Lighting Roman Military Barracks.
An Interdisciplinary Approach Based on
Archaeologia Bulgarica
XVIII, 3 (2014), 65-92
1
The military records kept on papyri
of the XX coh. Palmyrenorum, stationed
at Dura Europos reveal a number of par-
ticular elements in the structuring of
camp life and of the daily routine, which
were presumably intended, among other
things, to reinforce the local military
identity. One of the most notable in-
stances of this is the Feriale Duranum,
the calendar of the military religious fes-
tivals of the unit. The general tendency
of the research to emphasize the uni-
formity of different segments of Roman
society, instead of searching for proof of
“diversity of practice” has been asserted
by D. Mattingly, who introduced the no-
tion of ‘discrepant identities’ with regard
to the social and cultural mechanisms in
a Roman provincial context (Mattingly
2004, 17).
Evidence from Dacia
Dávid PETRUȚ / Monica GUI / Horea TRÎNCĂ
What point is there after all in the archaeological depiction of a
building plan if one never understands what is involved in pushing
open a door to enter a room? (Barrett 2006, 153)
1. Introduction
Recent studies addressing the question of soldiers’ communities within
the Roman army in the time of the Principate emphasize the role of the
barracks as places where the communal identities of the soldiers were
strengthened through a wide range of collective occupations, includ-
ing food preparation, dining and various leisure activities. The com-
munal tasks and activities specific to the contubernium, or regularly
involving the members of these groups, are regarded by scholars as
being part of a complex mechanism devised to construct a common,
military identity for the soldiers of each garrison (see James 1999, 14-
19; Haynes 1999b; Carroll 2005, 363). Nevertheless, it would seem that
the particular features of the individual units were emphasized within
this process, therefore inducing a strong local consciousness to this
sense of common identity, this in turn making it necessary to speak of
multiple local military communities (Haynes 1999a, 7; Haynes 1999b,
167)1. The ‘change of identity’ was achieved by introducing the recruits
to a series of specific quotidian activities labelled in the archaeological
literature as ‘Roman’ and ‘military’ in essence, and unfamiliar thus far
for most of the novice soldiers. A considerable part of these activi-
ties was focused in and around the contubernium (see Haynes 1999b;
Coulston 2004, 135; Carroll 2005, 364-369). Due to constant interac-
tion between its members, common social practices and shared liv-
ing space, these units, regularly consisting of eight men, played a key
role in reinforcing group identity and conveying a sense of community
among the soldiers of a garrison.
According to our current knowledge of soldiers’ barracks in the
aforementioned period, the architectural features of these structures
did not provide access to a suitable amount of natural light; therefore,
the need to attend to this shortcoming by means of artificial light-
ing would seem evident. In fact, the barracks reconstructions from
South Shields (Britannia) and Saalburg (Germania Superior) display
structures with rather dim interior spaces, where hardly any activity
would be possible without artificial lighting. Conversely, the question
of lighting in the barracks has not been addressed so far through the
systematic analysis of the lighting devices associated with these build-
ings. More recent studies have drawn attention to the fact that the use
of oil lamps in a Roman provincial setting was not commonplace, as
previously thought, and in all probability alternative methods (torch-
66 Dávid PETRUȚ / Monica GUI / Horea TRÎNCĂ

es, candles, dried pine branches and hearth light) were employed to a
larger extent (see Eckardt 2002a; Eckardt 2002b, 15; Crnobrnja 2008,
409-411; Eckardt 2011)2. While this view seems to be gaining increas-
ing acceptance, the oil lamps represent by far the most significant ar-
chaeological evidence for artificial lighting in this period. The analysis
of oil lamp consumption on certain sites may prove instructive, as the
use of these lighting implements displays a high degree of both spa-
tial (i.e. between provinces and sites) and chronological variation, for
which a wide range of possible explanations have been put forward so
far (see below). In a complex study by Eckardt (2002a), the fluctua-
tion of lamp usage and its distribution patterns according to military,
civilian (i.e. large towns) and rural sites (i.e. small towns and country-
side) is comprehensively analysed at the level of an entire province.
Nevertheless, the significance of these changing patterns is not treated
in terms of the effect it had on the lifestyle of individual military or ci-
vilian communities. Instead, emphasis is placed on the social and eco-
nomic implications of artificial lighting and the relationship between
the effects of ‘supply and availability’ on the one side, and the impact
of cultural factors on the use of a typically Roman manner of artificial
lighting, on the other.
The classical work by Davison (1989) represents a cornerstone for
the study of barracks, although the investigation focused mainly on
the plans of the structures and spatial and architectural analysis, and
only to a much lesser extent on the investigation of everyday activi-
ties based on a contextual analysis of the archaeological features and
finds from the barracks interiors3. During the last two decades, how-
ever, numerous attempts emerged to ‘push open the door’ into the bar-
racks, by means of close archaeological observations and the analysis
of material assemblages (see Sommer 1995; Hodgson 2002; Hodgson
/ Bidwell 2004).
The barracks of forts and fortresses from Roman Dacia have so
far benefited from limited research, since the archaeological investiga-
tions converge mainly on the defensive works and the central build-
ings (latera praetorii) of military installations (see Marcu 2009, 14-19).
Consequently, the number of fully excavated barracks is very low, the
most notable examples coming from Buciumi, Cășeiu (Samum) and
Ilișua (Arcobadara), although, in the latter two cases, the archaeologi-
cal material pertaining to these structures is still unpublished. This is 2
According to a more recent approach
a major deterrent for the investigation of everyday life activities within to the question of lighting in prehistoric
times and in antiquity, the apparent or
the barracks of Roman Dacia, although it can be said that this sort actual lack of lighting implements in
of interpretation of the archaeological record was regularly neglected the archaeological record cannot be in-
even in the case of structures with fully published material. terpreted as evidence for the absence of
artificial lighting within the respective
2. Object and method societies, as this would have resulted
in long periods of inactivity, especially
The current paper intends to offer insight into the question of illumi-
during the winter months (Wunderlich
nation in the barracks of legionary and auxiliary soldiers from Roman 2006, 251-252; also Gogâltan 1996, 16-
Dacia by analysing the evidence of lighting devices discovered in the 18).
respective buildings. Along with the primary question related to the 3
These aspects are briefly discussed in
degree to which artificial lighting was employed, further problems the study through the listing of a number
which will be addressed include the proportion of lighting devices of documented situations from barracks
in the European part of the Empire re-
found in the barracks compared with other internal structures, the ferring to amenities, furnishings and
possible discrepancy between lamp usage in auxiliary forts and legion- various activities within the contubernia
ary fortresses, as well as the investigation of the hypothesis that the in- (Davison 1989, 230-244).

