoviciu ,
[
1. Glodariu, Materiale, X, 1973, p. 78-81; N. Gostar, AMN, VI, 1969,
pp. 493-500; C. Daicoviciu a. o., Materiale, VI, p.350-353.

114. We consider that only the character of the soil rende red it impos sible for
snt: the digging to define clearly the layer of debris just below the crepida.
the We do not think the construction of the rampart wall to have been possible
without a base ; it is likely for the berm p resumed by us to have been
erected at the moment when the wall was built out of "wreckage" of the
3d
constructton ; anyway , we think that what seems to be a peculiarity of
d·,
the earth-work ditch-Doppelspitzgraben-is actually the ditch of an
earlier pha se in the Iife of the fort, that had an agger also of brown-
539
)1
yellowish clay ; the ditch starts from the Ievel of a berm higher by 15-20
~tioned. cm compared to the berm of the original construction.
shes 115. The brownish-black soil between the rampart and the vallum strict1y
~) speaking could be taken as the remains of this caespite s.

116. In the post-Trajanic period this fort was the base of N. Germanicianorum
(Exploratorum ?), in the variants indicated by the stamps bearing its
name N. Ger, NGR, NU GER, N G E (H. Dalcovlciu, I. Glodariu,
op. cit. , p. 80)-probably formedof exploratores who had taken part in
. cit.
e the conquest wars waged by Hadrian (Call ies , 45. Bericht RGK, 1964,
pp. 130-227).

117. C. Daicoviciu, 'Micia', I, ACMIT, 1930-1931, p. 16 sqq.

118. Maybe for this reason suhsequent excavations failed to recover the
aspect of the vallum-O. Floea and L. Mărghitan, 'Noi consideraţii
privitoare la castrul roman de la Micia", Sargetia, VII, 1970, p. 43-56.

119. C. Daicoviciu , op. cit., p. 25

69

~-
•
120. CIL, XVI, 163.

121. .CIL, III, 1371.

122. The attested presence at Micia of some veteran of ala I Augusta

Ituraeorum and of ala Pannoniorum cannot be an unquestionabl e proof
that etther of these alae were stationed there. But the fact that ala
--- ---
Augusta Ituraeorum is attested, in its early years of existence in Dacia
only at Micia , makes us bel ieve that the possibility is not definitely
excluded for its being stationed here (unlike C. Petol e scu , Milttarg renzen,
II, p. 369) the more so as the wide plain we st of Micia was appropriate
for the activittes of an ala.
1. 1. Russu , AMN, VI, p. 171, is inclined to think that ala Aug.
Ituraerorum was based at Micia during its stay in Dacia (until the start
of Hadrian's reign at the latest).

123. D. Protase , AMN, IV, 1967, p. 48, fig. 2, -stamps of legio IIII FF
were discovered here.

124. N. Gostar, Inscripţii şi monumente din Germisara. Contribuţii la

Cunoaşterea regiunii Hunedoara, Deva, 1956, pp. 54-99;
The site of this camp has not been identified on the ground despite
the fact that Neigebauer (19th century) descrfbed it as lying on a highland
overlooking the Mureş Vall ey,

125. W. Wagner, p. 20, CIL, XVI, 57 and 107 and N. Gostar, loc. cit.

126. RE, XII, 1719. We think that vexillationes of this legion may have been
sent to Porolissum (CIL, III, 838, 8064 and p. 167), To Tihău (Materiale,
VII, 1960, p.385, fig. 24) and to Potaissa (1. Tigara, Probleme de
muzeografie, Cluj, 1960, p. 195) only before the formation of Dacia
Porolissensis.

127. Ritterling R. E. XII, 1390-1391; CIL III 1628

V. Christescu, IMDR, p. 175.

128. M. Macrea a. o., Materiale, V, 1959, p. 435.

129. The mil estone at Aiton of the year 108-CIL, III, 1627.

130. M. Macrea a. o., Materiale, V, 1959, p. 448-449.

The fort at Ighiu , measures 50 by 41 m, its long sides face east-west;
it had a west gate with tutulus, and an additional building to the west; as
shown by the plan this rampart could bel ong to a previous fort of large r
stze ; the description of the two sections cut across the vallum shows
that it seem s to have been a Holtz-erde-Mauer 3 m wide.

131. Excavations car rted out in 1930 and published in ACMIT, IV, 1932-1938,
pp. 195-233 were resumed in 1965 at first under the guidance of Profe ssor
Macrea (until 1968) and then of his former col leagues.

132. A fort lying at the confluence of the Sebeş with the Crişul Repede, at
the point where the Me seş Mountains slope off gently towards north-
north-east. To the south, 1. Ferenczi's resea rch did not reveal traces
of Roman forts in the Apuseni mountains (AMN, IX, 1972, pp. 387-409).
133. MiliUlrgrenezen II, 1977, p.320, fig. 7 and AMN, IX, 1972, p. 421,
fig. 14/5.

134. We are pleased to note that this phase ha.s been dated according to archae-
ological evidence di scove red on the site, and not by me rely stating facts,
as ha s often been the case.

135. M. Macrea, ACMIT, IV, 1932-1938, pp. 195-233.

M. Macrea, Viaţ~ ... p. 38.

136. Examining the publ ished profile (MilWlrgrenzen, II, p. 320, fig. 6) we
would be ternpted to belteve that the earth-work agger is comparatively
clearly defined internally by the heap of stones fall en to its edge from the
1 b (enla rged) fort when the stone wall was being built.

137. M. Macrea, a. o., Materiale, VIII, 1962, p. 492-493; excavation s begun

by A. Buday on the territory of the municipium in 1908-1914; in 1938-
1939 C. Daicoviciu sea rched the fort on the Pomăt, and so did A. Radnoti
in 1943. It is known that below the ~ of the earth-work fort construc-
tions in timber and stone have been identified whose function, however ,
has remained unknown; in 1977 diggings on the Pomăt, were re sumed.
A. Radnoti (Archaeologiai Erte sito , V-VI, 1944-45, p. 151 sqq) was
the first to examine ai r-photog raphs of this site (ibidem Pl. LXVII-
LXVIII) .

138. M. Macrea, D. Protase , M. Rusu , 'Santierul arheologic de la Porolissum',

Materiale, VII, 1960, p. 374-375; the remains of an earth-work fort
have beeri traced on the south-west side and at the east angle.

139. CIL, III, 6283; Arch. Anz., 1925, 302; RE, XXI, 1, 1953 sv.
Porolfssum , 267.
140. CIL, III, 7638 = C. Daicoviciu , Dacia, VII-VIII, p. 328, dating from
the time of Phillipus.

141. Coh. VI Thracum at Porolissum-CIL III 8074, 24; AMN, IV, 1967, p.
88, n. 14; W. Wagner, p. 194.

142. This stamp was re-used at a construction on the 'Terrace of the palaestrat ,
Prof. I. I. Russu assigns it to Coh. I. [H]Is(p) B and rejects its being
identified with Cohors 1 Ituraeorum Sagittariorum (M. Macrea a. o. ,
Materiale, VII, p.379, fig. 17.
. The diplomas found in Dacia record two cohorts Ituraeorum:
Coh. 1 Aug. Ituraeorum Sagittariorum based in Dacia in 110-(CIL, XVI,
57) and in Dacia Superior in 144 and in 157-158 (CIL, XVI, 90, 107 and
108) to which wa s assigned the stamp inscribed Coh. 1 Aug. found at
Bucium i (Castrul roman de la Buciumi pl. CXXXIX) and at Porolissum
(I. I. Russu, SCIV, X, p. 316); and Coh. 1 Ituraeorum Sagittariorum,
which only occurs in the Diploma of Februa ry 17, 11 0, it afterward s left
for Thracia (I. G. R. 1, 1462). It appears that Cohors 1 Augusta
Ituraeorum erected the earth-work fort at Bucium i (Castrul roman de )
la Buciumi, p. 122), to be displaced to Dacia Superior in 144. We think
that if the reading C(o)h(or)s 1 (H)is(panorum), cannot be excluded, there
is no definite reason to reject the hypothesis that the stamp found at

71
 Porolissum i s a variant of the one reading C(o)h(or)s I (Augusta ?)
I(turaerorum) S(ag). Anyway, it appear s that both these coho rts were
brought to Porolissum being engag ed , in coope ration , in the task of
building military constructions, without necessarily being in garrison
there.

143. MilWrrgrenzen, IIp. 320; even if we do not come to understand how they
got to "auf dem Iungf'raultchen Boden emer Baracke. "

144. CIL, III, 8074, 18 and the Diploma of Românaşi, IDR, I, DO 4 == Dacia
N. S. , XVI, 1972, p. 290. The team directed by IvI. Macrea carrying
out research on this site, determined two stag es of the construction;
the earth-work fort being , in thei r view, short-lived. From the published
data we cannot say exactly when this earthwork fort started to function.
Excavations conducted in 1952 also revealed stamps inscribed Coh. VI
T(h)r(acum), (CIL, III, 8074, 24)-a troop that appea rs to have been
(from the very start) stationed in northe rn Dacia.

145. I. Ferenczi-EmlekkC5nyv Kel em en Lajos szUletesenek nyolovanadik

evfordulojara-A Tihoi Romai Taborrol, 1957. pp.279-292. V. Wollmann.
Gh. Bot, 'Castrul şi garnizoana romană de la Tihău', in In memoriam
C. Daicoviciu, pp. 429-439.
Despite the evidence brought to light by excavations, N. Gudea,
AIIA, 19, 1975, p. 81 considers that the fort had an earth-work version.
145a. Em. Panaitescu, ARBSH, 1929, f.321 sqq and ACMIT, IV, 1929,
(abstract).

146. CIL, III. 821 and A E, 1929, no, 1.

147. CIL, XVI, 57, 163.

148. T. Beche rt , B. J., 171, 1971, p. 260, sq. fig. 24.

149. A E. , 1929, no. 1.

150. Em. Panaitescu, "Ca.strul roman de la Căşei'-ACMIT, IV, 1929, fig. 1.

151. In northern Dacia in 110 (CIL, XVI, 163) and in 123 IDR, no. 7 pp. 88
sqq. in Dacia Porolissensis.
152. See below.

153. D. Protase , st. Dănilă, 'Un castru roman da pămrnt la Livezile pe

graniţa de nord a Dactert , SCIV, XIX, 3, 1968, p. 531-536.
The fort measures 166 by 120 m, and covers 1. 99 ha (the vallum
included); its agger is Ievell ed down, and the ditch is 4-5.25 m wide
and 1. 25-1. 80 m deep,

154. As there is no indication whatsoever as to the unit held by the fort at

Livezi we cannot accept without re serve the certainty that it was
constructed by Coh. I Hisp.

155. M. Macrea, D. Protase , st. Dănilă, 'Castrul roman de la Orheiul

Bistriţei', SCIV, xvrn, 1967, 1 pp. 113-120; the fort covers an area
of 2. 92 ha and measures 203 by 144 m ; from the published profile
(fig. 35) we can infer that the agger was built of caespites, hence the

72
 regularly successive layers of black and yellow soil ; Iikewise , the
earth-work ditch was much wider than that of the stone fort (our inter-
pretation marked in the section).

156. W. Wagner, pp. 181-182; CIL, XVI, 57, 163.

157. M. Macrea, 'Garn izoanele cohortei VIII Raetorium in Dacia, ' in

Omagiu lui C. Datcovtciu , 1960, pp. 341-343.

158. M. Macrea, K. Horedt, etc. 'Şantierul arheologic Sf. Gheorghe-Breţcu',

SCIV, II. 1, 1951, pp. 304-306,-theearth-workfort, coversapprox.
2 ha (2.07 ha across the rampart.s) and is surrounded by two ditches.
d The preliminary account does not include data regarding the ar chaeolog ical
find s ; they have remained unpublished after Prof. M. Macrea ' s death.

159. D. Prota.se+s question, Mtlttarg renzen , II, p. 386 and Marisia V, p.

64, about the defensive system of the Mureş Valley in Roman tirnes
has remained unanswered.

160. Careful research on the ground might correct this observation, Among
the auxiliary troops found in Dacia in 110, the following have remained
unlocated: ala ICR, Ala Claudia; ala I Britannica CR and Coh. 1.
Thracum CR; coh I Ituraeorum : coh II Gallorum Mac.; coh II
Gallorum Pannonica; among the se troops, which were to leave Dacia
shortly, only coh I Thracum will continue to be recorded in the Diplomas
of Dacia Superior, which leads us to think that the fort would have to be
Iooked for in just the central part of Transylvania, possibly on the eastern
frontier line. The increased number of troops mentioned in the Diploma
of July 110 (CIL, XVI, 163) was given the interpretation that military
actions were carried on against the Jazygi-L. Balla, 'Guerre Jazyge
aux f'rontfe res de la Dacie en 107/108', in Acta Classica V, 1969, pp.111-
113.

161. Apart from the forts located between the Danube and the Mureş, on the
road to Tibiscum, the castellum at virşeţ, (Vrsac) ha s to be considered
not searched yet, where cohors II Hispanorum is attested in 108 (CIL,
III, 6273); the claim that the inscription to Mars Ultor must be
associated with a military action against the Jazygi does not carry
absolute conviction.

162. 1. Fe.renczt , 'Contribuţii la problema l im esului de vest al Daciei '

(partea II (2)-research conducted in 1947-1957 and in 1966 in AMN,
X, 1973, pp. 565-567, including the previous bibliography.
There is little probablHity that the Romans set the boundary line
right through the middle of the Apuseni mountains, locating watch
towers and burgi in a region difficult to get in touch with-which, more-
over, did not give any advantage over the enemy, Actually, no defence
work has been traced in the area.

163. S. Dumitraşcu, 'Contribuţii la cunoaşterea graniţei de vest a Daciei

romane', AMN, VI, 1969, p. 486, and Map no. 1.

164. As suggested by the p resence of a fort in the neighbourhood of the

Dacian stronghold at Piatra Neamţ, N. Gostar, Apulum, V, 1964, pp.
144-147.

73
 165. Kornemann, Unsichtbahren g renzen , passim.
Klose, Rom s Kl ientel randsrraaten, passim.

166. Roman forts dated to the time of the principatum have been a scertained
at the points whe re ruins prior to the Roman-Byzantine period are to be
found and where epigraphic evidence for the troops of Moesia Superior
was discovered. If, in general term s , such a m ethod could provide a
minimum amount of information about the Roman army and its displace-
ment to the province of Dacia, when carelessly handled it leads to rash
conc1usions-as was the case of the epig raphic evidence concerning the
p re sen ee of Roman troops in Torni, which ha s been taken as a proof of
thei r being pe rmanently stationed there. First, we think that, given
the statute of civitas libera et foederata enjoyed by the city of Torni
(D. M. Pippidi, DID I 316-317), the re is not much probability that the
troops had thei r permanent quarters in Torni. Second, the thriving
city on the Black sea shore was sure to have been often visited by a
large number of veterans and soldiers in active service whose presence
was, somehow or other , recorded epigraphically (Forni, Lime s , 1085).
Much in the same way, the p resence of some vexillationes attested at
Tropaeum Trajani during the time of the Marcomannic wars was taken
as a proof for the extstence of a military defence work here throughout
the principatum pe riod (Em , Condurachi, 'Les conditiona politiques
du Bas Danube et le Limes,' Roman Frontier Studtes , Tel Aviv, 1971,
p. 163)-a hypothes is invalidated by the results of research conducted in
recent years (Ioana Bogdan Cătăniciu in Tropaeum Traiani, 1, 1979,
Chapter: Incinta).

167. T. Ivanov , 'Archaologtsche Untersuchungen des r~mischen und fhrtt-

byzantinischen Limes an der unteren Donau in Bulgaria', Roman
Frontier Studies, Cardiff, 1969 (1974) p. 235 sqq.
Idem-'Die Letzten Ausgraburgen des r~mischen fr11-byzantinischen
Donau Llm es in der VR Bulgarian, Fronti'eres roma ines ', Mamaia ,
1972 (1974), p. 55-70 Em. Condu rachiv pp. cit.

1. Barnea, G. stefan, 'Le ltmes Sythicus des ortgmes a la fin de

L'antiquttă' , Frontieres romaines , p. 15-25.

168. L. Barkoczi, Intercisa, II, p. 503 sqq ; L. Balla, Acta classica I,

1965, pp. 39-40; J. Dobiaa, Omagiu C. Daicoviciu , 1960, p. 147;
C. Daicoviciu , SCIV, IV, 1953, 3-4 = Dacica p. 318-319, considers
that the breaking out of a rising in Dacia is possible at the tirne when the
province was attacked by the Jazygi and the Roxolani.
169. The reasons for the reorganisation of the Dacian territories were
reconsidered by M. Macrea, AMN, III, 1966, p. 138, note 107.
C. Daicovlciu, AISC, I, 2, 1933-1935, pp. 71-77 = Dacica, p. 138;
M. Macrea, Dacia VIII, 1964, p. 156 sqq.

170. C. Daicoviciu, Klio, 38, 1960,180-182; SCIV, IV, 3-4, 1953 p.

171. Ioana Bogdan Cătăniciu, in Mil itâ.rg renzen II, 1978, p. 273-275, and
'Populaţia c1ientelară din Muntenia', to be published.

74

~ ---
172. As early as 123 Dacia Inferior and Dacia Porolissensis will be attested
besides Dacia Superior (I. I. Russu, Dacia, XVIII, 1974, pp. 155-178).

173. C. Petol escu , Revista de Istorie, 32, 2, 1979, pp. 259-275, makes
an attempt to demonstrate that Dacia Poroltssensts was formed con-
current1y with Dacia Superior and Inferior. This hypothests relies on
the fact that the Palmyrenii Sagittarii, attested in Dacia Superior in
120 (Diploma Porolissium, Căşei, IDR, 1, no V, VI) were stationed
also to the north of Dacia, at Porolissum and at Căşei respectively,
only after 126, possibly under Antonius Pius. Until more certain evidence
is found for this troop, attested at Porolisium, Tibiscum, Optatiana,
it is reasonabl e to consider that Dacia Porolissensis was created in
the second phase of the organisation of the Dacian territories.