4
Up to this point, the question of ar-
tificial lighting was addressed in the ar-
chaeological literature from Romania
almost exclusively from the perspective
of the oil lamps. While there is no reason
to assume the existence of a considerable
number of candlesticks and torch imple-
ments in Roman Dacia (contrary to the
case of the candlesticks from Roman
Britain), it is likely that a certain number
of such artefacts was overlooked by the
excavators and authors given the lack
of standardization and extremely varied
morphology of these objects; regarding
the variety of shapes displayed by the
candlesticks from Roman Britain, see
Eckardt 2002a, figs. 113-123. In the case
of Roman Dacia, among the few publi-
cations dealing with these artefacts, the
majority focus exclusively on the spec-
tacular examples, e.g. Cătinaș 2004.
5
Among the three forts, a single lamp
was discovered inside a barracks, in the
fort from Gilău (Roman 2006, 79, Tab. 1).
6
Under better circumstances (i.e. a
larger proportion of well preserved ex-
amples for which the published technical
data is complete), observations related to
the dimensions of the lamps, with spe-
cial regard to the size of the reservoir,
can indicate the length of function and
the fuel requirements of the lighting de-
vices. Given the relatively high fuel con-
sumption of oil lamps (Wunderlich 2006,
256), it seems reasonable to assume that
examples with fairly large reservoirs were
better suited for constant usage, while
specimens with small capacity required
constant refilling, which rendered them
somewhat impractical for constant use.
7
The lighting equipment from the aux-
iliary forts discussed here was published
in fort monographs and individual stud-
ies, while in the case of the lamps from
the legionary fortress from Potaissa,
the data is comprised in the PhD thesis
of Ana Cătinaș concerning the Roman
lamps from Potaissa (Cătinaș 2002).
LIGHTING ROMAN MILITARY BARRACKS... 67
tensity of lamp usage in military context was subjected to chronologi-
cal variation (see Eckardt 2002a). The evidence related to natural light-
ing, i.e. window glass and window frames will be taken into account in
the wider context of barracks architecture, along with aspects related
to the light efficiency of lamps in relation with the interior spaces de-
limited by the individual contubernia. Although our knowledge of the
architecture of the barracks throughout the Empire is relatively lim-
ited, the question of natural lighting is essential for the present inves-
tigation, as it can determine the necessity of artificial lighting within
these structures, as well as contribute to a better understanding of the
living conditions. Furthermore, a comparative analysis with military
sites from other areas of the Empire (where this type of data is avail-
able) will also be employed.
The analysis is based on the discoveries of lighting devices from
the barracks of forts and fortresses of Roman Dacia. The entire range
of such implements discovered within these structures will be included
in the discussion, regardless of the material of their manufacture4. Due
to the particularities outlined above, which have, thus far, defined the
archaeological research of military installations on the former terri-
tory of Roman Dacia, the material from only four sites can be included
in the analysis (fig. 5). Lighting devices (almost exclusively lamps)
unearthed in barracks are known in the case of the auxiliary forts at
Buciumi, Ilișua (Dacia Porolissensis) and Feldioara (Dacia Inferior), as
well as from the legionary fortress at Potaissa (Turda). Further bar-
racks have been excavated in the forts at Porolissum (Moigrad, on
Pomet hill), Cășeiu and Gilău (all three in Dacia Porolissensis), pro-
ducing hardly any lamps5. The explanation for this situation may lie
in the excavation method: the respective barracks were researched by
trenching, so a consistent part of the material, including the possible
lighting devices, could have been missed by the excavators.
The discussion regarding the finds will rely primarily on the func-
tional aspects of the lighting devices, such as: 1) the type of fuel used
(based on the morphological features and the dimensions of the filling
holes of lamps, including cases in which the discus was intentionally
broken in order to enlarge the filling hole); 2) the presence or the lack
of handles on the lamps, which can offer clues with regard either to
their exclusive use indoors, or to both indoor and outdoor employ-
ment; 3) the number of nozzles displayed by the lamps, which has a
bearing on the lighting efficiency of these objects6. The classical lamp
typologies, while still indispensable, overlook the functional features
of the objects, focusing mainly on the morphological, and to a lesser
extent on the technological characteristics (Eckardt 2002a, 20-22).
Nevertheless, the investigation of the functional aspects will be inte-
grated in a typological analysis, as this is required in order to assure a
certain degree of coherence in the discussion. Furthermore, the need
to re-evaluate the previously published typological classification of
these artefacts according to more recently implemented standards can
often emerge7.
In order to assess the extent and the way in which artificial lighting
was employed, the spatial and chronological distribution of the light-
ing devices will be observed for individual contubernia. For a closer
estimation of the lighting requirements of the soldiers’ rooms, we used
a 3D graphical computer simulation, which displays the lighting ef-
68 Dávid PETRUȚ / Monica GUI / Horea TRÎNCĂ

ficiency of the oil lamps in the context of a closed virtual environment

shaped by our partially hypothetical knowledge of Roman barracks
interiors.
3. The architecture of the Roman barracks in the 2-3rd
centuries AD, with special reference to the natural
lighting they afforded
While the ground plans of the barracks are increasingly well known
and understood, little can be said in terms of the soldiers’ accommo-
dation. Issues like furnishing or access to natural lighting still remain
mostly a matter of conjecture. However, some inferences about the lat-
ter can be made starting from the general layout and architecture of
these buildings.
Usually, the barracks were laid out in back-to-back or in facing
pairs, though the difference between these with respect to our study is,
for the most part, nominal. Particularly common until the end of the
Antonine period (both for legionary and auxiliary barracks) seems to
be an arrangement in which the back-to-back pairs were divided by
a 2 m wide space allowing the drainage of rainwater from the roofs;
another, albeit less frequent disposition, in existence mainly in the 3rd
century, involved the adjoining of two buildings by a rear party wall,
meaning that the papiliones had no windows (Davison 1989, 20, 77,
fig. B/1-2, rear wall configuration types 1 and 2; also Johnson 1983,
172; Bidwell 1997, 60). The height of a contubernium is presumed to be
around 3 m. The roof, depending on its style (e.g. gable or shed roof),
could increase the total height of a barracks by a little over 1.50 m to
as much as 5.50 m, even though the last figure is not likely (Davison
1989, 225-227, fig. 123)8. Thus, it becomes clear that, generally, the
rear room windows, if they existed, would have been obstructed by
neighbouring structures.
Since there is no evidence for clerestories, Bidwell (1997, 60) con-
cluded that the soldiers ‘probably lived in a crepuscular gloom’. In con-
trast, Connolly (1998, 13, figs. B, C) proposed a couple of variants with
clerestories (fig. 1/1-3), while Davison (1989, 20) admits that at least
the barracks with a common rear wall must have had a basilica-type
roof. Furthermore, Johnson (1983, 172) suggested that the strength-
ened rear party walls at Carrawburgh could be an indication of clere-
stories. Skylights are also a possibility (Johnson 1983, 172), as well as
the ‘mezzanini’ (fig. 1/4) suggested by Haalebos (1992, 655, Abb. 2)9.
The problem with some of these solutions, however, is that in the ab-
sence of a ceiling the quarters would have been perhaps too tall to
be effectively heated (Davison 1989, 226). Moreover, if we consider
Hodgson and Bidwell’s (2004, 136, 147, fig. 8) vision of the cavalry bar-
racks, in which the roof space was used for accommodating the calones 8
Roughly the same figures were used
(also Hodgson 2003, figs. 61-62), clerestories or skylights would be
in the graphical reconstruction proposed
useless for illuminating the rooms below. for the barracks from Buciumi (Landes-
The impression of poor natural lighting might be further substan- Gyemant / Gudea 2001, 149, Abb. 19).
tiated by finds related to windows and window glass. The size of bar- 9
We are thankful to P. Franzen, whom
racks windows is unknown, but we can assume they were fairly small we owe this reference.
10
Thermae were, throughout the
in order to prevent heat loss10. Most likely these were placed high up
Roman period, the preferred buildings
on the wall, starting from 2 m above ground level (Davison 1989, 230). for glass use, and, in general, the quarters
Shutters were probably used (Johnson 1983, 171; Davison 1989, 230). provided with a hypocaust (Haevernick /
There are some clues concerning window manufacture at military Hahn-Weinheimer 1955, 66-68).