174. H. A, H, 5, 1 "Adeptu s imperium ad priscum se statim morem instituit

et tenendae per orbem terrarum paci operam intendit. "

175. It is in this way that M. Macrea, AMN, III, 1966, p. 139 and note 109 views
the reason why Dacia was turned into a praetorian province, following
the stationing of one Roman legion here after reorganisation.

176. Arcidava , Surduc, Berzobis and maybe Virşeţ (no available archaeological
evidence lends support to the early abandonment of the latter fort).

177. C. Patsch, 'Banater Sarmaten, Anzeig er Akademie der Wissens, in Wien! ,

1925, XXVII, pp.181-216. C. Da icoviciu , 'Banatul şi iazygii', Apulum.
1939-42, 1, pp. 98-108.

178. A. Altold}, 'Die Roxolanen in der Walachei', VI Kongres fUr Archaologfe,

Berlin, 1939.
N. Fetich , 'Archaologtsche Belt răge zu r Geschichte des Sarmatisch-
Dakishen Beztehungen", AAASH, 3,1953, p. 137.
L. Barkoczi , "I'ransplantatlon of Sarmatians and Roxolani in the
Danube Basin', AAASH, VII, 1959, p. 443 sqq.

179. M. Moga, N. Gudea, 'Contribuţii la repertoriul arheologic al Banatului L ,

Tibiscus, IV 1975, p. 129-146 completing the T. I. R. L34, Budapest, 1968.

180. V. Christescu, IMDR, p. 63-"It appears that the raiding Barbarians

had been subdued in Dacia; for, this was the only way for the Emperor
to reduce the army in the province ; indeed, there is one legion less
in Pannonia, too",

181. Palmyrenii sagitarii are attested in the Diplomas of Dacia Superior,

in 120 and 126 (IDR, 1, V, VIII); the Diplomas of 120 were awarded
ante emerita stipendia, which leads us to think that thei r stay at
Porolissum and Căşei pleads for therr being quartered already in the
northern part of the province. In 126 Palmyrenii Sagitt. are named
the same as in 120. Epigraphic records show that part of the unit or
its soldiers were at Tibiscum and part at Porolissum, generally, as
numeri of palmyrenii with an added epithet derived from the name of
the respecti ve fort. 'I'hei r stay at Tibiscum and Porolissum is accepted
(C. Daîcovtciu , AISC, 1, 1933-1935, p. 73; idem , AMN, II, 1965,
pp. 137-138). I. I. Russu considers that the unit was initially stationed
at Porolissum (IDR, 1,· p. 97) and was afterwards transferred to Tibiscum.
75
 The narne numerus does not imply a change in the character of the
troop, occurring under Hadrian or Antonius Piu s (Cal lies , 45 Bericht
RGK, 1964, p. 181); signs of a contrary view can be detected in most
of the works dealing with the Palrnyrtans and the Moors, in Dacia (C.
Petole scu , SCIVA, 30, 1, 79, p. 108). The 'Orts und Grenzwehr '
character of the unit (Callies, pp. 172-173) and its great strength, Ieads
us to think that after coming to Dacia it was split up into seve ral garrisons
which served as regular auxiliaries during campaigns. It seem s to us
that the epithets derived from the names of thei.r forts: Porolissensis,
Tibiscensis, Optationensis, r esult from the fact that the respective troop
was not stationed at various forts in the sarne p rovince but in different
p rovince s. The splitting up of the unit among the p rovinces appea rs to
us to have been possible and r easonable p re ei sely because a numerus
was not a regular, clea rly defined unit.

182. We think that the extension of the area of the fort to the north must be
dated to this time, too; coh I Vindelicorum is also a newcome r to this
fort. See 102.

183. In the castellum , stamps inscribed coh. I S. were found, ascribed to

this troop after it had been mentioned in an inscription dedicated to
Ma rcu s Aureltus (M. Moga , Tibiscus, 1974, p. 129-131). As archae-
olog leal obse rvattons to suggest any relation to the context in which the
stamps were found are missing, it is as yet not possible to say when
the troop carne to Tibiscum. D. Benea (SCIVA, 27, 1, 1976, p. 82)
is incl ined to think that the pre sence of this troop in the fort was short-
lived, and connects it with the battles waged in this area during the
Ma.rcomanni c wars (N. Moga, 1. 1. Russu, 'Lapidarul Muzeului
Banatului', Timişoara, 1974, pp. 8-10). stamps of coh I Sag. also
occurred at Zăvoi (Banatica, IV, 1977 pp. 131-132).

184. Coh. II FI. Commagenorum is attested in Hadrian 's reign CIL,

III, 1371 and in a number of inscriptions CIL, III, 1343, 6267, 1372,
1379 j ala 1. Hisp. Compagnorum is also largely attested epigraphically:
CIL, III, 1342, 1343, 1377, 1378, 1380.

185. Already formed into palmyrenii sag itarfi ; C. Petol escu (SCIVA, 30,
1, 1979, pp. 105-109) considers that the palmyrenii sagittarii originally
garrisoned only Tibiscum; versus D. Benea, Apulum, XVIII, 1980 p. 131-139.
186. Av. Doma szewski , Rheinisches Museum , 48, 1894, p. 240 sqq.

187. D. Protase, A. Zrinyi, "Ca st rul roman de la Br'Incoveneşti In Valea

Mu reşului. Săpăturile din anii 1970-1973,' Marisia, V, 1975, p. 57
sqq = Milttărg renzen II, p. 379-386.
A. v. Doma szewski , Rango rdnung , p. 135, dates the inscription, CIL,
III, 1197, to Trajan's reign according to styl e. We think that the
inscription found at Apulum, whi ch reads: Tutor Silvanus [eque]s
alae Bosp(oranorum) ex N(umero) Illyr(icorum) sti[p] (endiorum)
XXIII vix(it) ann(os) XLIII h(ic) s(itus) e(st), should bedated to the post-
Trajanic per-iod because ala I Bosporanorum is attested in Pannonia in
116 (CIL, XVI, 64) and supposed to have come to Dacia, or (more
p reci selyj come back, considering that it had taken pa rt in the Da cian
wars.
76
 C. Iul. Quadratus Bassus (Wiegand, Abhandl, 1932, 5, 40; Weber, ebd.
57-95). This numerus Illyricorum atte sted in Apulum, possibly set up
for the same reason late during Trajan 's reign, must have been re-
organised as an ala before the reign of Antoninus Pius (ILS 2209).

188. Though coh. 1 Alpinorum is m entioned for the first time in the Diploma
of Dacia Superior, of 144, it must have come to Dacia before the provin ce
s of Dacia Porolissensis was created; it was only then that the troop
could have been engaged in the construction of civil settl ements at
Napoca (AMN, II, p. 34 = M. Macrea in Dacia, VIII, 1964, p. 152, n.40).
1. 1. Russu, Frontferes rcmaines , p. 222, thinks that the troop
had remained in Dacia since the tim e when the Dacian wars, in which
it took part, were brought to a close.

189. ala 1 Bosporanorum, attested for the first time by the Diploma of 144
(CIL, XVI, 90), but it would seem that it had come from Pannonia
during the reign of Hadr ian , W. Wagner, p. 17.

190. D. Protase, 'Ca strul roman de la Călugăreni; Săpăturile din anul

1961', in AMN, II, 1965, pp. 209-214. Sections have been cut across
the four sides; but evidence coming from SI (fig. 38) is enough to
suggest a complete picture. The fort is quadrangular, with slightly
unequal stdes , and covers approx. 2.25 ha-appropriate to have held
the whol e cohors quingenaria. A stamp of Leg. XIII G. (CIL, III, 8064)
was found within its ramparts-which is but natural given the location
of the defence in the military territory of the castrum of Apulum.

191. D. Protase, ~, II, p. 212, state s that "the vallum and the ditch of
the original fort can be clearly seen in the profile of section 1. When
the stone fort was built, the old ditch was Ievell ed up , and the ba se of
the new rampart, at last its north side, was laid into the berm of the
old earthwork defence. The new berm is 1. 90-2. Om long and "covers"
quite a long stretch, of the filled up ditch of the old castrum. . . The
earthwork vallum, standing to full height (0.50 m), can be seen in the
section 1; its ditch is 2 m deep and wider at the top-3. 50 m. In
exchange , the agger of the stone fort, as it looks today, is 0.80 m high,
6.50 m wide at the base , and made to slope off gently as far as the via
sagularis, suggested by a heap of riverstones piled against the Ievel of
139. ancient soil . The ditch is 3 m deep and has a maximum width of 6 m.
A point must be added-the exîstence of an additional, 0.60 m wide,
bottom end at the internal escarpment,

192. Z. Szekely , 'săpăturile executate de Muzeul regional din Sf. Gheorghe',

in Materiale, VII, 1961, p. 186; idem , Sondaje executate de Muzeul
reg. Sf. Gheorghe, Materiale, VIII, 1962, pp. 331-335.
It is almost square -shaped , measu res 140 by 146 m and covers
2.04 ha; the north-gate (praetoria ?) built in opus quadratum has a
single tower, 6.25 by 8 m; the south gate has quadrilateral turrets, 4.5
by 6 m : trapezoid bastions (5 by 5 m) at ang les : between each gate
and angle tower an abutment (just one?) has been uncove red ; the berm
is 1 m wide; it has been stated that an earthwork fort is supposed to
have existed which none the less has not been described or sectioned ;
the rampart and the towers with the exception of the ones on the north
side are in opu's incertum; 1. 5 m thick.
77
 193. Poena ru Bo rdea , C. Vlade scu , Frontieres romaines, pp. 247-257,
no timber con struction has been determined for the forts either.

194. V. Christescu, IMDR, p. 130; Baatz , RL 1974, p. 25.

195. V. Christescu, IlVIDR, p. 130, CIL, III, 1061-aqueduct; annamentarium

CIL, III, 1121, 1138; CIL, III, 1958 and CIL, III, 1070.

196. A study of the remains of the pre served forts in the feudal defence work
published in AIIA, XXII, 1979, p.47-69.
197. G. M. Visconti, the plan made in 1711, of the feudal fortress (13th-17thcent.).

198. TIR, L 34 sv : the preliminary results of re sea rch unde rtaken at Cenad
by the team of the History Mu seum in Arad are to be publ i shed soon.

199. 'A'. Wagner, p. 16 andp.17.

200. CIL. III, 8074, 2 AL BADO

201. CIL, III, 8074, 3 == 12630 AL BOS; ALA BOS ro

Materiale II, 1956, p. 162, fig. 117/18 AL BOS.

202. 1. Mitrofan, Gh. Moldovan, "Ca strul roman de la Sighişoara' AMN,

V, 1968, pp. 99-109. An earthwork fort in the TIrnava Mare riverside
(test diggings in 1964-1967): approx. 180 by 133 m in stze , its long
sides facing NW-SE.

203. Possibly as an outcome of the Dacians ' atternpt to rebel, which C.

Daicoviciu p resumes (Dacica, p. 318) to have taken place at the time of
the attacks perpetrated by the Jazygi and the Roxolani.

204. 1. Mitrofan, AMN, V, p. 104-105.

A Hadrianic coin was found in the vallum (the year 128-129 Cohen II,
369) which gives a tenninus post guem for the construction of this camp
and one from the time of Marcus Au rel ius (Cohen III, 776) in a pit of a
subsequent civil settl em ent. Therefore, the fort at Sighişoara was
in u se late in the reign of Hadrian or early in the reign of Antoninus
Pius until Marcus Au rel ius ' time (1. Mitrofan, 22.. cit., p. 106).
1. Mit rofan ' s observation (~ cit. , p. 105 and note 33) to the effect
that there are sever-al phases in the construction of the earthwork fort,
Ieads us to think that the p resence here of leg. XIII. Gemina-according
to the nam es of some Aurelii brickmakers (ibidem, notes 44-46)-could
be associated with the exi stence of a defen ce of later date somewher e
near the excavated fort.

205. C. Petol e scu , SCIV, 22, 3,1971, pp. 411-422; versus. H. Daicoviciu ,
steaua, no. 4, Feb., 1972, p. 27.

206. According to D. Tudor, O. R4, pp. 162-163.

207. Systematic investigations were conducted by Gr. Tocil escu and his
assistant, Enginee r P. Polonic, an expert in topography. Except for
the hrtef account in Foutlles , pp. 119-134, agreat number of tra vei
notes and interpretations concerning these two l ines considered to be
successive limites for southern Dacia, are now in the custody of the
Romanian Academy. T'hese unpublished materials were used by D. Tudor

78

,
\..: ---_~- - ======~_----- --
 who, with the assistance of his pupils, has lately resumed r'esea rch
particularly in the 'Iimes alutanus '. His observations, especially those
of a historical nature, have been summ ed up in Oltenia Romană;
Fourth Edition, 1978.
1
208. Gr. Tocilescu, Fouilles, p. 119; M. Macrea, I R, I, 1960, p. 377
consider that "the fortification of this boundary-line and its organisation
as the frontier-line of the province took place under Hadrian, after the
abandonment of Wallachia and the reorganisation of Dacia" also C.
Daicoviciu , AMN, 1, 1964, p. 174.
.ent. ).
Despite the fact that the Hunt papyrus shows quite cl ea rly that
southern Moldavia and Wallachia formed part of Moesta Inferior, which
is also highlighted by archaeological evidence concerning Trajan's time,
the idea persists that "the fortification of the eastern boundary-line
(our italics) sta rted , at least in a rough manner, as early as Trajan's
reign-D. Tudor OR4, p. 153, a vi ew V. Christescu had expl icably held
a few decades before, QE. cit. p. 123.

209. G. Formi, Erontie res romaines , p. 285 sqq.

210. Gr. Tocilescu, Fouilles, p. 120, identifies the ten Iocal ities in Tabula
Peutingeriana, as fol lows-
ROMULA Reşca
A CIDA VA Enoşeşti
RUSIDA VA Drăgăşani
PONS ALUTI Ioneştii Govorii
B URIDA VA SIăviteşti Boroneasa
CASTRA TRAJANA Gura Văii
ARUTELA Bivolari
PRAETORIUM Racoviţa and Copăceni
PONS VETUS Ciineni
CAPUT STENARUM - Boiţa

211. Tudor OR4, p. 279; Repert. Arh. al R(ms) sub ~.

212. D. Tudor, Militttrgrenzen II, 1977, p. 399-403.

213. A. Odobescu , 'Antichităţi din Romanaţi'; ~ AEM, XI, 1888,

p. 203. I~C;;- 1'7:f-

214. Tocilescu, Fouilles, p. 120; SCNIV, 1968 p. 207; SCNIV, 1968,

pp.209-222.

215. Tocilescu, loc. cit.

216. AEM XIII, 141, XIV, 13 and XVII, 226.

217. AAR, ser. III, f. XVIII, 1896, 109-112; Tocilescu, Fouilles, p. 128.

218. K. Htoredt, Studii, 2, 1949, 1, p.142; 1. Pop. SCIVA, 26, 1975, 2,p.289-292.
219. Neigebauer, Dacien aus Uberesten, 274-275, A. Bunday, Dolgozatok
VII, 1916, pp. 10-12, 23-24.

220. Buday, loc. cit. p. 24.

221. Neigebauer, QE. cit., 279.

79
222. D. Tudor, OR4, p. 252.

223. Excavations carried out by N. Hampartumian, under the guidance of

D. Tudor; the results have been published in Materiale, IX, 1970,
p. 245 sqq. We are reticent about the military character of the excavated
construction, as shown by the published account (see below).

224. C. Vlădescu, M. Moghior, 'Notă asupra sondajelor efectuate la Tia

Mare, Judeţul Olt,' SMIM., 11, 1978, pp.167-169.
225. Marsigli, Danubius Pannonicus Mysicus, Haga, 1726, tome II, 1, fig.
XL; VIădescu, Poenaru, SMIM, 10, 1977, p. 20 == Limes, Szekes-
fehervar, p. 355.
226. D. Tudor, OR4, p. 185, idem Oraş~ ... p. 344-Romula quadrata, 216
by 182 m in size , was initially protected by a vallum and a ditch; later
the vallum was replaced by a brick wall. This is the Iocation of the
city about which D. Tudor OR4, p. 177 says:
"The colony was set up under Hadrian at the latest when, as is
known, the last constructions to the same pattern were erected in the
empire. The somewhat regular plan of the city, with cardo and
decumanus, and the role played by the vererans, Iend support to this
hypothesis. "
C. VIădescu, Poenaru-Bordea , 'Le complex de fortifications de Romula
dans le cadre en systeme defenaif du Limes Alutanus' , Limes, Szeke s-
fehervar, 1976 (Budapest, 1978)p. 354, re-examine the epig raphic
evidence testifying to the status of the city, attested in 158/159 as a
municipium (CIL, III, 7249 == ILS 1465) and certain to be a colonia in 248
(CIL, III', 8031 == ILS 510) considering that the status of colonia conferred
on this city could be prior to this date. In his characteristic manner
of working, in the b.rief paper under discussion, too, our colleague
Mr. C. VIădescu leaves the easentlal problems unclarified, says
nothing about the character of the main fort descrfbed, Ieaving us to
think that it was garrisoned by coh. 1 Commagenorum and Numerus
Surorum (op. cit. , p. 359), and takes the inscription of Leg. XXII
Primigenia and leg. VII CI. ,that are certain to have taken part in the
construction of the Philipan ramparts, as a proof of the exi sten ce of
a Roman military garrison at Romula.
In his doctoral thests "Armata romană in Dacia Inferior" (The
Roman Army in Dacia Inferior) he considers the city to be one and
and the same as the fort: "It has been stated that the main fort within
the Romula defence work was a replacement of an earthwork castrum
dating back to the time of the Romans' settlement in Dacia. On the basis
of stratigraphic observations , to which evidence coming from coins is
added, the p robable date of the construction of the brick fort is the second
half of the 2nd century, possibly in connexion with the creation of Dacia
Malvensis. "

227. CIL, III, 8031 == ILS 510 == IDR, II, 324. D. Tudor considers that "a
defence wall running along the right bank of the river (Teslui) separated
the town into two", without bothe ring to think of the existence of some
areas enctrcled by successive walls.