11
A complete example from Hinton
St. Mary measured approximately 54.5
× 61 cm (Manning / Painter 1967, 122,
fig. 1); for an extensive list of grilles
found throughout the Roman empire,
see Manning / Painter 1967, 126-129; in-
terestingly enough, such grilles found in
Spain are connected with the use of se-
lenite (lapis specularis), rather than glass
panes (Bernárdez Gómez / Guisado di
Monti 2007, Pl. VII/fig. 8).
12
The Saalburg grille is presumably re-
lated to a tower (Jacobi 1924, 58).
13
Skimming through the ORL and
Limesforschungen series, window glass
is reported at many sites, but in most
cases it lacks a clear provenance (for an
index of the window glass from ORL, see
Oldenstein 1982).
LIGHTING ROMAN MILITARY BARRACKS... 69
sites. Though most pieces of evidence cannot be associated directly
with the barracks, they can give some useful insight into the subject.
For instance, a reconstructed window from Saalburg measures 16.5
× 32 cm, and was based on a fragment of an iron grille, pieces of glass
and a few preserved wooden crossbars (Jacobi 1924, 58, reconstructed
model: Abb. 21-22, original elements: Taf. IX/22-25). This particular
type of grille, with cross-shaped elements, is noted elsewhere, both in
military and civilian contexts. Some of the almost complete examples
are considerably larger11. The barracks, however, were unlikely to be fit-
ted with these, which were probably meant for other types of chambers,
like strongrooms (Manning / Painter 1967, 126)12. Although not quite
in the time frame we have in mind, the evidence from Vindonissa can
also be informative. The middens around the legionary fortress, partic-
ularly the ‘Schutthügel’, have produced numerous fragments of broken
glass and wooden transoms and mullions, the length of which varies
from 4.15 to as much as 43 cm; unfortunately, no frames have been
found (Fellmann 2009, 94-96, Taf. 32c). The crossbars do offer some
interesting information about the manufacture of windows. These were
assembled in a jigsaw-like manner: broken panes would have been eas-
ily replaced, broken glass salvaged and cut into smaller rectangular
pieces, and windows fitted with as many supplementary bars as needed
to accommodate the new, smaller panes (Fellmann 2009, 98).
Initially, window glass was a luxury commodity, so other materials
were used instead of or alongside it, like lapis specularis, fish bladder,
cow stomach, different sorts of skins (parchments) etc., but the situa-
tion appears to have changed around the mid 2nd century (Haevernick
/ Hahn-Weinheimer 1955, 67-68; for selenite extraction from Hispania
and export throughout the 1st-2nd centuries AD, see Bernárdez Gómez
/ Guisado di Monti 2007). Davison (1989, 230) provides a list of
Roman forts from across the Empire where window glass ‘deriving
from barracks’ was found, but it seems this was not a universal feature.
The author also notes the absence of window glass from Lauriacum,
Bearsden and Pen Llystyn (Davison 1989, 230), while Worrel (2003,
200) mentions the Flavian forts from Brompton and Elginhaugh13. In
any case, because of their mode of production (which involved pouring
the molten glass onto a tray, thus leaving a glossy texture on one side
and a grainy one on the other), cast windowpanes, usually with a blu-
ish or greenish tint, never achieved perfect transparency (Haevernick
/ Hahn-Weinheimer 1955, 66).
In the military environment, a 3rd century funerary inscription
from Carnuntum names a speclariarius as immunis of legio XIIII
Gemina (ILS, 9094). Another funerary epigraph from Rome (CIL VI,
33911 = ILS, 7647) proves beyond doubt that the speclariarius was a
window maker, producing both glass and window frames, since on
the stone there is a depiction of a window and some tools, includ-
ing a saw (Haevernick / Hahn-Weinheimer 1955, 69-70). This makes
perfect sense when considering the manufacturing process suggested
by the related finds from Vindonissa. The numerous small glass slag
lumps appearing inside the Roman fort from Bar Hill pointed to
glass manufacturing at the site, which most likely included window
glass (Macdonald / Park 1906, 79). Also, the remains of a glass oven
were discovered in Carnuntum, but the exact find spot is unspecified
(Haevernick / Hahn-Weinheimer 1955, 69).
70 Dávid PETRUȚ / Monica GUI / Horea TRÎNCĂ

Fig. 1. Ways of increasing natural lighting

(# 1-3 after Connolly 1998, figs. A-C; # 4
after Haalebos 1992, 655, Abb. 2)

Another aspect that certainly had an impact on the lighting condi-

tions is the furniture, but little is known about the subject. The usual
barracks interior reconstructions illustrate bunk beds, which are, of
course, just guesswork (Johnson 1983, 171, fig. 131; Connolly 1998,
13; cf. Hodgson / Bidwell 2004, 141). They seem like a practical solu-
tion to accommodate eight men, but at least in the case of the cavalry
barracks it was convincingly demonstrated that just three troopers
shared a room (Hodgson / Bidwell 2004, 133, 141). If indeed bunks
were used, this would have further affected the degree of illumination
(both natural and artificial) in some corners of the barracks.
We tried to select as case studies some of the most extensively exca-
vated barracks from Dacia, which would yield a considerable amount
of material. Consequently, we centred on the auxiliary forts at Buciumi,
Ilișua, Feldioara and the legionary fortress at Potaissa. Even so, the
plans of the auxiliary barracks considered are rather confusing. The
most coherent data concerns the last phases of these buildings, associ-
ated with the rebuilding of the forts in stone. Unfortunately, this also
implies that the contextual information for most of the lamps originat- 14
One of the constructions in the
ing from these sites is not of the highest resolution. In what follows, we praetentura sinistra suspiciously resem-
try to give an account of the architecture of these structures in as much bles a cavalry barracks, with the cesspits
in front of the quarters rather than in the
detail as the available literature allows. We focus especially on their arma, although the excavators did not re-
size and layout, important for the issues related to natural lighting, but alize this (Protase / Gaiu et al. 1997, 25;
also on the size of the individual contubernia, which will later enable also Gaiu 2006, 212, fig. 4). F. Marcu sug-
us to at least partially reconstitute the context of the lamp finds. gests that it could actually belong to the
At Ilișua (fig. 7/1), the barracks of the first timber and earth fort later phases of the fort, rebuilt to garrison
the cavalry unit (Marcu 2009, 82-84).
(of Trajanic date), probably garrisoned by an auxiliary cohort, are not 15
C. Gaiu does not mention this in-
well known. Eight barracks from this phase were identified, although formation, and the distances could not
there is some uncertainty, since the dating is not without problems14. even be determined approximately from
The four located in the praetentura dextra seem to be about 9 m in the plan of the fort (Gaiu 2006, fig. 2),
width, comprising of a 2 m wide corridor and a single row of 3.3 m long since no scale is provided. Note that the
plan given in fig. 7/1, with the timber
chambers (Gaiu 2006, 211-213, figs. 2, 4). The barracks are grouped in
and earth and the stone forts superim-
pairs, with varying distances between them, but little else can be said15. posed, was created by greatly distorting
The two investigated in the retentura dextra are similar, having a row the plan of the former, and thus is purely
of 3.5 × 4 m undivided contubernia preceded by a 1 m wide corridor conjectural.