80
 228. Info rmation 1. Chiţu, Director, Museum of Caracal on the visit we
paid to Romula together. Excavations conducted by C. VIădescu did
not reveal the remains of the suggested fort, mentioned in passing in
Limes, Szekesfehervar, p. 355. .
229. CIL, III, 8032 = 1593 = IDR II 350-immunis ex N. Sur(orum)
Sag(ittariorum); IDR II 380-Leg. VI [1 C](laudia) p.f.); ibidem no 381-
leg.] XI CtIaud ia ) , ibidem 382-retrograde COR IF[l)avia) Corn (magenorum) ;
ibidem no. 383-unearthed in Philippus Arabus' wall N(umerus S(urorum);
A. E. 1940 no 13-14 = IDR II 325-326-leg. XXII Primigenia P F; A. E.
1939 no 28 = IDR II 327-328-leg. VI Claudia P. F.
230. Ic,.111aBogdan Cătăniciu, Limes, Szekesfehervar, p. 335.
231. The date when the municipium at Romula was founded is stiU unde r
discussion, see D. Tudor, Oraşe, tlrguri, sate p. 349 sqq.
232. T. I. R. L. 35, p. 51 and D. Tudor, OR4, p. 298.

233. Possibly now a new castellum is being built in this locality on the bank
of the Olt, in the area of the modern churchyard.
234. Limes, Szekesfehervar, p. 336. C. Vlade scu and Poenaru Bordea,
wished to resume the search in the remains of the ca stellum ; in doing
this, they did not use the observations published by u s , considering that
we had cut the section outside the south rampart and south of the sections
that they obta ined in 1977 across "the south stde ". The authors have
come to the conclusion that "the refo re nothing has been preserved of the
south west 'horn' (angle) as it appeared to our predecessors (Gr. Tocilescu
ms. Rom. Acad. 5139, p. 40) and as it could have been inferred from the
profile in the two ravines." The ai r photograph taken in 1971, whose
copy we did not get in time to be able to present it to the Congres held
at Szkesfehervar, clearly reveals that the south-west (fig. 44) angl e of
this fort ha s remalned as our predecessors had seen it. Our own section
ha s been cut almost perpendicular to the west side, under the fonn in
which it was preserved. The profile of the section shows, beyond any
doubt, the existence of the fortification elements specific to a castellum.
The data published by C. Vlade scu and Poenaru Bordea SMIM, 11, 1978,
pp.137-142, who have not bothered to give a plan and a profile drawn to
scale , provide no ce rtainty over a more accurate location of the Roman
defence. Moreover, we have our doubts whether the traces detected by
them really belong to any fortification, the more so as throughout the
area west of the castellum relics of a Roman construction built in mortared
brick are visible in the ploughed land , that are certam to be remains of
a civil settlement.

235. CIL, III, 8074, 14, d and C. VIădescu, Poenaru Bordea, QE. cit. , p.140.
fig. 4.

236. TIR L 35.

237. D. Tudor, OR4, p. 286. During diggings at the north-west angle of

the camp a coiu-hoard was discovered under a layer of burnt matter,
the last coin being of Philip the Arab. Gh. 1. Petre Govora, 'Tezaurul
monetar de la Ioneştii Govorii', SCN, IV, 1968, p. 207 sqq, It is un-

81
 fortunate that observations are not supplemented by plans or sections;
also B. Mitrea, SCN, IV, 1968, pp. 209-222 ; see also D. Tudor,
sciv , XVI, 1965 , 4, p. 612.
238. W. Wagner, p. 138 and B. Gerov, Klio, 1959, p. 196-198.
239. D. Tudor, Ora§e, t1rguri, sate, p. 367; OR4, pp. 214-217.
~ -W. Provided they were not damaged by activities for laying out a nursery
in the area.
:2 -11. Besides the ones at Sarmizegetusa, Porolissum and Micia.
~-1:2. D. Tudor, Buridava, 1972, p. 30.
2-!3 . Three phases have been ascertained but not chronologically assessed.
24-!. IDR II, 560 Co[ho]rs m(illiaria) B(rittonum)-possibly coh. I Augusta
Nervia Pacensis Brittonum that appears in the Diploma of 140 of Dacia
Inferior (B. Gerov, Klio, 1959, pp. 196-198), N. Gostar, Arh. Mold, IV,
1966, p. 183, C. Petolescu, SCIV, 3, 1971, p. 414, note 25. D. Tudor
considers it to be Coh. I Aur Britt 0() that was used in rebuilding the
fort at Bumbe§ti in 201.
245. Materiale, IX, 1970, pp. 245-249-figs 1 and 2.
The sectioned east side is 60-70 m long, the wall is 1,10 m wide, with
a 1. 30 m wide base set in mortar and widened externally. A layer of
burnt matter has been described as prior to the construction in stone
and lasting throughout the two phases. In Frontieres romains, p. 242.
D. Tudor speaks about an earthwork fort, while the report in Materiale
IX states that no evidence to suggest the existence of this phase was
found. The fact that the complete results of the test diggings have not
been published and that the relevant problems have not been carefully
examined has led to rash conclusions and contradictory statements:
In Oltenia Romana, 4th edition p. 271, the wall described is 1. 50 m
wide, and belongs to a castrum built "in the first half of the 3rd century"
over previous Roman settlement which included a kiln for the reduction
of iron ores. Therefore, at least in the searched area, no Trajanic
castrum was identified.
246. D. Tudor, Oltenia Romana, ed. 3, 1968, p. 293; at the point Gaitini
"a rectangle, 6 0 by 100 paces, with ditch and vallum can be clearly
seen ... at 100 m east, far from this defence are the remains of the
Roman road along the Olt" fig. 73/2, but in 0. R. ed. 4 p. 281 "The pre-
sumed Roman fort is in actual fact a (feudal ? ) construction in earth".
247. Archaeological excavations were conducted by Gr. Tocilescu in the
1890s, but he did not succeed in publishing the results which remained
among the manuscripts, observations and notes published by D. Tudor,
'Castra Dacia Inferioris' IV, in BCMI, XXXV, 1942, pp. 143-144;
the results of more recent excavations conducted by C. Vladescu and
Poenaru Bordea, under the guidance of D. Tudor, were presented in BMI,
XLI, 1972, pp. 27-32; SMIM, 2-3, 1969-1970, pp. 8-46; SCIV, 23,
3, 1972, pp. 477-485; Frontieres romaines,. pp. 247-250; SMIM,
6, 1973, pp. 12-26 and Oltenia, I, 1974, pp. 47-58.

32
 The general plan of the defence work has been recovered, as well
as of the road within its ramparts, part of the plan of the principia,
and of a horreum (interpreted as "assembly hall"); likewise the
remains of some stone bases for timber constructions have been revealed.
248. Front{eres romaines, 249-comparing this piece of information with
the profile published in SMIM, 2-3 (fig. 4) we think that it had no
foundation strictly speaking as the socle has an unusually shallow
foundation (according to the drawing-it appears to be 20 cm in depth
(no scale is indicated).
249. SMIM, 2-3, 1969-1970, p. 13 and Frontieres romaines, p. 245.
250. D. Tudor, Oltenia Romana, ed. 4, p. 264.
251. SMIM, 2-3, p. 22 but no further details are given.
252. CIL, III, 12601 a-b= 13793, 13794.
253. Silver tablet inscribed Valerius Valerianus Egues lib(rarius) c(o)hor(tis)
I His(panorum) ex (v)oto pos(uit).
254. C. Vhidescu, Poenaru Bordea, Oltenia, Craiova, 197 4, p. 57. The
latest coin discovered is of Elagabalus-but we know nothing of the
related context in which it was found and the possibility is not excluded
for it to belong to a disturbed necropolis traced during diggings.
255. SMIM, 2-3, 1969-1970, p. 23-24.
256. Excavations carried out by Gr. Tocilescu which met the same fate as
the previous ones: D. Tudor used his manuscripts and the observations
jotted down by P. Polonic on the spot in Buletinul Muzeului Militar,
V, 1943, pp. 95-101. Only the last third of the fort has been preserved
New evidence resulting from recent excavations has been partly published
in Frontieres romaines, 1972, p. 254 and Oltenia, Craiova, 1974, pp.
54-55.
257. CIL, III, 13795 = ILS 8909.
258. CIL, III, 13796 = ILS 9180.
Imp(eratore) Caes(are) Tito Aelio Hadriano/ Antonino Aug(usto) Pio
trib(unicia) potes(tate) III Co(n)s(ule) III/castra n(umerus) burg(ariorum)
et vered(ariorum) quod anguste tenderet duplicato valli pede et in/po
sitis turribus ampliavit/per Aguilam Fidum proc(uratorem) aug(usti).
259 . Callies, 'Die fremden Truppen', 45 Bericht RGK, 1964, p. 180;
W. Wagner, pp. 204-205.
260. If the first layer of burning has been dated, arbitrarily enough, though
to 130-140 (also L. Balla, Acta Classica, Dehreczen, I, 1965, p. 43
associates the rebuilding of the fort with the year 140, in connexion
with the issuing of the Diploma of Pamalarca, motivating it by the wars
with the Roxolani) the second one is dated to the 3rd century and
associated, we do really see why, with the milestone discovered in
front of the east gate, that is of the time of Maximinus the Thracian
(Poenaru Bordea, C. Vladescu, Oltenia, Craiova, 1974, p. 57-"two

83
 deteriorations occurred, whose causes are as yet unknown, the first
between 130 and 140 and the second one towards the middle of the 3rd
century, according to a milestone dating from the time of Maximinus".
The resemblance between the plan of the forts at Arutela (Bivolari)
and Praetorium (Copaceni) was emphasized from the very start and
connected with their being contemporary and with the preference of
Hadrian's architects for this type of construction.
260a. Gr. Tocilescu 's excavation accounts were published by V. Christescu,
Il\IDR, pp. 144-147 and D. Tudor in BCMI, XXXIII, 106, 1940, pp. 35
sqq. South-side-112. 41 m, north-side 112.29 m, east-side 101. 10
alld west-side 100. 92 m; area approx. 1. 13 ha.
261. Evidence for the Roman defences at Peri§ani and/or Pripoarele is
contradictory and must be checked on the ground, T. I. R. _b 35 s. v.
262. The excavations carried out by the research squad led by D. Tudor
resumed the digging of the fort carried out in 1972; except for a
summary plan their results have remained unpublished. The fort
measures 63.10 by 56.70 m.

263. Technical data about the plan of the two forts are incomplete in C.
Vladescu and Poenaru Bordea, Frontieres romaines, 250-254.
264. Frontieres romaines, p. 253, fig. 7, size: 57.35 by 41.75 m.
265. In the reports published: Oltenia, Craiova, p. 51 and OR4, p. 297,
it is considered that the porta praetoria was on the west side; true,
the sketch of the plan published does not contain all the elements describec
in the text, but there has been some confusion which appears more
obvious in D. Tudor loc. cit; porta praetoria (E), decumana (N) and
princ ipalis dextra (W).
266. R. Popa, L. Nemoianu, T. Nemoianu, L. Petculescu.
267. D. Tudor, 0. R. 4, p. 287; air photographs studied in the last three
years revealed possible remains at Greble§ti, as yet not checked
on the site.
268. Continued excavations, employing inadequate research equipment,
with results largely unpublished; initially conducted by M. Macrea,
the dig was later taken over by N. Lupu, Faculty of History, Sibiu.
M. Macrea a. o., Materiale, VI, 1959, pp. 429-437 and N. Lupu,
Materiale, VII 1961, p. 411-420. The fort measures 47 by 41 m.
269. N. Lupu, In memoriam C. Daicoviciu, 1974, p. 224.

271. Excavations conducted in thenorth-side angle, that has been preserved,

have revealed a timber and an earth phase in the life of this castrum
as well as the north-west and north-east gates; the dating of the
commencement of this fort is accounted for by the fact that from the
very beginning Cohors II Flavia Numidarum appears to have belonged
to Dacia Inferior (N. Gudea, I. Pop, Pontica, X, 1977, p. 333- 339).
271a. CIL, XVI, 75 and B. Gerov, Klio 1959 it is most likely that the unj 4
had already been north of the Danube before.
272. z. Szekely, 'Sondajele muzeului din Sf. Gheorghe', Materiale, VIII,
1962 p. 331 and Materiale, X, 1973, p. 221. Cumidava, IV, 1970, P· 51.

84
273. The end of the life of the fort has been dated according to numismatic
evidence alone; but we think that one has to consider the general
monetary crisis during the period of military anarchy in the Empire.
274. Read as follows: Coh. Iill Brittonum E (quitata), Coh. IIII Bessonum,
Coh. IIII Betavorum, Coh IDI Betasianorum, Coh. IIII Belgarum, for
the last two readings see I. I. Russu, Frontferes romaines, p. 224
including the previous bibliography.
274a. Z. Szekely, SCIVA, 1975, 3, p. 343-351.
274b. Epigraphic evidence published in SCIV, 1, 1950, p. 117; z. Szekely,
SCIV, XIV, 1963, pp. 164-165; SCIVA, XXVI, 1975, 3, p. 343-351;
N. Gostar, Arheologia Moldovei IV, 1966, pp. 179-181.
274c. The camp was too small (2. 7 ha) to have held an ala quingenaria.
More about fortlet garrisons, detachments to neighbouring provinces,
recently D. J. Breez, Milit~rgrenzen Roms, II, 1977, p. 4.
27 4d . CIL, III, 953 == 7721, re-read by C. Daicoviciu as Coh. Ill Gallorum,
in Dacia, 7-8, p. 316; G. Bako, SCIVA, 26, I, 1975, p. 145, no.
31-prefers the reading: Legio XIII Gemina as Neigebauer, in 1847,
had read X not H before III.
274e. I. I. Russu, Fronti'eres romaines, Mamaia, 1974, p. 224) states that,
early in the 2nd century, the upper Olt formed part of Dacia &Iperior
and later of Dacia Inferior; the same idea I. D. R., I, p. 20 based on
the same inscription laid by legio XIII G, found at Ho. ghiz.
275. D. Tudor (RIR, XIV, 1944, pp. 157-165) considers that Dacia Inferior
was confined to the territories south of the Carpathians; when confronted
with the epigraphic evidence, however, he stated that the province
extended also across south-east of Transylvania; hints at this view can
still be found in his works, with rare exceptions "limes alutanus
s'etendait sur 235 km. entre Izlaz et Boita-Caput stenarum (recently
Frontieres romaines, 1972, p. 235, and Oltenia romana, 4, 1978,
pp. 251-252.
276. Frontieres romaines, Mamaia, p. 239; Oltenia romana4, p. 153.
277. In memoria:r,n C. Daicoviciu, p. 51 sqq. and MilWtrgrenzen Roms, II,
p. ~7-275 map 1-2.
278. It has been noted that archaeological evidence is wanting for the period
of the conquest of Dacia and the end of the 2nd century between the two
defence lines.
279. Valea Totitei, burgus identified by means of air photography and
following the field seasons of 1972 when we collected Roman pottery
fragments in the t1attened area.
28 0. It is worthy of note that we have identified for certain the fortlet on the
Urluii Valley, south of the town of Rosiorii de Vede-G. Tocilescu,
Fouilles, fig. 67; fig. 73 shows another camp located by Tocilescu south-
east of Rosiorii de Vede; the two plans are different and we cannot say
whether he published by mistake two more or less accurate sketches

85
 of the same camp, or perhaps, elsewhere, maybe in the Valley of the
Bascov, stood another smaller camp now obliterated by vineyards.
Tocilescu, however, makes no mention of this fort in his manuscripts.
281. Trajan's road ("Drumullui Traian" as it occurs in Romanian folklore)
had previously been described by C. Schuchardt, AEM, IX, 1885, p.
228 sqq, as a road paved with bricks for lack of any other kind of hard
material in the area; Gr. Tocilescu resumed research on scientific
grounds and published an account in Fouilles, p. 118 sqq. evolving
the theory that "a la fin du IIeme siecle et au debut du m-e le frontiere
parut insuffisante, ou du moins on jugea le moment venu de fortifier le
limes alutanus par une deuxieme ligne a 1I Est de 1I Aluta; c 'etait un
muraille en terre battue et cuite, large de plus de 2 metres et haute
de 3, couronne par des creneaux ayant dans la partie superieure une
gallerie pour les sentinelles" and, he goes on to say, "cette muraille
en terre brulee on peut la considerer comme une ligne de postes
avances se trouvant avec le limes alutanus dans le meme rapport que
le premier vallum de Bretagne au second. "
(p. 122 and pp. 123-124).