Fig. 2. Simulation results for the three
scenarios considered (the point num-
bers correspond to those pinpointed in
fig. 11)
Fig. 3. Luminance threshold for
readability under white light
(from Welsh et al. 1977)
Fig. 4. Luminance threshold for
readability under red light
(from Welsh et al. 1977)
16
F. Marcu identifies six barracks
(Marcu 2009, 82, # 472); initially, the
excavators reported to have uncovered
five barracks (!) in the praetentura dextra
(Protase et al. 1997, 39-40).
17
For cavalry barracks see Hodgson
2003, 71-90; also Hodgson / Bidwell
2004.
LIGHTING ROMAN MILITARY BARRACKS... 71
(Gaiu 2006, 212). The fort was enlarged to accommodate an ala quin-
genaria at the beginning of Hadrian’s reign, and later rebuilt in stone
following the same layout. The excavators claim to have investigated
three barracks in the praetentura dextra and two in the sinistra per-
taining to this last phase. They also state that, except for one, all of
the barracks are ‘double’ (i.e. comprised of two rows of contubernia,
each provided with a 1.50-1.70 m wide corridor) and probably meas-
ure around 65 × 11 m, being separated by cobbled alleyways 4-4.60 m
in width. Also, it is maintained that the dimensions of a contubernium
vary between 3 – 3.7 × 4 – 4.5 m (Protase / Gaiu 1999, 418; also Protase
et al. 1997, 38). The published plan of this fort, however, causes a lot
of confusion. First of all, on every illustration it appears to be a total of
seven barracks, with five in praetentura dextra (Protase et al. 1997, Pl.
VIII; Protase / Gaiu 1999, fig. 3)16. Second, all the buildings are drawn
identically, so it is impossible to know which are referred to as ‘double’
and which is the simple one. Also, admittedly, there are two rows of
chambers, but one row could represent the papiliones and the other
row the armae, each single room (be it papilio or arma) having 3 – 3.7
× 4 – 4.5 m. The structures from the last two phases of the fort would
appear then to be quite the typical cavalry barracks (though slightly
larger than usual), with the horses quartered in the arma, and a veran-
da in front17. The only aspect that speaks against this interpretation is
that, given their size and considering three troopers per contubernium,
it is impossible to cram enough barracks inside the fort as to be able to
quarter the entire ala Tungrorum Frontoniana. Regarding the distance
between barracks, the reported width of the alleyways is observed
only in three blocks from the praetentura dextra: four of the barracks
appear to be grouped in tightly packed pairs, no more than 1-1.5 m
apart. Could these be the double barracks? It would certainly fit with
the claimed total of five, but if so, the rest of the account would not
make much sense. Unfortunately, the inconsistencies between various
reports and accompanying plans are inescapable. Also, we must keep
in mind that, while reconstructing the barracks plans, the excavators
might have been biased by the idea that two turmae must be sheltered
in one barracks. In all of their phases, the structures were built entirely
from timber, without a stone base (Protase / Gaiu 1999, 418).
The fort at Feldioara (fig. 7/2) accommodated an auxiliary cohort.
It probably had a Trajanic/early Hadrianic earth and timber phase,
succeeded by an Antonine stone fort, but only the barracks from that
latest period are discernable in the archaeological record (Gudea 2008,
42-48). Two of these were investigated through a series of criss-cross-
ing 1.25-1.50 m wide trenches (Gudea 2008, fig. 6). Except for their
outline, little else is known. The wattle and daub structures, both 45 m
72 Dávid PETRUȚ / Monica GUI / Horea TRÎNCĂ

Fig. 5. Map of Roman Dacia

long and 20, respectively 18 m broad, were built 5 m from each other
(Gudea 2008, 47-48). On the basis of their width, we can assume these
were also double barracks.
The fort at Buciumi (fig. 8) had three phases and was the succes-
sive garrison for two cohorts, also accommodating, at times, detach-
ments from other units. The general layout of the barracks remained
largely the same throughout the fort’s existence, with six barracks in
the praetentura and four in the retentura, parallel to the via principalis.
Four were double (about 50 × 19 m), a couple in the praetentura, be-
tween the simple barracks (50 × 9 m), and the other two in the reten-
tura (Gudea 1997, 22-23). Measured on the plan (Gudea 1997, fig. 8),
the distance between the barracks in the praetentura is around 5 m,
whereas for the ones in the retentura it is slightly bigger. The group in
the retentura is hardly investigated. Three of the praetentura barracks,
dating from the first timber and earth fort, could be clearly observed:
one simple (B1) and two double (B2 and B5). Initially, B1 and B2 appear
to be roughly Davison type F, in which a narrow corridor ran through
the middle of the building, separating the papiliones and armae, each
of these having a width of around 2-2.5 m (Gudea 1997, 30, fig. 19/1.a,
2.a; Davison 1989, 72-73, fig. A/F), B1 had a veranda (2 m wide), and
probably also B2 on one of its sides; a striking feature is represented by
the different plans of the two adjoined barracks making up B2 (Marcu
2009, 44-46). In the second phase (late Trajanic), in which barracks #
B4 was also noted, their plan was altered. They were transformed in
what N. Gudea identifies as Davison type A (though the contubernia
sized 3.5 × 3.5 m seem undivided), with 2-2.5 m porticoes in front

Fig. 6. Plan of the auxiliary fort from
Potaissa as it was known in 1996 (re-
drawn after Bărbulescu 1997, fig. 5)
with detailed view of a cohors milliaria
(# IV) and a cohors quingenaria (# V)
barrack (redrawn after Bărbulescu 1997,
fig. 16, 17)
18
For example, Gudea 1997, 50 states
that, since an internal plan could not be
established for barracks # B1 from this
phase, it probably was the same as that
from the previous phase, but the figure
he refers to (19.c.1) clearly shows a bar-
racks with two rows of chambers (papilio
and arma?).
19
Barracks B5 seems to contain within
the external walls a rectangular stone
based structure measuring 38 × 10.90 m
(Chirilă et al. 1972, 23).
LIGHTING ROMAN MILITARY BARRACKS... 73
(Gudea 1997, 28-30, fig. 19/1.b, 2.b; see Davison 1989, 75 for type G
with portico, fig. A/A, G). When the fort was rebuilt in stone, probably
at the beginning of the 3rd century, it was assumed little changed in the
case of the barracks, their internal plan remaining largely the same.
However, this is hardly clear18. Apparently, the pillars of the porticoes
were replaced, the new ones being based on stone walls surrounding
the buildings, an arrangement that must have led to a modified roof
structure (Chirilă et al. 1972, 21; Gudea 1997, 50-51, fig. 19/1.c, 2.c;
Landes-Gyemant / Gudea 2001, 149-151). It is believed that the simple
barracks # B4 and the double B5 were not living quarters, but perhaps
a storage or a hospital, respectively a fabrica (Gudea 1997, 29)19, with
rather complicated and confusing internal arrangements (see Marcu
2009, 48-51). Discussing the lamp finds from Buciumi, C. Cosma and
N. Gudea mention the almost complete unearthing of two barracks,
a stable, and a workshop-barracks (Gudea / Cosma 2008, 119-120).
Evidently, the barracks meant are B1 and B2, while the workshop is
B5; from the catalogue and the plan of the fort annexed to the respec-
tive article, it would follow that B4 is described as a ‘stable’, though
the reasoning behind this designation is never stated in this study, or
in the rest addressing the fort from Buciumi. A graphical reconstruc-
tion has been proposed for the last phase of B1 and B2. According
to it, the double barracks had three rows of rooms, the middle row
(presumably a large undivided hall) tentatively considered a storage
space, illuminated through windows on the lateral sides of the build-
74 Dávid PETRUȚ / Monica GUI / Horea TRÎNCĂ

Fig. 7. 1. Plan of the auxiliary fort from

Ilișua, with the larger ala fort (redrawn
after Protase, Gaiu, Marinescu 1997,
Pl. VII) and the earlier, smaller timber
and earth fortification, in dotted lines
(redrawn after Gaiu 2006, fig. 2). 2.
Plan of the auxiliary fort from Feldioara
displaying the excavation trenches (re-
drawn after Gudea 2008, fig. 6)

ing (Landes-Gyemant / Gudea 2001, 151, Abb. 19). It seems that in

each phase the barracks were built of wattle and daub and the double
pitch roofs were covered with tiles (Gudea 1997, 23, 28-29, 50; Landes-
Gyemant / Gudea 2001, 151). However, it should be noted that there
are doubts about the aforementioned stone walls surrounding them.
These might actually be stone sill walls upon which rested the rebuilt
wooden structures, and not pillars (Marcu 2009, 46, 50).
The stratigraphy is less complicated in the case of the legionary
fortress at Potaissa (fig. 6). This was the base of the V Macedonica le-
gion, garrisoned there following the Marcommanic wars. The relative
position and plans of the barracks were revealed through a series of
trenches, but only a few have been excavated more extensively. This is
the case of a group of barracks situated in the latus praetorii sinistrum,
the quarters of one of the quingenary cohorts. The respective buildings
were all L-shaped, with projecting officers’ chambers and undivided
contubernia (Davison’s type G), arranged in facing pairs (with 2 m be-
tween each group) so as to create a sort of internal courtyard of 11-
11.60 m in width (Bărbulescu 1987, 170-172; Bărbulescu 1997, fig. 17;
also Davison 1989, 18). Another group of somewhat different barracks
is known from the retentura. These were also laid out to form a court-
yard, were provided with a portico 1-2.50 m wide, some of the contu-
bernia were divided, and at least some rooms had a hypocaust installa-
tion (Bărbulescu 1997, 35). A part of the barracks pertaining to the co-
 LIGHTING ROMAN MILITARY BARRACKS... 75

Fig. 8. Plan of the auxiliary fort from

Buciumi (redrawn after Gudea 1997,
106, fig. 23), detailing the plans of bar-
racks B1 and B2 in all of their three
phases (redrawn after Gudea 1997, 102,
fig. 19)

hors milliaria was observed in the latus praetorii dextrum. The officers’
rooms seem to be completely detached from the men’s quarters and
there doesn’t appear to be any partition wall between papilio and arma
in the soldiers’ contubernia. These barracks had wide porticos (3-3.5
m) and were again set out as to form a courtyard through which ran
3 m wide alleyways connected to the via principalis (Bărbulescu 1997,
34, fig. 16). The residences of the first cohort were bigger, measuring
75 × 10.5-11 m, hence approximately 10 m longer and 3 m wider than
the rest, with rooms of 5 × 9.5 m, contrasting to quingenary quarters
of 4.80/5.70 × 6.80/7.10 m (Bărbulescu 1997, 34-35). All of these were
entirely built from stone, in the opus incertum technique (Bărbulescu
1987, 169, # 136; Bărbulescu 1997, 34-35).
As for the window panes, it can be safely assumed these were made
from glass, the lack of compelling evidence being mostly due to ex-
76 Dávid PETRUȚ / Monica GUI / Horea TRÎNCĂ

cavation method and mode of collecting and publishing the finds.

There are some clues to support this view. It was reported, for instance,
that numerous panes were found inside the barracks form Buciumi
(Landes-Gyemant / Gudea 1984, 183), glass of an unspecified type was
also noted in the men’s quarters at Potaissa (Bărbulescu 1987, 171),
whilst ‘window glass’ was found in undefined locations inside the fort
at Ilișua (Gaiu et al. 1997, 54). Without further details, however, for
all we know the glass could originate from large vessels (e.g. prismatic
bottles). Regarding transparency, the window glass recovered from the
principia at Potaissa was said to be almost opaque (Bărbulescu 1994,
136). The best evidence for window glass is provided by a fragmentary
inscription from Apulum, where the camp of legio XIII Gemina was
situated. Amongst a list of dimissi from the respective troop, the epi-
graph records a speclar(iarius)20. If this reading is accepted, it would
mean that the legion had a window maker in its ranks, just as XIIII
Gemina in Carnuntum did.
This summary of the barracks architecture was intended to give an
idea about the living conditions with reference to natural lighting. As it
immediately becomes apparent, the buildings seem to be indeed poor-
ly lit spaces, especially the double barracks, which, if lacking cleresto-
ries, had only indirect access to light. However, undivided contubernia
means that the rooms could have been lit through front, and perhaps
rear windows as well. The legionary barracks from Potaissa had an
advantage, being laid out in an airier fashion, with wide porticos and
‘internal courtyards’. Since at least some contubernia had hypocaust,
heath loss wouldn’t have been such an issue. Consequently, windows
could have been bigger than those of the auxiliary barracks.

4. The finds. Provenance and typology

Prior to discussing the various aspects related to the typology of the
analysed material, it appears necessary to point out a number of ba-
sic particularities that have the potential to affect the application of
the ‘classical’ lamp typologies in the context of the finds from Roman
Dacia. As it will be shown below, the main difficulties in this area
are related to the employment of the chronological frameworks es-
tablished in the respective typologies. In the case of Roman Dacia, a
general study regarding the lighting equipment from the province is
currently unavailable. As a result, an overview concerning the typol-
ogy, the chronology and the distribution of these artefacts is prone to
uncertainty and has to be based to some extent on the impressions of
the researcher dealing with this subject. A further disincentive for the
research in this field lies in the character of the material itself, which
in most cases lacks the intrinsic chronological value common to the
finds from various other provinces. This particular feature constituted
one of the foundations for the methodology employed by H. Eckardt
in studying the evolution and distribution of lighting equipment in
Roman Britain (see Eckardt 2002a, 33-60). The inherent chronologi- We grant that the preferred reading is
20

cal value attributed to the lamps based on the ‘classical’ typologies of
Loeschcke (1919), Broneer (1930), Iványi (1935) and more recently
Bailey (1980; 1988), have only a limited utility with regard to the
Roman lamps from Dacia. Certain lamp categories with a well-de-
fined chronological framework, because of the relatively short period
of time during which Dacia was part of the Roman Empire, display
spec(u)la(to)r (Moga / Drâmbărean 2007,
175-176; AE 2007, 1197; Petolescu 2009,
220, # 1300), spec(u)lar(iarius) appearing
only in the Epigraphik Datenbank Clauss
/ Slaby EDCS (http://db.edcs.eu:8888/
epigr/epigraphik_de, last accessed 28th
March, 2014).