282. Mss. Academy of the SR of Romania; ms. 5139, p. 20-re-dates the

transalutana line to Marcus Aurelius; p. 120. The Olt cannot be
properly defended as its left bank dominates the right one and it was
for this reason that a second defence line was built, that communicated
with the one along the river by means of several roadways; p. 19-the
two defence lines completed each other and formed part of the same
defensive system; p. 121-C. Schuchardt is mistaken about considering
the vallum as a brick road; the vallum at Urluieni, swerves north-
eastwards to guard the mouths of some valleys (p. 129); p. 123-the
towers and the forts are located at the points where the vallum was
crossed by rivers. "
Quite a few pages in Tocilescu 's manuscripts contain descriptions
of the wall and hypotheses regarding building techniques. The researcher
had set himself the task of carrying on systematic surveys called for
by the study of the transalutana line.
283. V. Christescu undertook excavations at sapata de jos, Filfani,
Izba§e§ti and Urluieni ( IMDR, p. 126). The results of excavations at
Sapata de jos are the only ones to have been made available in a report
(Dacia, V-VI, 1935-1936, pp. 435-447) likewise, the study of the hoard
of coins discovered in the fort (Istros, I, 1934, pp. 73-80).
284. G. Cantacuzino, Dacia, IX-X, 1941-1944, p. 441-472, carried out
excavations of the fort at Baneasa.
285. H. Gaewska, 'Limes alutanus i transalutanus', ;'\rcheologia, XXI,
1970, pp. 71-105. This work, the outcome of a careful study of Gr.
Tocilescu 's manuscripts and of his observations on the two defence
lines, undertaken by the Polish researcher on a visit to Romania as
holder of a study award by the Academy of the SRR, includes no new
data regarding the structure, building technique and dating of these
defence lines. It is to the credit of this work, however, that it has
scrupulously gathered together all previous references to the two

86
 defensive lines and has interpreted them objectively and consistently to
support the hypothesis about their having the function of a "double limes"
that started being built as early as the beginnings of the 2nd century".
286. c. Vladescu' I Armata romana fu Dacia Inferior'' Doctorate Thesis'
presented to the University of Bucharest (Prof. Em. Condurachi).
Except for the archaeological evidence it contains, the paper abounds
in erroneous interpretations and shallow arguments.
287. E. Kornemann, Klio, VII, 1907, p.105and Klio, IX, 1909, p.500-
considers that the forts on the transalutanus were prior to the replace-
ments in stone of the Slaveni and Bumbe~ti forts, possibly dating from
ti.e time of Antoninus Pius.
288. Patsch, 'Beitr~ge' , V, 2, p. 171-considers that these two parallel
fortification lines are the work of Hadrian.
289 . E. Fabricius, R. E. , sv. Limes, col. 645.
290. A. Buday, Dalgozatok, VII, 1916, p. 26.
C. Daicoviciu, La Transylvanie, 1944 , p. 105.
I. Ferenczi , Univ. Babe~-Bolyai, 1956, I. 1-2, p. 153, sqq.
M. Macrea, I. R. , I, p. 352; ibidem, Viata in Dacia Romana , 1968,
p. 49, 107' 109.
N. Gostar, SCIV , XII, 1961, p. 192.
291. a
Istros, I, p. 75-" Si les monnaistrouvees siipata nous donnent
quelques precisions sur la fin du castellum et aussi du limes de la
Vallachie, il est plus difficile pourtant de fixer la date a laquelle il
a ete construit. A defaut d'inscriptions c'est toujours des monnaies
que nous pouvons tirer quelque eclaircissements. Le fait que les
monnaies de siipata de jos ne remontent pas plus haut que le regne de
S. S. nous fait croire que cet empereur a pousse la ligne de defense
de l'Olt vers l'Est, dans le territoire de la Valachie, tenue jusqu'alors
seulement dans la clientele des Romains et dans !'obedience du
gouverneur de la Moesie Inferieur."
292. B. Mitrea, 'Cu privire la tezaurul monetar roman imperial de la
siipata de jos ~i prabu~irea limesului transalutan', SCN, IV 1968,
p. 198, sqq-dates the coins for the second time, considering that the
last issue was in 243-244; at the same time, he holds the opinion
that the coin-hoard, which started being collected with Severan coins,
could not possibly lend support to the theory that the limes transalutanus
was built under Septimius Severus.
293. Small-scale excavations directed only to recover the plan of the forts
and to give details of the construction of the defences.
294. Our study is designed:
- to trace the constituent parts of the defensive system, and to locate
them after a preliminary study of old maps and air photographs;
- to ascertain the methods of building of the transaluta defence line,
to determine its phases of existence and to fix their chronology;
- to examine one of each typical component part, such as towers,
burgi, forts, with a view to obtaining technical and chronological evidence;

87
 - to ascertain the phases in the life of the defensive system as a
whole.
Obviously, the proposed objectives will be spaced out over a longer
time on account of modest conditions of work and research equipment
and of the fact that all these tasks cannot be possibly coped with by one
researcher.
295. The most detailed description of the vallum transalutanus has been given
by Gr. Tocilescu, who was particularly concerned with both its aspect
and methods of building used; ms. Romanian Academy 5139, sheet
120-The vallum is an elevation of ground without visible ditches; on
its top was a fenced earth wall, as shown by the burnt soil and the
traces of wicker; traces of burnt beaten soil appear throughout its
course; at Urluieni, large blocks with remnants of twigs and canes
have been found; ibidem p. 122-two parallel fences, at 2 metres'
distance, the space between them being filled with soil beaten and burnt
by heaping up wood; ibidem p. 17, verso-the earth removed from both
slopes, piled up among wicker fences, in places the beaten soil was
converted into a wall of burnt earth by prolonged burning, 3-4 m wide
Inconsistencies in the description of the vallum are not due to the
author's superficiality; they can be explained by differences in the
aspect of the vallum at various points, where it could be observed
without express diggings.
296. Frontieres romaines p. 259-265; Muntenia 1n sistemul defensiv al
imperiului roman, ms. Teza de doctorat la Universitatea Bucure§ti.
A great many observations that were not checked on the ground could
not be interpreted or turned to account, especially those referring to
the area between the two defence lines and to that north of Urluieni.
297. C. Schuchardt, AEM, IX, 1885, p. 229-admits the absence of evidence
for the vallum course between the Vedea (Gresia) and Urluieni, which
confirms the accuracy of our observations on the site.
Tocilescu ms. 5137 p. 151 says that at Urluieni "the west end goes
as far as the borderland of the north commune and ends next to the
Cotmeana river".
298. FrontH:lres romaines, p. 261, lumps of burnt soil with marks of wood-
the remains of a timber-and-earth construction-have not been found
all over the course of the vallum.. We shall do our best to uncover
a stretch of the vallum containing such a 'core' of burnt soil in order
to gain an insight into its specific role and the method of building;
likewise, during salvage diggings to be carried out at Flam1nda-a
sector without a core of burnt clay-we will try to establish the building
technique used in erecting the vallum.
299. C. Schuchardt, AEM, IX, 1885, p. 228 sqq-interpret the vallum
transalutan as a road.
300. Preliminary Report to the Scientific Session held in February 1979
(in preparation). Unfortunately, just a few Roman pottery fragments
and animal bones were unearthed by excavation.
No sufficient evidence is available for the watch towers as they are

88
 hardly visible on the surface of the terrain and air-photos have been
taken at too small a scale to bring them to the fore. Actually, the plain
is studded with mounds throughout, most of them prehistoric tumuli.
Almgren, Studien Uber Nordeuropd 'ische Fibelformen, Leipzig, 1923.
taf, I, fig. 15, p. 106.
301. Almgren, taf, I, fig. 15, p. 106.
302. In all of the sections cut, the ditch has been filled with humus in the
course of time, and archaeological evidence is actually missing; only
in SIII/1977 the filling consists of earth mixed with plenty of pottery
material. Above the filling of the ditch is a layer of soil-clay which
cannot, however, be definitely ascribed to the moment when the vallum
transalutan was built, precisely because its upper part was considerably
disturbed in modern tin1es. During the excavations under way attention
will be focussed on the chronological assessment of the earthwork fort
and on further research into its relation with the vallum.
303. A. Buday, Dolgozatok, Cluj, VII, 1916, p. 26
H. Gaewska, .QQ· cit. , p. 91 (Putineiu) p. 92 (Baneasa).
304. C. Patsch, Beitr~ge, V. 2-Der Kampf urn des Donauraum p. 171.
C. Daicoviciu, La Transylvanie, p. 105-107,
M. Macrea, Via~a ..... p. 49, 224; N. Gostar, SCIV, XII, 1961, p. 199.
305. As to pattern, the porta decumana resembles the east gate at KUnzig,
B. J. 171, fig. 7/5 (a. 140/150) but the gate of the Arutela fort as
well (a. 138). Therefore, the replacement in stone of this camp can be
dated, in relation to the shape of the gates, to the time of Hadrian or
Antoninus Pius. Among the finds published are gates typical of the
early second century (Materiale, IX, p. 255, fig. 5 and p. 258, fig.
8/4 and p. 260, fig. 10/3-even earlier).
306. Our view, AMN, VI, 1969, pp. 479-480, that there is a gap in the life
of the fort between the reigns of Hadrian and Septimius Severus was
based on the incomplete observations of unpublished pottery material
to be found at the Museum of Bra§oV. Indeed, for the time being,
datings according to pottery material are entirely subjective as no
adequate chronological assessment of the pottery material found in
Dacia has been made yet.
307. Supra, p. 8-9.
308. N. Gudea, I. Pop. _QQ. cit., p. 13, 64-65 and SMIM, 7-8, 1975, pp. 55-
77, Cumidava, VII, 1973 p. 13-16, and Cumidava VIII, 1975 p. 55-63.
Size of the fort: 118 by 124 m.
309. G. Cantacuzino, Dacia, IX-X, 1941-1944, pp. 441-472; Excavations
carried out in 1943 were not more than mere test diggings meant to
recover the plan of the fort and to section the component elements of
the defense work. Special attention was attached to determining the
construction system of the ~. but no data were made available con-
cerning the lost pottery material. The descriptions of the sections cut
abound in details, but the profiles are roughly drawn, rendering re-
constitution difficult, the more so as the remains of some posts which
were used in the construction of the defence, are described, which
however, are not indicated on the plan (p. 455, 458, 461).

89
 Size: 130 by 126 m; the long sides face north-south.
The coins found in the camp range from Antoninus Pius to Caracalla,
G. Cantacuzino, QE·..£!1:, p. 447.
310. On the south-east angle the wall is 3 m wide but is almost completely
obliterated externally (ibidem, p. 463).
G. Cantacuzino claims that this wall is only 1. 5-2 m thick; the
watch-walk-approx. 2. 50 m; we think that it is more likely 1. 5 m.
It is certain that at the angles the wall is 0. 50 m wider than the curtain
wall proper.
311. It is probable that at the north-west angle and on the east side it has
been recorded that the fire took place after the fort had long been in
use, as the layer of ruins and debris-0. 30-0. 50 m thick-is overlaid
by a large amount of burnt matter along a width of 2 m.
312. Ibidem, p. 469.
313. Excavations published in Dacia, V- VI, J 935-1937, pp. 4 ~5- 44 7 and in
IMDR, pp. 150-154.
314. Se ctions across fortification elements are not available to show possible
changes occurring in the course of time.
The large camp measures 125 by 90 m internally, the long sides
facing south-west-north-east. The brick wall is much obliterated and
its original width is not known; at present , its width (the width of its
remains) varies between 1. 50 and 2. 50 m (V. Christescu, IMDR, pp.
150-151). The brick wall-stone is not available in the area either-is
imposed upon a structure of specially prepared soil.
"Sur environ 16-17 m, de largeur une couche de terre melangee de
gravier de 0. 40-0.60 m de profondeur, recouvre la terre vierge;
au dessus, il y a une autre couche d'environ 0. 30 m, composee de
gravier melange de sable et de fragments de brique. 93. et la assez
espacee, on touve des mottes de chaux vive. Le tout a ete petri de
terre glaise, bien battue; il en est resulte un beton tres dure, qui
resistait meme au coups des pies. n est interessant de remarquer
que cette couche de beton se trouve a certains endroits meme audessus
des birques qui forment les murs". (Dacia, V-VI, p. 437).
This seems to us to be the remains of a previous wall possibly
deliberately levelled .
At Sapata de Jos, more than at Baneasa where the soil used in the
construction of the Holz-Erde-Mauer was prepared in the same way,
the fact that after the layer of soil and the course of rubble has been
placed a layer of soil mixed with fragments of brick and with limestone
leads us to the question whether or not this layer is the result of the
levelling of an earlier phase of earth and timber _
315. Ibidem, p. 437-438.
316. V. Christescu conducted excavations at Urluieni which he did not publish;
for this detail see Dacia, V- VI, p. 438. During our test diggings, we
did not section the fortification elements on the north side of the large
fort in their entirety.

90
317. V. Christescu considered that the traces of burnt wood are remnants of
the superstructure of the rampart.
318. lbidem, p. 438.
319. Excavations paid no attention to the identification of the internal buildings
in wood and no elements necessarily required by the recovery of the plan
were revealed. A problem to be solved is the existence, close to the
west angle, of a brick wall running parallel with the rampart, at 8 m
distance. As it has been recorded, this wall remains inexplicably isolated,
but it must have actually been the wall of a barrack or of another internal
building. The earliest coin in the hoard found in the praetentura
p~·obably in one of the barracks (V. Christescu, Istros, 1934, p. 73)
is from Septimius Severus' time and the last from the time of Gordian
III.
320. Dacia, V- VI, p. 441. The small fort measures 35 by 45 m; the long
sides face east-west; the vallum is 1. 5 m high, "consistant en couches
de terre battue. A 1 m profondeur mais seulement a l 'angle ouest,
on a trouve sur une distance de 2 m de la terre et du bois brule"; also
on the north-west side traces of burnt clay have been revealed and
carbonised posts set horizontally. Judging from the place where these
traces of burning were found, in our opinion, it is a porta decumana.
321. No search was made in the ditches and so the plan has been recovered
on the basis of the traces visible on the surface.
322. Coins of Commodus, Alexander Severus and Julia Mamaea (Dacia,
V- VI, 1935-37, p. 445). Another two coins that could not be deciphered
were found in the thermae.
323. SCN, IV, 1968, p. 197-205.
324. A. Aricescu, paper read at the Scientific Session of the Museum of
Transylvania, held on May 25-28, 1979, also maintains that the province
Porolissense was created at the same time as Dacia Superior and Dacia
Inferior.
325. Diploma of 1Oth August 123-I. I. Russu, Dacia §i Pannonia Inferior,
1973; Dacia, XVIII, 1974, pp~ 155-178 = IDR, no. VII.
326. The troop is attested in Pannonia (CIL, XVI, 164) in 110 and probably
came back to Dacia after having taken part in the Parthian wars.
C. Daicoviciu, D. Protase, AMN, I, p. 167. JSR. LI, 1961, p. 63 sqq. ;
D. Isac, A.MP, SVI, 1979, p. 40-67.

327. 2 July 11 0-IDR , I, no. III = CIL, XVI, 163.

328. IDR, I, p. 92.
329. J. Ornstein excavated the camp at Gherla in the past century, AEM,
XIV, 1891, pp. 168-180, in the meanwhile its eastern part was obliterated
by the Some§, and its site was partly encumbered with industrial
constructions. Test diggings carried out by D. Protase in 1968 have
not been published yet. The sketch of the plan of the castellum drawn by
I. I. Russu (Dacia §i Pannonia Inferior, fig. 3) is not explicit enough to.
clear up the differences between it and Ornstein' s sketch.
For ala II Pannon see W. Wagner, pp. 92-93; K. Kraft, p. 169.

91
330. CIL, m, 13760 and SCIV, 18, 1967, p. 178-180.
331. CIL, III, 839.
332. M. Rusu, Materiale, II, p. 690 sqq; idem SCIV, III, 1952, p. 317 sqq.
M. Macrea a. o. , Materiale, V, 1959 p. 435 sqq.
333. We would like to thank our colleague, Mr. Dan Isac, for drawing the
plan corrected in the light of the latest data as yet unpublished. But,
in our description of the fort, we used the data coming from published
results of previous excavations only.
334. Materiale, II, p. 693, and Profile Pl. II. SCIV, III, 1952, p. 316 which
contains traces of timbers. We hope that research that is going on will
more clearly reveal the typical features of the agger in the primary
fort, to the extent to which it was not disturbed in the meantime, as
it was obviously flattened during the construction of the first stone
fort.
335. Section which is not perpendicular to the fortification elements.
336. Materiale, VI, p. 455. The barracks were 4. 5 m in width and had wooden
walls held with clay.
337. Ibidem, pp. 455-456-a Hadrianic sestertius and another one dating
from the time of Antoninus Pius-the year 148-are considered terminus
post-quem for the erection of the stone fort.
338. M. Rusu, Materiale, II, pp. 694-695 advances the opinion that the stone
fort was erected before 150, maybe even under Hadrian.
339. Actions revealed by the Diploma of 123 found at Gherla. I. I. -Russu,
Dacia ~i Pannonia Inferior= IDR, I, VII.
340. Attested in Pannonia Inferior, in 114, CIL, XVI, 61.
341. I. I. Russu, SCIV, X, 1959, pp. 305-307, the stamp COH II J11 \! read
Coh(ors) II N(er\ V(ia) (Brittonum).
342. M. Macrea, AMN, VI, 1969, pp. 149-155; Rev. Muz. II, 1965,
p. 434; st. corn. Sibiu, 14, 1969, pp. 289-298.
343. Eug. Chirila, N. Gudea, V. Lucacel, C. Pop, '_Castrul de la Buciumi;
contributii la cercetarea limesului Daciei Porolissensis', Zalau,
1972.
344. The earthwork fort measures 150 by 128 m (measurements recorded
on the crest of the wall); the agger consists of well-beaten yellow clay;
stripes of black soil with sporadic Roman relics in its make up.
The traces of black soil have not been interpreted and we cannot say
whether they are traces of rotten timbers or merely of vegetal deposit
from the time the vallum was built; the~ is approx. 10 m wide
(Qp_. cit. , p. 13) but the possibility is not excluded for the profiles 5,
6, 7 to represent soil from the~· In SI (Fig. 71) the agger appears
to stretch between m. 9-17 including the berm after levelling; the
ditch of the earthwork fort is about l. 10 m deeper compared to the
corresponding surface level.

92
345. The view expressed by the authors of the report p. 121 that the foundation
of the barracks contains a level dated by coins to the year 110 and
assigned to coh. I Augusta, possibly Ituraerorum sagittariorum's stay
here, seems to us not very soundly argued given the part played by
coins in absolute dating but also because when the fragments of terra
sigillata found in the same barracks were published D. Isac, AMP, I,
1977, p. 157, noted the existence of both Trajanic and Hadrianic coins
in the same level.
346. Castrul roman de la Buciumi, p. 15-fu the description of section XVIII
(fig. 73) cut across the north-west side it is considered that the ditch
of the primary fort was running between the metres 16 and 18, and was
0. 55 m deep. It is obvious that this ditch was dug from a much higher
level, corresponding to the berm of the stone fort. The ditch of the
earthwork fort ran between metres 18-24 being later deliberately filled
with alluvial soil. M. Macrea and his collaborators (AMN, VI, 1969,
p. 149) considers that the earthwork ditch is V-shaped, 3 m wide,
and 1. 50 deep. Not all of the sides were subsequently provided with a
second parallel ditch; for instance, the north angle primary ditch
maintained in all subsequent phases; apparently, the agger was
consolidated by posts (ibidem, p. 15 but fig. 5 is indicated probably by
mistake for fig. 7). We regret to note the absence of the traced posts
on the plan-which prevents us from recovering the type of~ used
at Buciumi; likewise, we do not fully understand the presence of socket-
holes (in which the posts were probably set) in S xvm, cut across the
north-west side, which could equally belong either to the same construc-
tion, or to the ones across metres 7-8 to the~ and that across
metres 2-3 of a barrack.
347. Ibidem, p. 122. . We note that the date of the construction of the stone
fort was not determined according to the archaeological finds dug up
in conclusive circumstances but according to the shape of the gate
towers.
348. I. Ferenczi-'Contributii de cunoa§terea limesului roman de la nordul
Some§ului Mare', IT, in File de Istorie, IV, 1976, p. 123.

349. Published in Erdelyi Museum Evk{5nyve, ill, 1864-1865, pp. 10-67,

finds discovered in the lli§Ua area also published in Apulum, IV, 1961,
pp.127-138; SCIV, XI, 1960, p. 329; Materiale, IV, 1957, pp. 319-
329 and A rh. Ert. , XIX, 1899, pp. 297-3 00.
The fort is square in shape, with sides 182.05 m long, and wall in
opus incertum; of peculiar interest are its unrounded angles, which
are not encountered elsewhere on the line. fu case this is confirmed,
it is highly probable that they are a later replacement of the original
square angle towers. D. Protase has let us know that archaeological
excavation at lli§Ua have started in 1979.
350. M. Macrea, D. Protase, St. Danila, 'Castrul roman de la Orheiul
Bistritei' (1957-1960), SCIV, 18, 1967, 1, pp. 113-121. Theprofile
of the section perpendicular to the north-east side appears insufficiently

93
 deep to be interpreted correctly (fig. 35). We feel sure that further
investigation of this fort is called for, with specific objectives which
should be minutely followed.
351. The fort was wholly obliterated by the building of the road; Em.
Panaitescu, ACMIT, 1930-1931, p. 81-104 published all the monuments
recovered at Sutoru, wrongly identified with Largiana.
352. CIL, ill, 7644 and 1193.
353. N. Gudea, 'Sistemul defensiv al Daciei romane. C1teva observatii in
legatura cu faza de pamint a castrelor', AITA, XVIII, 1975, p. 71 sqq.
354. Ibidem, p. 81.
355. Ibidem, pp. 77-79.
356. R. Florescu, 'Opus Caespiticium in ctmpia Romani, in flfov, File de
Istorie, Bucure§ti, 1978, pp. 89-92.
357. Profile published in SCIV, 1952, ITI, p. 316, PI. II Materiale, IT, p. 693
and note 4-traces of timbers are visible in the black soil.
358. Brian Hobley, Roman Frontier Studies, 1967, p. 21 sqq.
359. The existence of an early Holz-Erde-Mauer may be presumed (see
above) though in the profile published by C. Daicoviciu no post holes
are indicated but only a vertical line of demarcation from what appears
to be a kind of accessus and which was built later, considering that at
the level of the ancient humus, at the internal foundation of this Holz-
Erde-Mauer, a pavement approx. 1 m wide was found.
360. G. Cantacuzino considered that the terrain was specially prepared at
the base of the wall, but there are no logical arguments to support this
idea given the dryness of the soil in this area.
Comparable situations at Sapata de jos and, as it has been stated, at
Urluieni, lead us to believe that all these defences were originally
provided with a solid vallum which was levelled when the brick wall or
the wall of earth and timber was built.
361. Remains of the timber construction have not been traced by excavation
here either.
362. We hope that further research will improve our knowledge and enable
us to trace the remnants of a possible wooden structure, in the~;
for the time being it appears that the clay-revetted timber was used
only on the crest, under the form of a palisade.
363. M. Macrea, 'Apararea granitei de Vest §i Nord-Est a Dacieiih timpul
1mparatului Caracalla', SCIV, VIIT, 1957, p. 218-fixes their building
during a lull in the Dacian wars.
364. The inscription found in the principia at Gherla (Arh. Ert. XXVI,
1906, pp. 37-38; JOAI, XII, 1909, Bbl.207) was considered to be a
proof of the construction of the stone fort at that time.
365. Materiale, V, p. 455-456; at 1. 20 m under a layer of clay filling
Hadrianic and Antonine sestertii were found. The year 148, when the

94
 coin of Antoninus Pius was minted, was interpreted as terminus post
quem for the construction of the stone-fort. Research on this site
was resumed by D. !sac, who is particularly concerned with detailed
observations to ascertain the various stratigraphic and archaeological
phases in the life of this fort, apparent in the published section.
366. It is presumed that under Antoninus Pius the forts at Micia, Bologa,
Porolissum Gherla, Ca§ei and lllilima were re-built in stone. -M.
Macrea, Via~~ .. p. 223; C. Daicoviciu, La Transylvanie, p. 109-110,
n.l.
367. To that effect, the findings of the experiment at The Lunt-Proceedings
of the Eighth International Congress of Roman Frontier Studies, p. 81.
368. IULIAE AUGUSTAE MATRI SANC[':!'IJSS[I]MI
PIISSIMIQ[U]E ANTONINI AUGUST! ET CASTRORUM
SENATUSQUE AC PATRIAE COH(ors) I BRITT[A]NICA
MILIARIA ANTONINIANA; Rev. Arch., 1929, no. 1.
Em. Panaitescu, ACMIT, 1929, p. 321-342.
369. Aelius Aristides, Orationes, XXVI, 70;
Oracula Sybilina; XVII, 181; HA, Ant. P. 5, 4, W. HUttl, Antoninus
Pius, Prague , 1936, I, p. 284 B. Mitrea, SCIV, V, 1954, pp. 474-482;
the latter enlarges upon the battles in Dacia under Antoninus Pius;
IVI· Chitescu, SCIV, XXII, 3, 1971, p. 401-410.
370. B. Mitrea, .212.· cit., p. 478.
371. The Diplomas of 144 and 157, 158-IDR, I, no. XIV=
CIL, XVI, 90; XV= CIL, XVI, 107; XVI= CIL, XVI, 108;
ala I Batavorum and ala I Bosporanorum, as well as cohors I Alpinorum
appear only in these diplomas, but it is generally considered they had
been brought to Dacia under Hadrian (W. Wagner, pp. 16-17 and 82-83).
372. The fort at Inlaceni is one of the more carefully surveyed forts in
Dacia, despite the small-scale excavations and their partly unpublished
results. Essential data concerning its planning and conclusions re-
garding subsequent replacements M. Macrea, K. Horedt a. o. in SCIV,
I, 1, pp. 304-306. The stone construction has a wall of regularly-
shaped blocks; without angle-towers and is provided with small
'abutments' forming into platforms square towers at the gates protruding
from the line of the wall; successive re-buildings noted at the towers;
an inscription dedicated to Hadrian in 129 by coh. VIII Raetorum was
used as bl!ilding stone for the south gate; but, considering that the report
specified several replacements of the gate towers, the date inscribed
in the stone cannot be taken as a certain indication for dating the stone
fort, but just one of its replacements.
M. Macrea, Omagiu lui C. Daicoviciu, 1960, pp. 341-343.
373. Probably at Odorheiul Secuiesc where stamps .c I VB have been dis-
covered (CIL, III, 8074/25 a-r. Ferenczi, Materiale, X, 1973, p.
347) but the defence is as yet unidentified.
37 4. Rescue excavations conducted prior to the construction of the large
storage lake that covered entirely the ancient city of Dierna (the

95
 modern Or~ova) did not bring to light remains of an early Roman fort
(E. Bujor, In memoriam C. Daicoviciu, p. 60) but research is of
limited scope, and their results, largely unpublished, cannot provide
absolute proof.
More attention was paid to the discovery of a quadriburgium on the
bank of the Danube. Data about Dierna in Roman times in D. Benea,
Banatica, ITI, 1975, Re§i~a, pp. 91-97.
375. M. Macrea, Omagiu lui C. Daicoviciu, p. 339 sqq.
376. 'Repertoriu Arheologic al Romaniei', ms. sv.
M. Macrea, Studii, IT, 1, 1949-the fort faces north and measures
116 by 142. 6 0 m: N. Gudea published the coins found at Mehadia
(SCIVA, 26, I, 1975, p. 147 sqq) stating, on that occasion, that M.
Macrea's field notes were lost. In cooperation with M. Moga he
published the results of excavations of the bath-houses of the fort,
Tibiscus, IV, 1975 p. 107-124; I. I. Russu, 'Inscriptiile romane din
Praetorium', Banatica, II, 1973 Re~ita, p. 103 sqq; the fort had
trapezoid angle-towers and square gate-towers projecting beyond the
line of the wall. It was constructed by coh ITI Delmatarum (CIL III,
8074, 15; 8010) occasionally assisted by coh VIII Raetorum in its
building or in one of the replacements. With the exception of the stamp
of coh. vm Raetorum no clear evidence was found to suggest when the
life of the fort began.
377. N. Gudea, Banatica, II, 1973, Re~ita, pp. 97-101; the wholly pre-
served side measures 120 m; it seems that an earth construction
existed which had an agger made of clay: wall in opus incertum with
single ditch; the archaeological evidence coming from excavations is
relatively scarce.
378. CIL, m, 1579, 8021, 8009-undated monuments.
379. C. Daicoviciu, 'Banatul ~i IazygU', Apulum, 1939-1942, I, pp. 98-
109 == Dacica 1970, p. 277.
38 0. As we have already pointed out, we know nothing of the size of the
earthwork fort and, apart from coh IT Fl. Commagenorum, the troops
that were stationed there from the very start are not known, either.
381. 0. Floca, L. Marghitan, 'Noi consideratii privitoare la castrul roman
de la Micia', Sargetia, VII, 1970, Deva,. p. 46.
382. The presence of a centurion of legio IITI F. F. -CIL m, 1353-at Micia,
extends the range of action of this legion over this point, D. Protase,
AMN, IV, 1967, p. 60-61.
383. N. Go star, Analele >?tiin1;,ifice ale Universi!{ii A. I. Cuza, Ia§i seria
Istorie, XIV, 1968, pp. 93-97 -considers that this concentration of
troops might be connected with a state of unrest in western Dacia
(under Septimius Severus). C. Petolescu holds the belief that the in-
scription is laid on the occasion of the building of a basilica castrensis
for the ala I Campagnorum at the time when the camp at Micia was
rebuilt in stone with the contribution of all the troops recorded in the
inscription (Mililttrgrenzen, II, p. 370-372).

96
384. As shown by the north side section (published by C. Daicoviciu).
385. CIL, III, 1061.
386. H. Daicoviciu, I. Glodariu, Materiale, X, 1973, pp. 78-81-its exact.
area is no longer ascertainable because of erosion by the Apa Ora§ului.
Neigebauer, Dacien ... pp. 94-95-saw the fort before its obliteration
and gave the measurements of 181.90 by 153 m (N. Gostar, AMN,
VI, 1969, p. 500, note 28). The wall (0. 95 m in width) is in opus
incertum; the west gate (4. 05 m) has no towers-just a bastion with
4. 40 m long wall perpendicular to the rampart, resembling the porta
principalis sinistra at Arutela-Bivolari and porta decumana at Tite§ti.
387. H. Daicoviciu, I. Glodariu, ..21.?.: cit. , p. 79-the plan of the gate is not
available.
388. CIL, III, 1149, 1294; and an inscription discovered in 1966 confirms
the presence of this troop. I. Berciu, I. Popa, paper read at the
Museums Session, December, 1967.
389. See note 369 and CIL, III, 1061, 1416.
390. B. Mitrea, loc. cit. , M. Macrea, Viata, .. , pp. 54-56.
391. M. Macrea, D. Prota:se, M. Rusu, '~tierul arheologic Porolissum',
Materiale, VII, 1961, p. 375; the fort measures 101.10 by 66:65 m;
1. 20 m wide wall in opus incertum with a base of 1. 60 m; 6 m wide
agger, berm sprinkled with mortar, 2. 25 m in width; the ditch was
dug only on the south-west side where the terrain is not steep; Portae
principales flanked with rectangular shaped towers, slightly projecting
beyond the line of the wall, and angles provided with trapezoid towers;
Excavations have yielded a scanty occupation level: the end of the life
in the fort seems to have been violent, as a thick layer of burning was
found in the gate towers. During the existence of the fort on the Citera
an annex building was constructed (190 by 190 m) which is considered
to be contemporary with the earthwork fort (ibidem, p. 376) but it has
not been examined yet. Until further evidence is available it cannot
be connected with any period in the life of the fort until the final abandon-
ment, which probably occurred some time during the Marcomannic
wars.
392. Materiale, VII, 1961, p. 374; in the place of the gate towers with
semi-circular protrusion, traces of an earlier stone construction were
found, presumably the work of Antoninus Pius.
393. See above.
394. Materiale, VI, pp. 445-456.
395. A. Buday, Dolgozatok, Travaux, V, 1914, pp. 106-108.
396. B. Gerov, Klio, 1959, XXXVII, pp. 196-210.
396a. Z. Szekely, SCIV, XIV, 1, 1963, p. 165-considers it to be ala Gallorum
from the Diploma CIL XVI 90; N. Gostar, Arheologia Moldovei, IV,
1966, pp. 171-181-considers that it was ala I Gallorum Capitoniana of
the army of Dacia Inferior.

97
397. Z. Szekely, SCIVA, XXVI, 3, 1975, pp. 343-351-naturally, ala
Palmyrenorum was levied late in the 3rd century A. D.
398. L. Lenschi, CRAI, 1945, p. 144 sqq re-read by R. Syme, JRS, XLIV,
1954 and JRS, LII, 1962, pp. 87-96; M. Macrea, Via~ ... pp. 59-60.
399. Ion Piso, Revue Roumaine d'Histoire, 6, 1973, pp. 1006-1007.
400. SHA, Vita Marci, 22, 1; R. Noll, Archeologia Austriaca, 14, 1954,
p. 43, sqq. We are not going to enter into details about military develop-
ments because our knowledge derived from epigraphic records and
literary sources has already been made use of. The wars with the
Marcomanni brought about the last administrative changes in Dacia,
shown in the activities of M. Claudius Fronto (CIL VI, 1377 ILS,
1098 ). It is not known whether the formation of Dacia Apulensis and
Dacia Malvensis involved territorial changes (C. Daicoviciu, H.
Daicoviciu, AMN, IV, 1967, pp. 79-83) or if they are simply new names
for the old territories of Dacia Superior and Dacia Inferior respectively
(M. Macrea, AMN, m, 1966, p. 149; D. Tudor, 0. R. 4 p. 161 ).
401. The last coin found in the layer of debris of a suburban villa near
Sarmizegetusa was issued in 164 (Sargetia, 1, 1937, p. 58); CIL HI
7969 = ILS 371. Sarmizegethusa Ulpia Traiana had to face two dangers
and the date on the latest tablets buried in the Apuseni mountains is the
year 167; Apuleius Marcus, questor of the city of Sarmisegethusa will
rebuild a porticus cum cubiculis after the city "ancipiti pericolo
virtutibus restituta" (H. Daicoviciu, I. Piso, AMN, XII, 1975, pp. 159-
163).
402. B. Mitrea, SCIV, V, 1954, p. 482 and D. Protase, AMN, VI, 1969, p.
512, notes two directions from which the enemy penetrated Sarmizegetusa
from Moldavia and from the Banat-thus justifying the "double danger"
the city met with.
403. CIL Ill, 949.
404: Istvan and Geza Ferenczi, Sargetia, VII, 1970, pp. 59-78.
405. Istvan and Geza Ferenczi, Materiale, VII, 1961, pp. 402-403-its early
phase cannot be dated for lack of conclusive evidence.
406. C. Daicoviciu, Dacia, VII-VIII, 1937-1940, p. 320.
407. D. Protase, AMN, VI, p. 512, note 13.
408. The ruins of this fort were of impressive size until the 18th century.
Since then they have been persistently obliterated, being used as a
source of building materials and in the antiquities trade. The first
systematic archaeological survey was conducted in 1958; larger-scale
excavations have been resumed since 1971.
I. H. Cri§an, Materiale, VII, 1961, pp. 431-437; M. Barbulescu,
a. o. in Potaissa, 'studii §i Comunicari, I, 1978, Turda, p. 5 sqq.
Approximate size: north side- 575 m; south side 562 m; east and
west side-410m. It covers 22.9 ha.

98
409. M. Thirbulescu, ..2E· cit. ,p. 6.
410. I. H. Cri§an, .2E.· cit. , p. 436.
411. M. Barbulescu , .2E.· cit., p. 9.
412. leg. I Italica at Potaissa (CIL III 889) and leg X Fretensis at Do:rnne§ti
(CIL III, 7625) . .
413. M. Macrea , Via~a ... , p. 73; coh I Hispanorum milliaria probably
fought in Galicia (ILS 9171).
414. M. Thirbulescu, Z. Milea, SCIVA, 26, 4, 1975, pp. 571-575.
415. Ibidem; N. Gudea, AMP, Zalau, II, 1978-stampsof legio VII Gemina
and of legio III Gallica were found in the gates of the Pomat fort.