21
Some later variants of the Loeschcke
type VIII lamps, designated as types P
and Q according to D. Baileys’ typology
continue to be produced throughout the
2nd century, and in some cases even in
the 3rd century in Italy and some western
provinces. The later variants of the vo-
lute lamps referred to as Loeschcke type
I B and especially I C have a production
period which ends in the early Trajanic
period in Italy, see Bailey 1980, 152.
Nevertheless their production seems
to continue throughout the 2nd century
AD in certain western provinces, e.g.
Pannonia, see Iványi 1935, 29.
22
Earlier studies have interpreted the
presence of the wheel-made lamps in
Dacia as evidence for 3rd century and
even post-Roman activity (e.g. Benea
1996, 59-60).
LIGHTING ROMAN MILITARY BARRACKS... 77
a restricted chronological significance. This applies, on slightly dif-
ferent levels, to all of the three large categories of ceramic oil lamps
that Eckardt highlights in her study, i.e. the 1) ‘picture lamps’, 2) the
‘Firmalampen’ and the 3) ‘wheel made circular lamps’.
The lighting devices included in the category of ‘picture lamps’
(Bildlampen), comprised of S. Loeschcke’s types I-VIII, in the context
of Italian production (but also some of the 1st century provincial manu-
factures, see below) exhibit the best chronological indicators (Eckardt
2002a, 22). However, their production, with only a few exceptions, is
limited to the 1st century AD, in the period before Dacia’s integration
into the Empire (see Bailey 1980, 314-376)21. The examples of ‘pic-
ture lamps’, present in relatively high numbers in Dacia and consisting
mostly of various provincial variants of Loeschcke type VIII lamps,
display a time span that covers the entire Roman rule in the territory
of Dacia (see Roman 2006, 40). The same is valid for the ‘Firmalampen’
category. The production of the early variants designated as Loeschcke
type IX lamps was halted at the beginning of the 2nd century AD; con-
sequently, their presence is very rare in Dacia, although the few exam-
ples of this type can be regarded as chronological indicators for the be-
ginning of that century. The later variant (Loeschcke type X), however,
has a time span that encompasses the entire 2nd century AD, with the
production continuing throughout much of the 3rd century (see Harris
1980, 143-144), thus its chronological significance in the context of
Roman Dacia is quite limited. The case of the so-called ‘wheel-made
circular lamps’ is somewhat similar. The emergence of this category
is usually ascribed to a change in the manufacture technology (wheel
throwing rather than moulding), prompted in part by modifications
in lamp usage, which consisted mainly in a shift from vegetal oil fuels
to animal fat in the 2nd century AD. This type is relatively widespread
in Roman Dacia. Contrary to earlier assumptions, the production and
propagation of this category of lamps started in the 2nd century AD and
lasted up to the 4th century (see Eckardt 2002a, 33; Negru 1996, 76-77;
Roman 2000, 122-123; Roman 2006, 26, 30)22. As a consequence, this
category of lamps is less informative with regard to the chronological
evolution of the lighting devices from Roman Dacia. A further dif-
ficulty in this line of study resides in the fact that the vast majority of
lamps in Dacia appear to be local products, partly in accordance with
W. V. Harris’ concept regarding the local production and distribution of
ceramic oil lamps (see Harris 1980, 134-137), although there is still no
evidence for the existence of a system of organized branch workshops
in this province or elsewhere. For this reason, the provincial variants
which make up the bulk of the oil lamps in Dacia are very distant from
the Italian prototypes, but also from other provincial variants, e.g. the
lamps coming from Pannonia and Germania in terms of chronological
and technological (especially qualitative) aspects (see Bailey 1988).
The analysed material is comprised of 225 pieces discovered in the
barracks of the above-mentioned four military sites, and, apart from
one candlestick fragment, consists entirely of oil lamps. Over half of
the lighting devices (118 pieces) were uncovered in the legionary for-
tress at Potaissa (see Cătinaș 2002), while the barracks from the two
auxiliary forts from the Northern and North-western frontier of Dacia
Porolissensis have yielded approximately the same number of finds –
Ilișua with 44 pieces (see Gaiu 2010) and Buciumi with 46 pieces (see
78 Dávid PETRUȚ / Monica GUI / Horea TRÎNCĂ

Gudea / Cosma 2008). This seems to be in accordance with the rela-

tively similar state of research concerning the barracks of the two aux-
iliary forts (at least regarding the actual area and number excavated)
and to some extent with their comparable size, the fort at Ilișua dis-
playing an inner area of 3.36 ha (see Protase et al. 1997, 46), while the
territory occupied by the fort at Buciumi was evaluated at 2.23 ha (see
Gudea 1997, 40). Conversely, the fortress from Potaissa, described as a
medium-sized legionary castrum, has an estimated inner area of 23.37
ha (Bărbulescu 1997, 14). The situation of the fort from Feldioara, in
the inland of Dacia Inferior, is somewhat different. Given the fact that
only two barracks situated in the praetentura dextra were excavated,
the number of lamps (15 pieces) recorded here is quite low. Moreover,
due to the deficient recording and publication (apart from one exam-
ple, the lamps from Feldioara were published with no illustration and
without a typological classification) we are deprived of any informa-
tion regarding the types of lamps present in the respective fort.
The material from the first three military sites mentioned above
can be classified in eight typological categories, in addition to a sepa-
rate category comprising the undeterminable fragments. Apart from
the pottery lamps, which make up the overwhelming majority of the
lighting devices, only two non-ceramic (i.e. copper-alloy) objects were
recorded: a candlestick fragment from Potaissa (Cătinaș 2002, 322, #
316) and a bronze lamp from Ilișua (Gaiu 2007, 417-418, # 3, fig. 4).
The typological framework applied to the analysed artefacts consists
of the following categories (see fig. 9):
Firmalampen (114)
Loeschcke type I (2)
Loeschcke type I similis (2)
Loeschcke type VII similis (1)
Loeschcke type VIII (20)
Circular wheel made lamps (8)
Loeschcke type XXI bronze lamps (1)
Candlesticks (1)
Undetermined fragments (76)

5. Discussion. Context and functionality

Unfortunately, because of limited excavation or of excavation tech-
nique and finds recording, detailed contextual data is missing in all of
the cases under study. For example, at Potaissa, where we have an idea
of the spatial distribution, there is almost no reference to the layering
of these artefacts. For Buciumi, though the stratigraphic context of the
finds is loosely recorded, no clue is given to the exact locations of the
lamps inside the barracks. The best we could do was to see whether
the barracks types or the size of the contubernia had any impact on the
number of lamps recorded, and to compare these with the figures pro-
duced by other structures from the forts under consideration (fig. 10),
bearing in mind, of course, the difference in the extent and focus of
the excavations. Therefore, ‘context’ will be employed in a loose sense,
referring, wherever possible, to issues like use, deposition, associations
of finds, etc. (see Hodder 1985, 14; also Eckardt 2000, 9).
The only instance in which lighting implements can be more or
less assigned to a particular contubernium is the legionary fortress at
Potaissa. As already mentioned, there were two almost completely un-

23
The seven lamps discovered in the
building situated next to barracks # I in
a space that should have been normally
taken up by the centurion’s quarters,
were not considered.
24
Though barracks numbers are some-
times given when stating the provenance
of the lamps or of other finds, we could
not find any single reference to the num-
bering convention used, or any plan that
would identify the buildings by their
numbers.
25
For instance, in Britain, iron open
lamps tend to concentrate in barrows
from rural sites (Eckardt 2000, 14-17).
26
S. Regep records just ten from Dacia,
including the Ilișua finds; out of these,
five were found in forts: Ilișua (# 1-2),
Românași (# 6), Tibiscum, in the prin-
cipia (# 7) and Gilău (# 9), and the rest
come from civil settlements adjacent to
forts. The author states that these must
be connected to workshops, both in
military and civil sites (Regep 2002, 267),
though only one has a secure provenance
in a workshop from Tibiscum while three
were found in principiae.
27
In the original report, the lamps
were considered part of the funer-
ary inventory belonging to the tomb of
Aurelius Themaes, a librarius from the
ala Tungrorum Frontoniana (Torma
1866, 46, # 11, t. XII/2, 3; the inscription
is published in CIL III, 804). However,
the connection is uncertain since the
tombstone was found much too close to
the fort to belong to a cemetery; perhaps
it was reused in antiquity.
LIGHTING ROMAN MILITARY BARRACKS... 79
covered barracks: # V in the latus praetorii sinistrum, home for some of
the men in one of the quingenary cohorts, and IV, located in the latus
praetorii dextrum, meant to accommodate soldiers from the miliary
cohort. The most common configurations seems to be of one lamp
per contubernium in barracks # V (though some of the men’s quarters
yielded three or four), and two or three lamps in each contubernium in
barracks # IV. Since there are fairly few lighting devices recovered, any
statistical analysis would probably be of little or no value. However,
comparing the total numbers from the two barracks, the difference is
striking: twice as many lamps were recorded from the miliary cohort
barracks than from the quingenary one (16 as compared to 33, not
counting the eight from the portico). Also interesting is the overall
number of lamps emerging from the latus praetorii sinistrum, where
the barracks of the cohors milliaria were located, 5423, set against the
number recovered from the principia, 60. Needless to say, the most lav-
ish lighting implements cannot be associated with the barracks. Only
one relatively simple, flower-shaped copper-alloy candlestick element
was found in barracks # V (Cătinaș 2002, 322, # 316), whereas the
principia yielded four candlesticks, including a four-armed example
shaped like a silenus and another in the form of an acrobat sitting on
his hands (Bărbulescu 1994, Pl. X/1, 3, fig. 31).
As already noted, given the published data so far, it is nearly im-
possible to determine how many and which barracks were excavated at
Ilișua, and to what extent, though some were apparently almost com-
pletely unearthed (see Gaiu / Protase / Marinescu 1997, 52)24. A divid-
ing line between barracks dating from the first timber and earth fort
and those built in the following two phases was taken into account, but
the inconsistent data makes it difficult to reconcile fully. Regrettably,
no further classification refinement based on context seems possible.
The highest number of lamps recorded from a single barracks is 10
(barracks # IV in the praetentura dextra) but that particular structure
might actually be a ‘double barracks’ for all we know. Also, the finds
are spread over roughly 150 years. Only two lighting implements were
published from the principia, a couple of open iron lamps making
up a chandelier that was probably pinned to a wall (Protase / Gaiu
/ Marinescu 1997, 21, Pl. LXX/2-4). While in other provinces, this
particular type, also referred to as ‘stable-lamps’, is mostly found in
rural areas25, in Dacia it appears in and around military sites, but the
numbers are much too small to allow any comparisons26. In any case,
iron is much more prone to corrosion or recycling, so this distribution
pattern can be misleading. Two other metal finds, this time of copper-
alloy, are recorded from within the fort: one lamp that could originate
from a barracks (Gaiu 2007, 417-418, # 3), and another in the shape
of a pine cone, damaged in antiquity and stored for recycling in one
of the porta praetoria towers along with other pieces of scrap metal,
sometime in the first half of the 3rd century (Protase / Gaiu / Marinescu
1997, Pl. LXX/1; Gaiu 2007, 418, # 5). Concerning the depositional
context, perhaps it would be interesting to mention the case of two
other copper-alloy lamps, although they were found outside the fort.
These could have been dumped, though it seems curious in light of
their value and of their good condition27.
Interestingly enough, the number of lamps recorded from the dou-
ble barracks # B2 and # B5 from Buciumi (18) are more than double
80 Dávid PETRUȚ / Monica GUI / Horea TRÎNCĂ