416. B. Dobson, Epigr. St., 8, pp.122-124-re-dates the inscription of

Ujo ·(AE, 1935, no. 12), that had been assigned to Trajan; on the basis
of the new dating proposed by E. Birley for Hyginus (Corolla memoriae
E. Swoboda dedicata, p. 5, sqq. n. 6) assuming that bellum dacicum
is the one mentioned by HA, V. Comm, 13, 5 and Cassius Dio LXXII,
8.
417. The inscription at Intercisa CIL III 3385, referring to the Danube can
be regarded as a token of Commodus' s undertakings for the welfare of
the province following the conclusion of peace.
417a. M. Macrea, AISC, IV p. 241sqq. C. Daicoviciu, St. Cl., VII, 1965,
p. 237 sqq. V. Christescu, Viata economica, 1929, p. 132 sqq.
418. M. Macrea's study 'Apararea grani~ei de Vest §i Nord Est a Daciei
1n timpul 1mparatului Caracalla', SCIV VIII, 1957, p. 215 sqq.
419. I. I. Russu, SCIV, 19, 1968, p. 667.
420. CIL III, 14485 a.
421. It is not known for certain whence this troop came from; its surname,
Aurelia shows that it could be of comparatively recent date, N. Go star,
Arheologia Moldovei, IV p. 182-184 and not the same as cohors
milliaria Brittonum based at stolniceni (CIL III 14216, 25). D. Tudor
considers that it is one and the same with coh I Augusta Nervia Pacensis
Brittonum, attested by the Diploma of Dacia Inferior in 140.
422 . Owing to the fact that no trace of the fort with muri caespiticii was
found it can be presumed that the earthwork fort was completely
destroyed and that only the internal buildings remained in use, which
faced a different direction than the walls of the fort (Gr. Florescu, a. o.
Materiale, IV, 1957, pp. 108-11 0). We think that further research is
called for in the non-obliterated third of the fort, in order to assess the
chronology of the various phases in its construction, which can be inferred
from the plan recovered by excavations carried out so far.
423. See above p. 6 note 22. Excavations revealed the fortification elements
on the east and south sides; the fort measures 156 by 114 m; it is

99
 considered that it faces south; 2nd century pottery fragments were
found in the agger; apart from Roman pottery fragments (and terra
sigillata or local imitations), grey-burnished Dacian (?) pottery frag-
ments were found, decorated with netted stripes; this ware and the
Salonina coin discovered in the fort lead us to presume that it may have
been in use in a later period.
D. Tudor and M. Davidescu consider that there is the possibility
that the fort was rebuilt early in the 3rd century, thus explaining the
existence of 2nd century pottery material in the ~ (Drobeta, Turnu
Severin, 1976, pp. 62-74) and a second ditch is added.
424. CIL III 1374-the replacement in stone of the barracks apparently came
to a close around 204-205 when a basilica castrensis for the ala I
Campagonum was built (CIL III 1343 ).
425. C. Daicoviciu, Dacia, VII-VIII, 1937-1940, p. 326; .
M. Macrea, SCIV, VIII, 1957, pp. 236-237. M. Macrea considers
that this fort was built in stone only after Caracalla as the inscriptions
found in the gates read: Imp. Caes. M. Aur. Antoninus Pius Aug.
Felix Particus Maximus Pontifex maxi, Brit. Max Trib. Potes XVI
Imp. II Cos IIII P. P. PROCOS FECIT;
426. SCIV, VIII, 1957, p. 238.
427. SCIV, X, 1959, pp. 311-312, building inscription.
428. ACMIT, 1929, pp. 321-342,
429. S. Ferenczi, Frontieres romaines, p. 205.
430. M. Macrea, a. o. Materiale, VIII, 1962, pp. 493-496;
Dolgozatok-Travaux, V, 1914, pp. 95-98 and VI, 1915, p. 96 sq.
AISC II, 1933-1935, p. 254 sq. and 302 sq. Arh. Ert., V-VI, 1944
pp. 146-149, 163-166.
431. Porolissum had been a municipium ever since the time of Septimius
Severus, Dacia VI-VIII, 1937-40, p. 326, no 7 (bed)= AE, 1944,
52-54.
432. The earth vallum was sectioned between the two burgi; its base is
8. 5 m wide; its height (as it stands now) is 1. 5 m; the ditch is 3. 5 m
wide and 1. 40 m deep. Materiale, VIII, 1962, p. 494.
433. The burgi, spaced at a distance of 500 m, occur "below the Citera";
the large burgus has sides of unequal length (60 m west; 62 m north;
60.5 m east; 64 m south) and west and south gates; the west and the
north sides are common with the vallum. An internal burnt barrack
(3 by 4 m) has been excavated, and a Nero coin was found in the burning;
The small burgus measures 32.5 m by 37 m (ibidem) and its west side
is common with the vallum. ·
434. M. Moga, SCIV, I, 1, 1950, p. 134; M. Macrea, a.o. Materiale, VII
(1961) p. 376-377.
435. We do not think it safe to date the defence works as a whole according
to the coin found in the large burgus.

100
436. On the external wall is a platfonn (3. 65 by 3 m in size); on the internal
wall-a tower in opus incertum ( 3 by 3 m) built concurrently with the
vallum-on the towers superstructures were built in timbers. I.
Ferenczi considers (AMN, V, 1968, pp. 89-90) that this double wall,
as well as its replacement in stone, in the vicinity of Porolissum, are
subsequent constructions that could be assigned to Hadrian, Antoninus
Pius and Caracalla.
437. M. Macrea, Via\~ .. p. 231.
438. The line along the Mese§ was considered to be a closed limes, built to
the pattern of the one in Upper Gennany; the intention of the limes in
this zone has been a long-debated question. Bibliography for I.
Ferenczi, SCIV, X, 2, 1959 p. 337-339. Field research conducted by
I. Ferenczi made available a detailed topographic study of the constituent
parts of the defence; Dacia, XI, 1967 , pp. 143-162 and AMN, V, 1968,
pp. 75-97.
In recent years, N. Gudea has undertaken research into some of these
parts (AMN, VIII, 1971, pp. 507-529). We stand by our objections
concerning the excavation of this defence, of the wooden towers particu-
larly, which, in our opinion, have not been given whole attention.
439. All the data supplied by N. Gudea QE· cit. , plus a map of the Bologa
zone and the plan of the excavated towers; the same map in ANRW, II
6' 1977, fig. 7' p. 864.
440. St. Ferenczi, AMN, V, 1968, p. 81.
441. St. Ferenczi, SCIV, X, 2, 1959, pp. 344-345-only those lying in the
vicinity of Porolissum have been searched.
442. Ibidem.
443. St. Ferenczi, 'Contribu~ii la problema limesului de Vestal Daciei',
II/1, AMN, IX , 1972, p. 398 and 408. In the vicinity of the city of
Napoca (the modern Cluj-Napoca), at the point Mana~tur a tower seems
to have existed which, according to St. Ferenczi, connected Gilau
with the city; we would rather think that it ensured the link with the
legion based at Potaissa.
444. St. Ferenczi, Frontieres romaines, Mamaia, p. 203.
445. I. Ferenczi, 'Cu privire la apararea hotarului de nord al provinciei
Dacia', Studii §i Comunicari, Satu Mare, 11, 1969, pp. 91-11 0; idem,
'Cercetari §i rezultate noi pe limesul de nord al Daciei romane',
File de istorie, Bistri\a, II, 1972, pp. 37-46; idem, 'Cercetari ~i
rezultate noi pe limesul Daciei intercarpatice', Apulum XI, 1973,
pp. 191-222; idem, 'Contribu\ii la cunoa§lterea limesului roman la
nordul Some§lului Mare', I-Sargetia, X, 1973, pp. 79-104 and IT-File
de istorie, 1976, pp. 107-130; idem, 'Die nordstrecke des dakischen
Limes vom Cri~l Repede bis zu den Ostkarpaten, Frontferes romaines,
197 4, pp. 201-205, idem, Dacia, XXII, 1978, p. 259-288; Dacia, XVIII,
1974, p. 126-136.
446. St. Ferenczi, Fronti'eres romaines, Mamaia, 1974, pp. 202-203; it is
actually a fortlet as at Negreni and Negrile§lti, etc.

101
447. st. Danila, File de istorie, I, 1971, pp. 265-266, fig. 5.
448. G. and I. Gerenczi, Materiale, X, 1973, pp. 348-349 two small burgi
measuring 41 by 31 m and 24 by 24 m, respectively at 200 m distance
from one another; I. Ferenczi, Frontferes romaines, Mamaia, p.
204.
449. N. Vlassa, st. Danila, 'sapaturile arheologice de la Sara~el', Materiale,
VIII, 1962, p. 346, a stone fortlet commanding the confluence of the
rivers Sieul and Bistrita, at &ira~el.
449a. Limes, Szekesfehervar, 1978, pp. 365-375.
450. I. I. Russu, Activ. Muz., 1956, no. 3-dated to A. D. 224 and no 2
to about the same time.
451. Ibidem, no. 4 from AD 230.
452. C. Daicoviciu, AMN, Ill, 1966, p. 166, no 7 and note 52 re-reads CIL
Ill 825 bf. cos. agens in m(u)nere stat(ionis).
453. I. I. Russu, op. cit. , no 1 from AD 243.

454. CIL Ill 827 = 7633 from 239.

455. C. Daicoviciu, AMN, Ill, 1966, p. 166, no 6 re-reads CIL Ill 822 bf.
cos. leg. V(M) pie (sic) agens sub signis reg. Ans.
456. Ibidem, pp. 167-170.
457. V. Parvan, Getica, pp. 275-276.
458. C. Daicoviciu, op. cit., p. 168.
459. The fortlet at Negrile§ti was the only one along the north border known
at that time; we wonder whether the statio in regio Ansamensium should
not be looked for at one of the points containing remains of a middle-
sized fort indicated by I. Ferenczi. Negrile§ti could have been a
statio within the territory neighbouring upon Ansamenses .
.460. C. Daicoviciu, .2£· cit. , p. 169, see and p. 168 note 56.
461. CIL Ill tab. cerate VIII= IDR I, no I p. 193-197 of 9 Feb. 167.
462. CIL, Ill 8060 M. Macrea, ACMIT, IV 1932-1938 p.232-233; V. Parvan,
Getica, p. 275-276 ; I. I. Russu, IDR, I, p. 188 doubts that this statio
Resculi is identifiable with the one inscribed on the mile-stone, there-
fore, with the one in the Bologa area.
463. C. Daicoviciu, AMN, Ill, p. 164, note 56-military statio in the
neighbourhood of the mining area; accepted also by I. I. Russu, ..2P.:.
cit. , p. 188.
464. Alburnus Maior and Bologa are the only points on the northern sector
of the Apuseni range where Roman troops are attested, and the possi-
bility is not entirely excluded for the text concerning the collegium
ftmeraticium to have been posted at Aburnus and Resculum.
465. I. Ferenczi, SCIV, X, 2, 1959, pp. 347-349, 359; Dacia, XI, 1967,
p. 152.

102
466. C. Daicoviciu, .2.2.· cit., pp. 168-169.
467. H. A., v Al. S., 58, 4-5; Fr. Altheim, R. Stiehl, 'Eine agrarpolitische
Massnahme S. Alexanders', in Romanitas, 6-7, 1965, pp. 321-330
(quoted by C. Daicoviciu, ~· cit. ).
468. R. Grosse, IWm Milit~rgeschichte, 1920, p. 65.
469. Schl5nberg, JRS, LIX, 1969, p. 152, 154; F. Kichle, Historia, XI, 2,
1962, p. 188-189; Richmond, History, 1959, XLIV, p. 113.
470. Milliarieswere found at Babiciul Episcopiei CIL III, 13802 and
Gostavatu-Slaveni-CIL III, 14216, 18.
471. CIL III 13800-the inscription on the foundation stone laid by ala I
Hispanorum and bricks bearing the same stamp; inscribed tiles
coming from the bath-houses were found bearing the stamp of ala
Claudia and dated to before their rebuilding early in the 3rd century.
D. Tudor, SMIM, 7-8, 1974-75, p. 17.
472. G. Tocilescu, ms. Acad, 5139 pp. 40-44.
473. D. Tudor, MilWtrgrenzen II, p. 401, in 0. R. 4 p. 302-this wall that
parallels the rampart wall at 6 m distance is only 0. 6 0 m wide.

474. D. Tudor, 0. R4, p. 302.

475. D. Tudor, oR4, pp. 302-303.
4 76. Unfortunately, these important data concerning the internal organisation
of this fort were never published; the size of the barracks (D. Tudor
0. R. 4, p. 306)-9. 60 by 43.5 m and their rooms are fully appropriate
to hold an ala. B. D. Breeze, B. Dobson, Roman Frontier Studies, 1969,
Cardiff, 1974, pp. 16-17.
477. See above.
478. D. Tudor, Bucure§ti, 1-2, 16/5 p. 111 == IDR II, no. 610. The fort is
too small to have held an ala or a cohors B equitata; the area of this
fort, whose wooden barracks for the soldiers' quarters have not been
systematically searched, could be appropriate for a numerus equitum.
The fort, measuring 132.35 by 98.65 m, has a wall built in riverstones
1. 80-1.90 m width, an agger with a 6 m wide base, and a berm of 2 m;
the ditch is 7-13 m wide and 3 m deep. Four levels of habitation have 1

been ascertained; Em. Popescu 's observations (Materiale, IX, p. 252)

are essential, being the only ones to refer to the phases in the life of
this fort. A remark worthy of special interest is the one on page 252:
"all the deposits of the primary level are under the layer of mortar
fragments fallen during the building of the rampart wall, and spread
close along the wall to a width of 0. 3 0-0. 4 0 m 11 , p. 253-in the wooden
dwelling the four levels succeed one another as follows: "the first
level is covered by the agger; the second is contemporary with the
agger; the third level was obtained by using part of the height of the
agger in the construction of the dwellings; at the third level a Gordian
Ill coin was discovered. The ~ourth level has a passageway made of

103
 bricks laid over the burnt, demolished dwelling". The last two levels
ended by being destroyed by fire.
479. D. Tudor, Front{eres romaines, p. 245.
480. This locality has been long known for the ancient remains it contains:
the first systematic survey was conducted by Gr. Tocilescu but, however,
he never published the results-some of which were used by V. Parvan
(in 'stiri nou:i din Dacia Malvensis'-Mom. Sect. Ist. An. Acad. R., IT,
XXXVI, p. 54) and by D. Tudor (Apulum V, 1964, p. 233-257);
systematic excavations were carried out by Gr. Florescu (' Castrul
roman de la Racari'-Dolj, Craiova, 1931). The fort measures 173.20
by 111. 50 m, its long sides face east-west. The 1 m wide wall is built
in opus incertum, has rectangular gate and angle towers, slightly
projecting beyond the line of the wall.
480a. N. Gostar, SCIV, III, 1954, p. 607; Gr. Florescu, Castrul de la Racari,
p. 19.
481. Sargetia, VII, 1970, p. 64.
482. N. Go star (An. st. Univ. Cuza, Ia~;i, XIV, 1968, p. 93 sqq) thinks
that the fragmentary inscription found at Micia on Dacia' s eastern
frontier-line CIL Ill, 1343 would suggest a concentration of troops to
prevent a danger from outside; a state of emergency seems to have
come about in Pannonia, too (J. Fitz, Acta. Arch, XI, 1959, p. 253)
which occasioned Septimius Severus's visit there in 202.
The presence at Germisara of some soldiers coming from other
frontier sectors, cannot be taken to account for their being based here,
given the existence of thermal baths in this locality.
483. CIL Ill 14416 at Oescus, B. Gerov, Acta of the V Epigraphic Congress,
1967 , pp. 431-436; Em. Doruvu-Boila, SCIV, 24, 3, 1975, p. 435-
441; A. Bodor, In memoriam C. Daicoviciu, p. 48 sqq. D. Tudor,
Latomus, XIV, 1960, p. 350 sqq-denies a war waged with the Carpi
reading the inscription at Oescus as Cenni not Carpi.
The discovery in the thermae at Pietroasele, probably in a secondary
position, of the stamp of legio XI Claudia Antoniniana (see note 59
above) leads us to think that the construction was possible of a fort for
a marching campaign by a vexillatio of this legion precisely on account
of the wars with the Carpi; this people occupied central Moldavia at
that time, a region which lay in the immediate vicinity of the territory
of the imperial clients in Wallachia and southern Moldavia. Nothing
is surprising about the existence of one or several defences in Wallachia
if we take account of the obligations that derived from the treaties with
the client states.
484. Ili§ua, CIL Ill 795, 796; Porolissum, Dacia VII-VIII, p. 326, SCIV,
8,1957, p. 222; Micia-CILIII1378, 1376; Ca§ei, AISCI, 2,1929-
32, p. 60; Buciumi SCIV X, 1959, p. 311; Inlaceni, Almanahul Muz.
reg. Sf. Gheorghe, 1955, p. 42 and the miliary found at Vi§tea re-
written by Caracalla AISC, I, 1, 1928-32, pp. 48-53.