Fig. 9. The typology of the oil lamps

discovered in the barracks. 1. Loeschcke
type X lamp from Ilișua (redrawn
after Gaiu 2010, 225, # 34, Pl. V); 2.
Loeschcke type X bilychnis lamp from
Buciumi (redrawn after Gudea / Cosma
2008, 127, # 56, Taf. 97); 3. Loeschcke
type X lamp from Ilișua (redrawn after
Gaiu 2010, 221, # 1, Pl. I); 4. Loeschcke
type I similis lamp from Buciumi (re-
drawn after Gudea / Cosma 2008, 122, #
3, Taf. 90); 5. Loeschcke type VIII lamp
from Ilișua (redrawn after Gaiu 2010,
222, # 13, Pl. II); 6. circular wheel made
lamp from Buciumi (redrawn after
Gudea / Cosma 2008, 126, # 51, Taf.
96); 7. Loeschcke type XXI bronze lamp
from Ilișua (redrawn after Gaiu 2007,
417-418, # 3, fig. 5); 8. Loeschcke type
VII similis lamp from Turda (redrawn
after Cătinaș 2002, 277-278, # 197)

those from the simple barracks # B4 (7). If we keep to the chrono-

logical sequences devised by N. Gudea and C. Cosma around a loose
stratification of the finds (Gudea / Cosma 2008, 117-118), we detect
that this trend is maintained through, at least, the 2nd century. This
comes to show that maybe some kind of meaningful pattern can be
detected here. However, the situation is complicated by the fact that
‘barracks’ # B5, which produced the most lamps, may not have been
a barracks at all, as suggested by the great number of crucibles, tools
and slag discovered inside, by its unusual plan, and by the presence
of several hearths (see Chirilă et al. 1972, 57-58, 77-86; also Landes-
Gyemant / Gudea 2001, 147). Actually, it contains more tools, lighting
devices, arms and armour than any other excavated structure in the
fort, but the outcome is at least partly due to the fact that it has yielded
the most material. The high number of lamps could indeed point to
the function of fabrica. As for B4 being a hospital or a stable, there is
no evidence to support these views, and alternative functions were ap-
parently put forward because an internal partition could not be clearly
observed (Gudea 1997, 29).
The excavation technique used at Feldioara did not reveal enough
information about the internal plan of the barracks. While in the
double barracks # 1, 12 lamp fragments were found (in accordance
 LIGHTING ROMAN MILITARY BARRACKS... 81

Potaissa (Turda) Arcobadara (Ilișua)

b. I b. V b. I b. III
mid. 2nd c.: 2 1
/2 2nd c.: 1

barracks, praetentura dextra

?: 2 A: 3

barracks coh. quing., latus praet. sinistrum

b. II B: 4 3rd c.: 1 mid. 2nd c.: 1
b. II end 2nd- beg. 3rd c.: 2
?: 3 C: 1 1
/2 2nd c.: 1 ?: 1

Total: 26
b. III D: 1 2
/2 2nd c.: 3 b. IV
S: 3 E: 0
2nd c.: 1 1/
2nd c.: 1

Total: 36
?: 2 F: 3 2
end 2 - beg. 3 c.: 1
nd rd
2 c.: 2
nd
b. IV G: 1 end. 2nd- beg. 3rd: 2
B: 3 H: 0 ?: 2 3rd c.: 1
C: 1 I: 1 ?: 4
b. 1 (1st pahse?) b. VI

barracks, praetentura sinistra

D: 4 J: 0
?: 1 K: 1**
1/
2
2nd c.: 1 beg. 2nd c.: 2 (1st phase)
b. VI ?: 1 1
/2 2nd c.: 3

Total: 17
?: 1
?: 1 b. V 2
/2 2nd c.: 1
b. IV end 2 - beg. 3rd: 1
nd
2nd c.: 1
A: 4 I: 3 3rd c.: 1
barracks coh. ∞, latus praet.

B: 0 J: 0 ?: 2
?: 4
C: 1 K: 2
/2 2nd c.: 2
2

Total: 5 T:2
D: 2 L: 0

Total: 54
dextrum

praet.
E: 3 M: 2 2nd c.: 1
?: 2
F: 4 O: 3 ?: 2*

p.
G: 3 portico: porta praetoria porta princ. dextra
H: 6 8
?: 1 on the road, 1/2 3rd c.: 1

Total: 4
gates
? porta decumana
18 tower: 1*
3 c.: 1
1/ rd
2
barracks,
retentura

Total: 20

beg. 2nd c.: 3 + 1*

Total: 10
32 3rd c.: 1
(1st phase?)
?

1/
2nd c.: 2 ?: 3
rooms: 40 + 4** 2
Total: 60
principia

well, room I: 8
Buciumi
porticoes: 4 + 1* b. 1 b. 4
?: 3 2nd c.: 2 1
/2 2nd c.: 2
W gate ?: 1
Total: 3
gates

southern tower: 2 b. 2 2nd c.: 2

praetentura

Total: 46
barracks,

?: 1 1
/2 2nd c.: 4 3rd c.: 3
Fig. 10. The total number of lamps from 2
/2 2nd c.: 1 b. 5
thermae

Total: 12

the forts, grouped according to their 12 2nd c.: 5 1

/2 2nd c.: 6
provenance, based on data from Cătinaș
3rd c.: 4 2nd c.: 9
2002 (Turda), Gudea 2008 (Feldioara),
?: 4 3rd c.: 3
building near

Gudea / Cosma 2008 (Buciumi) and

b.1 coh. ∞

?: 1
T.: 1
pr.
Total: 7

Protase et al. 1997, Gaiu 2007, Gaiu 7 C4 (bath?) C3 (praetorium)

tw. buildings

2010 (Ilișua); b. = barrack; A-S = indi-

other

T: 6

vidual contubernia from Potaissa; p. = ?: 3 ?: 3

principia; pr. = praetorium; c. tw. = cor- 5+1∗+2
T: 3

southern tower eastern tower

?