104
485. M. Macrea, Cumidava, AISC, IV, 1941-1943, p. 241; CIL III 797;
798; A. Ep. 1912, 2.
486. Zosimos,I, 20; S. Soproni, Folia Arheologica, 15, 1963, pp. 43-54;
C. Daicoviciu, st. Cl. 7, 1965, p. 242; K. Horedt, Apulum, XI, 1973,
p. 90; M. Macrea, Viata, pp. 440-441; Gh. Bichir, Cultura Carpica,
Bucure§ti, 1973, pp. 112-119; I. Piso, Inmemoriam C. Daicoviciu
pp. 301-309. M. Macrea, D. Protase, SCst, Cluj, V, 1954, pp. 495-
566.
487, V. Christescu, Istros, I, pp. 73-80.
488. Gh. I. Petre-Govora, SCN, IV, 1968, p. 207: B. Mitrea, SCN, IV, 1968,
pp. 209-222.
489. D. Tudor, Historia, XIV, 1965, pp. 368-380.
490. R. Vulpe, DID, II, 1968, p. 270 sqq. B. Gerov, Acta Philippopolitana,
VI, 1962, pp. 127-146.
491. B. Mitrea, X Congres Sciences Historiques, Rome, 1955, p. 149;
idem SCIV, 4, 3-4, 1953, pp. 611-640; M. Macrea, D. Protase, SCS,
Cluj 5, 1954, 3-4 pp. 495-566; D. Protase, I. H. Cri§an, SCN IV, 1968,
pp. 139-173; C. Preda, SCN IV, 1968, pp. 175-205; D. Protase, A.
Zrinyi, AMN, 2, 1965, pp. 257-268; G. Lazin, SCN 5, 1971, pp. 335-344.
492. V. Christescu, Viata economica; M. Macrea, Viat;,a .... , pp. 324-325.
493. EDR IV, 1930, p. 137 sqq; Latomus XVIII, 1957, p. 223 sqq.
494. G. Forni, Limes, 1269.
495. F. Lot, Fin du monde antique, 1927, pp. 63-65.
496. D. Tudor, Historica, I, Craiova, 1970, pp. 67-83. Frontieres
romaines 1974, p. 246.
497. D. Tudor, Oltenia Romana, ed. 4, p. 307.
498. Ibid.
499. At Porolissum the coins go on till Gallienus AMN, 1, 1964, p. 217.
sqq. An Aurelian coin was found at Boro§neuDacia, XIX, 1975,
p. 322.
500. Talk about the abandonment of Dacia by C. Daicoviciu, AISC, III, 1936-
1940, pp. 240-255 and Dacica, 1974, p. 476 sqq; M. Macrea, Viata, pp.
271-274 also Vl. Uiescu and R. Vulpe, Dacoraomania, 1, 1973, pp. 5-51.
501. Eutropius, IX, 15, 1.
502. M. Macrea, Viata .... , p. 234.
503. C. Daicoviciu, La Transylvanie, p. 74. and SCIV, I/1, 1950, p. 132.
504. CIL, m, 8060; 14216, 19; 8061.
505. CIL, III, 1176 = ILS, 514 (Sarmizegetusa).

506. AEM, 14, 1891, pp. 10-11, no. 4 = IDR, 11, no. 639 of 249 found in a
feudal tower at Turnu M:igurele where it might have been brought from
Romula along the Olt or from Oescus.
105
507. M. Macrea, AISC, IV, 1941-43, p. 249; N. Gudea, I. Pop, Cumidava,
1971, p. 37-the specific detail is given that the walls of the construction
have no foundation, which entitles us to ask whether or not the surface
level corresponding to the construction had been much higher and was
destroyed by agricultural activities; for the blocking of gates ibid. , p. 24.
508. M. Macrea a. o. ; SCIV, IT, 1951, pp. 304-306.
509. 'Castrul roman de 1: - ~; 11mi', 1972, p. 30 and 122. At Buciumi via
sagularis was out of use and Cl, C2 andC3 were built over it and prob-
ably C4 was developed. 'The C3 building, and the additional buildings
on the north-east side of C4, are late constructions; the last of them,
R-S whose walls are set in clay, drawing near to the date when the
troop withdrew from the fort and even later".
510. N. Gudea, MilW:trgrenzen, II, p. 325. At Bologa, over the~ and
the via sagularis an edifice A was built; at the same time the porta
praetoria and porta decumana were blocked.
511. Constructions subsequent to the military use of the fort were traced at
Micia-C. Daicoviciu, ACMIT, 1930-1931, p. 27. During the second
test digging at a depth of 4 metres, close to the wall a brick hearth was
uncovered, at 0. 40 below the present level, possibly a habitation sub-
sequent to the 'abandonment' of the fort.
512. M. Macrea, studii, 1 (II), 1949, p. 139; N. Gudea, SCIVA, 26, 1,
1975 p. 147 sqq. -published the coins found in the fort which testify to
their late issue: Maximinus (1), Gordian (1), Philip (3), Volusian (2),
Q. Herennius Etruscus (1), Valerian (3), Constantine I (5), Constantine
II (2), Constans (1 ).
513. MilWtrgrenzen II, p. 331 sqq. ; idem 'Die Letzten Jahrzehnte der
Provinz Dakien in SiebenbUrgen': Apulum,XVI, 1978, pp. 211-237.
Completing the plan of the fort searched by Z. Szekely at Comalau
(A. Komolloi er6ditett romai tabor, 1942) K. Horedt notes that it is the
plan of an ordinary fort typical of the second half and close of the 3rd
century; at Boro§neul Mare, the stay of the ala I Palmyrenorum (Z.
Szekely, SCIVA, 26, 1975, 346), a troop created in 251 at the earliest
(W. Wagner, p. 56) prolonged the occupation of the fort after that date;
an earth wall named "Honarka" by local inhabitants (I. Pulovics, Dacia
Keleti hatarvonala, 1944, pp. 66-68) and whose Roman character was
denied by C. Daicoviciu (SCIV, I, 1, 1950, p. 118) is associated with
an auxiliary defence of the Negru River when Angustia-Bre~cu seems
to have been abandoned under pressure by the Goths.
514. K. Horedt, Apulum, XVI, p. 234.
515. Dacoromania, 3, 1974, pp. 59, 61.

106
 LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

Abhandlungen Abhandlungen der Preussischen Akademie der

Wissenschaften.
ACMIT Anuarul Comisiei Monumentelor Istorice pentru
Transilvania, Cluj, I-VI, 1928-1931-1938.
Acta Classica Acta classica Universitatis Scientiarum Debrecenien-
sis, Debreceni.
A eta Antiqua Acta Antiqua Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae,
Budapest.
A eta Arch Hung Acta Archaeologica Academiae Scientiarum
Hungaricae, Budapest.
AeE Arcaeologiai Ertesito, Budapest.
AEM Arch:tologisch-Epigraphische Mitteilungen aus
Oesterreich, Wien.
AI IA Anuarul Institutului de Istorie §i Arheologie, Cluj.
AISC Anuarul Institutului de Studii Clasice, Cluj, I.:.V,
1928-1948.
Almgren Studien Uber Nordeurop:tische Fibelformen, Leipzig
1923.
AMN Acta Musei Napocensis, Cluj.
AMP Acta Musei Porolissensis, Zalau.
ANRW Aufstieg und Niedergang der rtlmiscen Welt,
herausgegeben von H. Temporini und W. Haase.
Ann E Annee Epigraphique.
An st Univ Cuza, Ia~i Analele Stiintifice ale Universita~ii Al. I. Cuza,
Ia§i.
Anzeiger, Wien Anzeiger der Akademie der Wiessenschaften, Wien.
Apulum Apulum, Acta Musei Apulensis, Alba Iulia.
Arh Mold Arheologia Moldovei, Ia§i, Bucure§ti.
ARM SI Academia Romana, Memoriile sec~iei Istorice
Baatz, R L D. Baatz, Der rtlmische Limes, Berlin 1974.
BC M I (BM I) Buletinul Comisiumii Monumentelor Istorice,
after 1976 (Buletinul Monumentelor Istorice).
Bericht R G K Bericht der Rtlmisch-Germaniscen Kommission,
Deutsches Arch:t logisches Instituts, Frankfurt am
Main. 107
BJ Bonner JahrbUcher.
BMC Coins of the Roman Empire in the British Museum.
ARBSH Academie Roumaine; Bulltin de la Section Historique,
Bucarest.
Bul Muz Mil Buletinul Muzeului Militar, Bucuref?ti.
CAH Cambridge Ancient History.
Christescu, IMDR V. Christescu, Istoria Militara a Daciei Romane,
Bucure§ti, 1937.
Christescu, Viata V. Christescu, Viata economica a Dacici romane.
economica Pitef?ti, 1929.
H. Cohen, Description des monnaies frappees
Cohen
dans l'empireromain, Paris, 1-VIIT.
Dacia Dacia, recherches et decouvertes archeologiques
en Roumainie, Bucuref?ti I-XII-1924-1947; N SI,
1957.
Daicoviciu, La Transylvanie C. Daicoviciu, La Transulvanie dans l'antiquite,
Bucarest, 1945.
Daicoviciu, Dacica C. Daicoviciu, Dacica, studii f?i articole privind
istoria veche a pammtului romfuesc, Cluj.
C. Daicoviciu, Af?ezarile dacice din Muntii Ora§tiei,
Al Ferenczi, Bucure~ti, 1951.

DID Din Istoria Dobrogei, I, IT, Bucure§ti.

Dolgozatok Dolgozatok-Travaux de la Section numismatique et
archoologique du Musee National de Transylvanie,
Cluj, I-X, 1910-1919.
EDR Ephemeris Dacoromana, Roma
Epigr st Epigraphische studien, Ktjln, Graz.
Filow B. Filow, Die Legion en der Provinz Moesia von
Augustus bis auf Diokletian, Leipsig, 19 06.
Forni, Limes G. Forni, Limes in Dizionario epigraphico, E.
Ruggiero, Roma.
Frontieres romaines Actes du IX Congres international d 'etudes sur les
Frontieres Romaines, Bucuref?ti, Ktlln, 1974.
Goos, Chronik C. Goos, Chronik der arch. Funde Siebenburgens,
Sibiu, 1876.
I G R Inscriptiones Graecae ad res Romanas pertinentes,
Paris, I-IV.
I L S Dessau, Inscriptiones latinae selectae.
IR Istoria Romaniei, Bucuref?ti, 1960.
J 0 A I Jahreshefte des oesterreichischen archttologischen
Institutes im Wien ..
JRS Journal of Roman studies.
K. Kraft K. Kraft, Zur Rekrutierung der Alae und Kohorten
am Rhein und Donau, Berna, 1951.
Limes, Szekesfehervar Limes, Akten des XI Internationalen Limes-
kongresses, Szekesfehervar, 1978.
Limes Forschungen Limes Forschungen , Studien zur Organization der
R..omischen Reichsgrenze am Rhein und Donau,
Berlin.
M. Macrea, Viata M. Macrea, Viata fu Dacia Romana, Bucure~?ti,
1969.
Marsigli, Danubius A. F. Marsigli, Danubius Poannonicus-Mysicus,
1- VI, Amsterdam-G aga, 1726.

Materiale Materiale ~?i cercetari arheologice, Bucure~?ti I

(1954) IT (1956), Ill (1957), IV (1957), V (1959), VI
(1960), VII (19 ), VIII (19 ), IX (19 ), X (19 ).
MiliHtrgrenzen, I, IT Studien zu den Milit~rgrenzen Roms, Vo.rtrage des
6 Internationalen Limeskongresses in SUddeutschland,
1967.
VortrH.ge des 10 Internationalen Limeskongresses
in der Germania Inferior, IT, Ktlln, 1977.
B. Milleker B. Milleker, Delmagyarorszag regisegleletei,
1-111, Timisoara, 1897-1906 .

Neigebauer, Dacien I. F. Neigebauer, Dacien aus den Uberresten des

Klassischen Altertums, Bral?ov, 1851.
OR D. Tudor, Oltenia Romana, ed. IV, Bucure~?ti,
1978,
Parvan, Getica V. Parvan, Getica, Oprotoistorie a Daciei,
Bucure§ti, 1926.
Patsch, Beitr~ge C. Patsch, Beitrage zur Vljlkerkunde von SUdos-
teuropa, V, 1, 1932; V, 2, 1937.
RE Paully-Wissowa, Real EncyclopH.die der Klassischen
Altertumswissenschaft.
Rep. Arh Repertoriul Arheologic al Romaniei, mss Institutul
de Arheologie din Bucure~?ti.
Rev. Arch. Revue Archeologique, Paris
Rev. Muz Revista Muzeelor, Bucure~?ti.

RIC H. Mattingly, E. A. Sydenham, Roman Imperial

Coinage, London, 1924.
RIR Revista Istorica Romana, Burure~?ti, 1-xvm,
1931-1947.
Sargetia Sargetia, Buletinul jude~lui Hunedoara, Deva.
SMIM Studii ~i Materiale de Istorie ~?i Muzeografie
Militara, Bucure~?ti.

109
SCIV (SCIVA) Studii §i Cercetari de Istorie Veche (after 1975).
Studii §i Cercetari de Istorie Veche §i Arheologie)
SCN Studii §i Cercetari Numismatice, Bucure§ti.
S C S, Cluj Studii §i Cercetari StiinVfice, Cluj.
s C S, Ia~id Studii §i Cercetari StiinVfice, Ia§i.
S Jahrb Saalburg Jahrbuch, Bericht des Saalburgmuseums
St Cl Studii Clasice, Bucure§ti.
St Corn Studii §i Comunicari, Sibiu

Tocilescu, Fouilles Gr. Tocilescu, Fouilles et recherches archeologique

en Roumainie, Bucure§ti, 1900.
D. Tudor, Ora§e, Tfrguri, sate fu Dacia romana,
Bucure§ti, 1968.
W. Wagner W. Wagner, Die Dislokation der Auxiliarformationen
in den Provinzen Noricum, Pannonien Moesien und
Dakien, Berlin, 1938.

110
 ADDENDA

We are glad to note that since the time the present work was written a
great many works devoted to the defence system of Dacia have been published.
We do not claim to assess, within the limited space of this appendix, the
extent to which these recently-published works confirm or refute our stand-
point. We think , however, that it would be helpful to present below some
facts and figures that have proved serviceable to our design, as well as some
of the most significant results of the excavations carried out in 1979-1980.
Angustia-Bretcu. In AMP IV 1980, p. 255-365, N. Gudea published a
monograph, the results of the previous excavation s, field accounts and part
of the archaeological evidence that have not been displayed in museums so
far. It is worth noting that the work presents the sections and the plans revealed
by the 1950 diggings while trying to re-examine them. It is stated that this
castrum had an earth phase. We think that the cross section to the north side
(Fig. 18) and the one to the west side clearly reveal two stages in the life of
the stone fort; further research will have to ascertain the existence of the
earthwork fort with palisade, which is likely to have preceded the stone fort
with double walls. It is certain that the 4-6 m wide agger is actually the
We hrgang filling, supported by an internal wall with superficial foundation.
N. Gudea does not account for this narrow agger (p. 275) and considers that
the internal wall (built after the agger and the external wall) has no definite
function (p. 282-298)-a wholly ungrounded view, to our mind, -maintaining
that it could be rather related to the internal structure.
We are not really aware to what extent the drawings of the cross sections
have been simplified (the~. for instance, looks uniform althoughon page
274 it is described as consisting of horizontal layers of clay and reddish earth)
but we think that the successive deposits in front of the murus have been
considered without taking into account either the real differences or the
existence of the thermae (p. 283-284)-despite the fact that Fig. 21 clearly
reveals the two periods in their construction. The fragments of terra sigillata
Graufsenque and Lezoux (pp.301, 307, fig. 25/1-4) are significant asto the
early dating of the fort to the time of the Dacian wars; N. Gudea presumes
the stone fort to be built only in the mid-second century; the detailed plans
of the gates and the angle towers reveal several phases and reconstructions
that have not been clarified yet (figs. 15, 16, 17).
Apulum-At the 15th Session where the results of the 1980 archaeological
campaign were reported (Bra§OV, March 25, 1981 ), Vasile Moga, of the Alba
Iulia Museum, presented accounts oftrial diggings in the north side of the
feudal castrum, proving that the fort thatwas the base of legio XIII Gemina
was re-used during the Middle Ages. The via sagularis of that particular
fort exhibits two distinct phases.

111
 Casei-In 1980, the diggings in the castellum were resumed (D. Isac,
I. Pi so, A. Diaconescu of the University of Cluj), bringing to light evidence
concerning the earthwork version with two ditches (Report to the Bra§OV
Session, March 25, 1981); the remains of the primary fort were removed
during the building of the second one.
Also in 1980, the castrum at Cinc§or started to be investigated (according
to I. Pop, Bra§oV, 1981), and the rescue excavations at Gherla (1979-1980-
R. Ardevan, Bra§OV, 1981), brought to light traces of a post-Aurelian settle-
ment within the castrum.
Gilau- A number of remarkable studies of the cast rum that was occupied
by ala Siliana (D. Isac, AMN, XVI, 1979, pp. 39-67) were published between
1979 and 1981. After several decades of waiting M. Rusu issued a compre-
hensive report on the 1951-1956 findings (Castrul Roman de la Gilau, Studii
§i comunicari de istorie, Caransebe§, 1979, pp. 153-193). The results of
research recently conducted by the Universityof Cluj team were published
by D. Isac in Potaissa, Turda, II, 1980,p. 29-53, Sapaturile arheologice in
Castrul roman de la Gilau, and contain accurate information and the required
archaeological arguments in support of the claims made. The castrum is
221 by 137. 5 m in size , and is provided with a porta praetoria on the east
side (p. 32). The existence has been ascertained of an earthwork version
having a 10. 50 m wide foundation~, which exhibits, apart from brown
clayey soil and dark-coloured earth layers, traces of caespites and fossa
fastigata. In Hadrian's time (D. Isac, AMN, SVI, 1979, p. 54), the castrum
was rebuilt with a wall in opus incertum. This version seems to have under-
gone a number of changes and adjustments that are visible especially at the
west-side gate towers and at the north-west angle tower (pp. 36-38 ). The
plan of the castrum (fig. 1) is supplemented by data concerning the principia
(compared to the one published by us fig. 67) which reveals several phases
(pp. 39-42).
The above report was completed by the studies ofD. Isac, A New Military
Diploma from Gilau, in Epigraphica, Tra vaux dedies au VIIme Congres
d 'epigraphie greque et latine, Bucharest, 1977, pp. 69-73. Idem, AMN,
XV, 1978, pp. 251-254; idem, Ala Siliana CR Torquata et armillata in Dacia,
AMNXVI, 1979, pp. 39-67.
Gala\i-M. Brudiu, of the GalaV Museum, discovered an earthwork
castellum in the 'Dunarea' district, and started investigating it. It appears
to have had two phases, and the amphorae found on the site can be dated to
the 1st-2nd centuries. It ispresumed to have been built by cob. I Hisp.
Veterana, after the peace concluded in 102 (Report to the Bra§OV Session,
March 26, 1981 ).
Ili§ua-Diggings conducted in 1979-1980 concluded that there existed a
primary earthwork fort, 125 by 135 m in size; and that the earthwork fort
was rebuilt in a more extensive area equal to that of the subsequent stone fort
(180 by 186 m); the fortwas built by ala I Tungrorum Frontoniana; the
latest coin found in its site was issued by Philip I, but the fort continued to
be in use in the 4th and 7th centuries (D. Protase, Report to the Bra§OV
Session, March 26, 1981 ).

112
 The excavations conducted at the site of Inlaceni, summarily presented
in the reports of M. Macrea (see p.18, n. 158, 372), were dwelt upon at large
in N. Gudea's monograph study, AMP, Zalau, Ill, 1979, p. 151-179.
Although N. Gudea 's interpretation of the profiles now available differ from
M. Macrea's it is nonetheless convincing, since the stratigraphic evidence
provides certain proof of the existence of an~ of levelled black earth (in
caespites, to our mind). The possible stratigraphic differences between the
mentioned sides could suggest that this particular fort was different in size
from the subsequent stone version.
The 142 by 146 m castrum in opus incertum with variable sides has a yellow-
grey eu.rth agger, which we take the liberty of interpreting as above (see p
95 n. 372 ), i.e. as the Wehrgang base supported by a wooden timber structure;
details of plans are given as well as of gates and angle towers that appear to
have witnessed changes and alterations already suggested in Professor M.
Macrea 's field accounts.
According to N. Gudea, the 'abutments' visible at angles on the internal
side of the murus, the porta decumana and on the curtain wall are elements
supporting the wall (p. 163); but we still contend that they suggest the existence
of some bulwark-platforms completed by a wooden structure. Relying on
archaeological data the primary phase of the castrum has been dated to Trajan 's
reign while the stone fort was attributed to Hadrian and to Antoninus Pius,
witha subsequent rebuilding by Caracalla, which underwent repairs late in
the 3rd century when the gates were also blocked.
Publication of the material supplied by M. Macrea's diggings bear out part
of our own interpretations and strengthen our conviction that further research
will provide more precise information as regards the phases revealed in the
life of this fort.
A recent preliminary report, in addition to the ones that have been published
so far, concerning investigations on the site of the castrumat Pojejena
(N. Gudea, 0. Bozu, Banatica 5, 1979, p. 181-185) shows that research went
on at the south gate, the south-east angle and the principia area; and that
a horreum and part of some barracks, sized 10-11 by 40 m, were discovered.
Porolissum-The team that resumed digging at this site starting in 1977,
have issued the first account of the results of research conducted so far,
making use of the archives available (V. Chirila, N. Gudea, Al. Matei,
V. Lucacel, AMP, Zalau, IV, 1980, p. 83-90). The corrected size of the fort
at Pomat is 230 by 300 m. Just one phase with earth vallum has been ascer-
tained followed by the stone fort which was subsequently repaired. It is stated
that the fact that the agger is widely different as to structure and colouring
is due to the fact that the earth was not taken from the ditches (p. 96 ). None
of the claims advanced could induce us to give up our own assumption to the
effect that therewere two or even three phases in the construction of the
agger (seep. 17 and fig. 26).
"The castrum faces north-east, the portapraetoria (7. 5 m with two passages)
are provided with bulwarks built at the same time as the fort itself, and the
lower part of their circular side is filled with clayey soil that is the same as
that in the vallum".

113
 We think that in this case also, as in that of the porta decumana (4. 25 m
wide) further investigation is necessary as regards the validity of the claim
that they were built at the same time as the fort, considering that the south
bulwarks of the porta decumana exhibit later additions of architectural monu-
ments which could be likely to have affected the plan of the gate itself and that
of the towers.
Porta principalis dextra, on the south-east side, provided with two wings,
is 7 m wide and has slightly uneven bulwarks on the south 9. 75 by 7. 75 and
9 by 5. 2 east.
Porta principalis sinistra, on the north-west side, is 7. 5 m wide, with
bulwarks 9. 25 by 5 m in the north and 9. 30 by 5. 09 west. The rampart wall
varies in thickness even in the course of the same side (we think that these
variations are due to the successive re-buildings). The north angle tower
is 5. 8 by 5. 3 by 2. 9 by 7 m and the west angle tower 5 by 3. 8 by 3. 8 by 6. 26 m.
No tower has been noticed at the east angle, the highest pointof the fort as
a whole. There are some towers along the curtain wall, -two on the north
west and north east and one on the south-west and south-east.
Excavations of the principia are under way.
The fact that stamps of legio VII G(emina) Felix have been found on the site
of the principia seems to us to be of special interest; the same type of stamps
added to those of CH III were found at the porta praetoria and the portae
principales (p.88 ). The presence of Hispanic troops (see above p.47 ), Leg.
VII Gemina and of the Symmachiares Asturi, during the Marcomannic wars,
probably after 180, entitles us to date a rebuilding of the gates and possibly
a change in the plan of the towers to that time. We really hoped that the
resumed diggings at the site at Porolissum would clear up the matters related
to the phases and the chronology of the forts. The section across the fortifi-
cation elements should have been aimed at finding the reason why varied layers
of earth were more than systematically used all along the agger; it has to be
determined whether the layers of crushed rock.£· 1. 5 m, was necessary to a
Holz-Erde-Mauer or whether it is a levelled up earth phase previous to the
latter. I wish I had been able to get E. Toth 's Porolissum Ausgrabungen von.
A. Radnoti 1943, Budapest, 1978, to get acquainted with his observations and
the way he has processed the data available.
The diggings conducted at Ulpia Trajana in 1980 brought to light two fossae
and the agger of the fort garissoned by leg. III FF, smaller in size than the
subsequent colony (N. D. Bra~;ov, March 1980).
Further research will have to ascertain the period when the legion (or part
of it) was stationed here, in the inter-war period or before the colony had been
set up.
Tibiscum, has not been the subject of a monograph study-which it would
have deserved given its historic importance and the richness of archaeological
material. Diggings in the castellum site and those in the civil settlement are
under way, and, again, only partial results have been reported; the siz~ of
the castrum is not certain. Under Notes, 101, we used lthe measurements
published in 1965. Now, the available size of the stone fort is 330 by 195

114
according to Benea (Tibiscus, 5, 1978, p.l41) and 310 by 195 according to
the report of the team published in Materiale §i cercetari arheologice,
Oradea, 1979, p. 215.
Four stages have been ascertained-one earthwork and three successive
stone forts (the reports are not supplemented by illustrations). A Trajanic
bronze coin, found at the first level of the north tower of the porta decumana,
which had originally been built in squared limestone blocks (opus quadratum),
is relevant to the dating of the fort.
Doina Benea (Apulum, XVIIT, 1980, p. 135) thinks that the first troop to
have occupied this fort-the smaller in size (the one observed at the north-east
corner of the stone fort) was cohors I Sagittariorum as a stamp bearing that
name was found at the mouth of a potter's kiln that had been burnt and levelled
up; a Hadrianic coin of AD 118, was also discovered in the levelled layer:
the fire was associated with the destructions brought about bythe Yazygi in
117/118.

115
 INDEX

Localities:
Acidava-Eno§e§ti 7, 25, 26, 30, 31, n. 234; 235.
Aizizis 6, 13
Albota 31, 33
Alburnus Maior-Abrud 15, 51
Ampelum-Zlatna 15, 44
Angustia-Bretcu 30, 41, no. 71; n. 158
Apulum-Alba Iulia 1, 15, 24, 25, 53, n.l95
Aradul No'l 15
Arcidava- Varadia 12, 41, 42, n. 87; 89
Arutela-Bivolarie 25, 27-28, n. 247; n. 248; n. 254
Baneasa 31, 34, 35-36, 40, 52, n.309, 310, 311, 360
Barbo§i 5, n.67
Bezobis 1, 6, 13, 42, n.l8, 97
Boita see Caput Stenarum
Bologa see Resculum
Bonciul 49
Boro§neul Mare 30, 45
Bretcu see Angustia
Brincovene§ti 18, 22, 23, 40, n. 159
Brucla 15
Buciumi 3, 38-39, 40, 48, 54, n.l42, n. 344-346
Bulci 24
Bumbe§ti 6, 40, 48, n. 422
Buridava-Stolniceni 5, 7, 8, 9, 25, 26-27, 30, 31
Caput Bubali 13
Caput Stenarum-Boita 25, 29-30, 31
Castra Traiana-Simbotin 7, 9, 27, 30, 31, n. 223, n. 245
Calugareni 22, 23, n. 190-191
Ca§ei see Samum
Catunele 6, 48, n. 22-23, n. 423
Cenad 24
Centum Putea-Surducul Mare 13, 42, n. 94
Cigmau see Germisara 15
Cinc~or 8, 25, 30
cfmeni see Pons Vetus
Comalau 3, n. 513
Crimpoaia 31
Comarnicel 7, n. 35
Copaceni25, 27, 28, 29, n. 256, n. 260
Criste§ti 22, 24
Cumidava Ri§nov 3, 8-9, 31, 32, 34, n.57, n.306
Coste§ti 14, n. 109
Dierna-Or§ova 21, 42
Domne§ti 50
Drajnade Sus 5, 9, 10, 21, 26, 40, n.70
Draga§ani 25, 26, 3 o
Drobeta 4, 11, 22, 25, 40

116
 Feldioara 25, 30
Filipeilti 9, n.66
Filfani-Izbaile§ti 31
Flaminda7, 8, 31, 32,33
Gala~i addendum
Germisara- Cigmau 15
Gherla 18, 37, 41, 42, 44, 49, n.l52, n.329
Gilau 38, 40, 41, 44, 49, n.333, 334, 365
Greble§ti 29
Gresia 31, 33
Hoghiz 10, 25, 29, 30, 34, 40, n. 72
Homorod 50
Ighiu 15, n. 130
Ili§ua 39, 44, 49, n. 349
Inlaceni 18, n. 158, n. 372
Ione§tii Govorii see Pons Aluti
Izlaz 7, 25, 26, 30, 31, n. 43
Jiblea 27, 1.246
Jidava 8, 31, 32, 34, 52, n.305, n.478
Jigoru 7, n. 33
Jupa see Tibiscum
Lederata 12, 21
Line alutana 32, n. 281
Linetransalutana32, 33, 36, n.281, n.294
Line of Mese§ 49
Limes porolissensis 48-49, n. 433, 436
Livezile 18, n.l53
Luncani-Tirsa 14
Malaie§ti 5, 9, 10, 21, n. 69
Mehadia 42, n. 376
Micia-Ve~el 14, 22, 40, 43-44, 46, 48, n.l22
Moeciu, Drumul Carului 8
Muncelul 7, 14, n. 36
Napoca-Cluj 1, 15
Negreni 51
Negrile§ti 50
Novae 7
Oescus 4, 7
Olteni 25, 30
Optatiana-&ltoru 39, n. 351
Ora§tioara de Sus, Bucium 14, 44, n. 113, 116, 386
Orheiul Bistri~ei 18, 39, 40, 48, n.l55, 350
Patru Peak 7, n. 34
Peri§ani, Pripoarele 25
Pietroasele 9, n. 59
Piroboridava 5
Plea§a n. 31
Poeni 49
Poiana pe Siret 5
Pojejena 12, n. 82

117
Pons Aluti-Ione~tii Govorii 25, 26, 30, n. 237
Pons Vetus-Ciineni 29
Porolissum; Pomat 16, 40, 44, 48, 49, 54, n. 137, n. 142
Citera 17, 44, 46, 49, n.391
Porta Mese~ana 16, 49
Potaissa-Turda 1, 15, 37, 39, 46-47, 49, n. 126, n. 408
Praetorium: Copaceni 25, 27, 28, 29, n. 256, 260
Racovita 25, 28-29
Prisaca 14, n. 110
Purcareni 31
Putineiu 31, 32, 34-35, 40, 52
Racovita see Praetorium
Ranistorum 10
Racari 52
Radacine~ti 25, 29
Razboieni 24, 30
Pesculum-Bologa 15, 16, 17, 38, 48, 51, 54, n.135, 136, 462, 463
Ri~nov see Cumidava
Romane~ti 17, 40, n. 144
Romita 37
Romula 25-26, n. 226, 227
Ro~iorii de Vede 7, 31, 33
Rucar 5, 7, 8, 21, 30, 40
Samum-Ca~ei17, 41, 48, 49, 50,51
Sarmizegetusa regia 7, 44
Sarmizegetusa, Ulpia Traiana Colonia Dacica 7, 13, 15, 46
sala~uri 44
&iratel 50
&ipata de Jos 31, 36-37, 40, n.291, 314, 319, 320
Sarateni 22, 23, 41, n.192
Scrioa~tea 33
Sighi~oara 24, n. 204
Simbotin see Castra Traiana
Sinpaul 46, 52
Slatina Timi~ului 43
Slaveni 7, 25, 26, 30, 51-52, 53, 54, n. 44, n. 476
Surducul Mare see Centum Putea
Sinicolaul Mare 24
Tapae 7
Teregova 42, n. 377
Tia Mare 25, n. 244
Tibiscum-Jupa 6, 10, 13, 21, 22, 42, 43, 46, n. 100
Tihau 17, 18, 41, 49, n.126
Tite~ti 25, 29
Tirg~mr5, 9, 10, 21, n.68
Urluieni31, 32, 33, 36, n.316
Valea Toti~ii 31, n. 279
Valea Urluii 31, n. 280
Vallum Comane~ti-Ierco~eni 19, n. 132
Vallum transalutan 33-34, n. 281, 282, 295, 297, 302

118
Viminacium 6
Vindonissa 10
Vi§tea 44
virtop 6
virtu 6
vir§et 42
Voine§ti n. 52
Zavoi 13
Zlatna see Ampelum
Zegaia 43

Alae:
Ala I Asturum n. 72
Ala I Batavorum 24, 30, n. 200, n. 371
Ala I Bosporanorum 22, 25, n. 187, n. 201, 371
Ala I Britannica (Brittonum) 37, 38, n. 160
Ala I Civium Romanorum n. 160
Ala Claudia n. 160, n. 471
Ala Electorum p. 17, 50
Ala Gallorum Capitoniana 45, n. 44, n. 396
Ala I Hispanorum 51, n.44,n.471
Ala I Hispanorum Campagonum 22, 43, n. 184, n. 383, 424
Ala N Illyricorum 22, 23
Ala I Augusta Ituraeorum n. 122
Ala I Latobicorum 30
Ala Milliaria 39
Ala Palmyrenorum 45, n. 397, n. 513
Ala II P annoniorum 18, 37, 38, n.l22, n. 329
Ala Siliana 37, 38
Ala Tungrorum Frontoniana 37, 39

Cohortes:
Cohors I Alpinorum eq. 22, 23, 43, n. 188, n. 371
Cohors I Antiochensium 11
Cohors I Batavorum 37
Coh. I [X] Batavorum, n. 46
Coh. II. FL. Bessorum 8, n. 46
Coh. I Bracaraugustanorum n. 71
Coh. I Britannica 17, 37, 38, n. 368
Coh. I Brittonum 00 Ulpia 16, 17, 37
Coh. Aug. Nervia Pacensis Brittonum 27, 45, n. 44, n. 421
Coh. II Nervia Brittonum oO 37, 38, n. 341
Coh. I Aurelia Brittonum Antoniniana 48, n. 244,n. 421
Coh. II Brittonum 37
Coh. III Campestris 12, n. 79
Coh. I Cannanefatium
Coh. I Fl. Commagenorum 26, n.44, n. 226
Coh. II FL. Commagenorum 14, 15, 22, 43, n.l84, 380
Coh. VI Nova Cumidavensis 54

119
Coh. IV Cypria 6, 48, n. 79
Coh. Ill Delmatarum n. 376
Coh. I Ael. Gaesatorum 37
Coh. II Gallorum 45, n. 160
Coh. Ill Gallorum 26
Coh. V Gallorum 12, n. 79, 86
Coh. Fl. Ulpia Hispanorum 18, 39, n. 154, n. 413
Coh. I Hispanorum B 17, 37, 47
Coh. I Hispanorum Veterana 5, 28, n. 71, 253
Coh. II Hispanorum Scutata 16, n. 161
Coh. IIII Hispanorum 42
Coh. I Aug. Ituraeorum n. 142, n. 345
Coh. I Ituraeorum 17, n. 160
Coh. V Lingonum 17
Coh. II Mattiacorum n. 67
Coh. II Numidarum 3 0
Coh. I Palmyrenorum Porolisensis
Coh. VIII Raetorum 18, 42, n. 372, 376
Coh. I Sagittariorum 12, 22, n. 104, 183
Coh. I Thracum n. 160
Coh. VI Thracum 17, n.141, 144
Coh. I Tyrorum 30, 45
Coh. I Ubiorum 42, n. 373

Numeri:
Singulares Britannici 15
N. Burgariorum et Veredariorum 28, 44, n. 258
N. Campestrorum 43
N. Germanicianorum 14, 43, n. 116
N. equitum Illyricorum 44, 187
N. Maurorum ~ 46, 52
N. Maurorum Hisp. 44
N. Maurorum Miciensium 43
N. Maurorum Optatianensium
Pedites Singulares 8
Palmyrenii Sagittari 22, n. 173, 181, n.185
N. Palmyrenorum Optatianensium 39
N. Palmyrenorum Tibiscensium 43
Surii Sagittari 44, n. 226
Symachiarii Astures 47

Legiones:
Leg. I Adiutrix 15, 24
Leg. I Italica n. 8, n. 46, n. 70, n.412
Leg. I Minervia n. 86
Leg. IITGallica n. 415
Leg. IIIT Flavia Felix 13, 14, 15, 43, n.18, 86, 93, 102, 106, 123, 382
Leg. V. Macedonica 7, 38, 39, 46, 50, n. 32, 46, 67, 69, 70
Leg. VII Claudia n. 86, 229

120
Leg. VII Gemina 47, n. 415
Leg. X Fretensis n. 412
Leg. XI Claudia 5, 8, 10, n.17, 46, 52, 70, 483
Leg. XIII Gemina 15, 17, 24, 30, 43, 47, 50, n.44, 190,204, 274d, 274e
Leg. XXII Primigenia n. 229
Classis Fl. Moesica n. 67, 71

121