T: 2 Total 4 T: 2

ner towers; c. = century; 1/2 = 1st half of

c.

?: 1 ?: 1
century; 2/2= 2nd half; beg. = beginning; Feldioara porta princ.
porta princ. sinistra
gates

mid. = middle; T = total; * = metal; ** dextra

b. 1 b. 2
barracks

Total: 14

?: 3 ?: 1
= candlestick; • = other accessories; ? =
unknown date/ location ?: 11 ?: 3 ?: 2
?

with the figures derived from the other auxiliary forts), just three are
known from # 2. Considering the criss-crossing 1.5 m wide trenches
(fig. 7/2), which did not allow for unearthing a significant area of these
structures, the totals are higher than expected. Almost all of the lamps
appeared at roughly the same depth (-0.40 – 0.50 m), but there was no
attempt to correlate this with the successive phases of the fort.
If there is one point where all case studies meet, it is in the number
of lamps found in the towers (either gate or corner towers), usually one
or, at most, two such devices. While it is certainly true that there are
82 Dávid PETRUȚ / Monica GUI / Horea TRÎNCĂ

simply too few lamps to jump to conclusions, we can nonetheless infer

that the difference between a permanent living space (i.e. the barracks)
and a temporary post can be observed to some extent in the archaeo-
logical material.
Of course, all these figures are only tentatively given. In each site
there are a number of lighting implements with unknown find spots,
which might have their provenance in the barracks, possibly complete-
ly changing the picture. As such, the table (fig. 10) is only meant to
give an outline of the available information, and, despite playing with
numbers, we do not believe that a solely quantitative approach is suit-
able. We can neither take these as reflecting a real-life situation, like a
snapshot taken at a certain point in time, nor can we reconstitute the
past situation, especially given the time span and the shortcomings
mentioned before. Even though some consistency in the evidence can
be noticed when it comes to the finds from the auxiliary forts, we are
far from a processual stand.
Speaking of processes, there was a lot going on in the formation
of the ‘archaeological record’ inside Roman forts, like abandonment,
recycling, etc. For instance, it is now common knowledge that with-
drawal involved a series of standard procedures for clearing a military
site, which might affect to some degree the pattering of the material
left behind (Bishop 1986). We have no evidence that this also hap-
pened with our case studies, but obviously the auxiliary forts under-
went a series of clearances occasioned by enlargement or rebuilding in
stone, and this could account for the dearth of finds. The scarcity of
lamps noted inside the barracks from Buciumi prompted N. Gudea an
C. Cosma to comment that these pieces were either well looked after
and in use for a long period of time, or alternative means of lighting
were employed, or even that upon deserting the fort the soldiers took
the lamps with them (Gudea / Cosma 2008, 120)28, which is, of course,
doubtful. While the difference in size between the forts and their gar-
risons is not to be dismissed, the first impression is that the legionaries
used a lot more lamps than their auxiliary counterparts. Maybe this
cannot be solely explained by their larger contubernia. It is also worth
considering that the legionary fortress functioned for approximately
100 years, whereas the auxiliary forts were used for somewhere around
170, so we could expect a larger accumulation of archaeological mate-
rial in the latter.
As stated above, the functional analysis is based in this case on
the following morphological features: 1) the enlargement of the filling
holes either as the result of a specific manufacturing process (i.e. wheel
throwing) or achieved through the careful breaking of the discus, sub-
sequent to production, resulting sometimes in its complete removal;
2) the presence or absence of a handle; 3) the presence of more than
one nozzle. It has to be noted from the start that quantification is based
solely on the data from the publications. Furthermore, for the aspects
related to the modification of the filling hole, it is necessary to rely 28
The authors reckon that in a simple,
exclusively on the illustrations, given that the descriptions in the cata- 11 contubernia barracks, at least 11 lamps
logues persistently overlook these details. Consequently, only the cases should have been used, while in a double
at least 22. While the numbers of finds
in which it could be determined with certainty that the discus was
from the double barracks are indeed
broken intentionally were taken into account. In this way, it is almost greater than those from the simple, the
certain that some examples were missed, so the numbers given here fact that only two were recovered from
have to be regarded as minimum figures. Because of the poor quality barracks # B1 is indeed dubious.

29
Only the functional handles (mostly
circular), were taken into account, while
the decorative triangular handles dis-
playing mostly palmette motifs, have
been left out, as their role was merely
ornamental.
30
Wunderlich (2003, 255-256) has
shown that an average oil lamp with a 2-3
cm long wick consumed approximately 8
g during one hour of functioning.
LIGHTING ROMAN MILITARY BARRACKS... 83
of the published data, no assessment of this sort could be made regard-
ing the fort from Feldioara (see above).
The overall numbers for each analysed criterion are fairly low.
Regarding the increased size of the filling holes, only around 21 cases
can be pointed out with certainty, among which seven are circular
wheel made lamps with wide filling orifices, while the rest comprises
mostly examples of Firmalampen (in addition to one Loeschcke type
VIII lamp) with broken discus. The minimum percentage of the lamps
with wide filling holes, which are appropriate for functioning with tal-
low rather than vegetable oils, is 9% (21 lamps in total). The highest
incidence for this phenomenon was observed in the fort at Buciumi,
where at least 15 lamps have increased filling holes. Altogether, a
number of 27 pieces or lamp fragments could be identified as hav-
ing handles29. Most come from Potaissa (13), while the barracks from
Ilișua have yielded nine, and the ones from Buciumi only five. Based
on these figures, it can be said that a minimum of 12% of the joint
lamp assemblages had handles, a number that suggests a mostly in-
door use of these lighting implements, as opposed to an outside, or ‘on
the move’ use (see Eckardt 2011, 186). The minimum percentage of the
lamps with more than one nozzle is only 3% (7 pieces and fragments).
The figures indicate that there was only a minimal effort to increase
the lamp’s efficiency by using the multilychnis variants of the lamps.
The relatively low consumption level of oil lamps in the regions
characterized by European temperate climate has been attributed to
the joint effect of specific economic and cultural factors. The pre-
sumably high price of olive oil (given the transport costs), correlated
with excessive fuel consumption rate of these devices resulting in a
low light efficiency, most probably acted as serious disincentives in
the widespread adoption of this lighting method in these regions (see
Wunderlich 2003, 255-256; Crnobrnja 2008, 409-411)30. Given the
high consumption of olive oil, an expensive commodity in Roman
Dacia, and the constant need to maintain lamps (e.g., trimming the
wick), it is unlikely that more than two or three lamps, on average,
were working in each contubernium. Furthermore, cultural process-
es have to be taken into account as well. H. Eckardt has shown that
the symbolic meaning associated with these objects (i.e. connection,
and later disconnection, to the material culture ‘package’ expressing
Roman identity), influenced to a great extent their adoption and re-
jection in remote provinces, such as Britain (see Eckardt 2002, 37).
The higher degree of oil lamp use in legionary fortresses compared to
auxiliary forts has been noted in the case of other provinces too (see
Eckardt 2002, 37). This phenomenon can be linked to the possibil-
ity that the legions enjoyed a better supply system than their auxiliary
counterparts, but additional cultural and social considerations cannot
be ruled out.
Given the fragmentary nature of the evidence on the one hand,
and the more recent developments in integrating social theories in ar-
chaeological studies on the other, we believe that it is also important to
understand something of the contribution these lighting implements
had to the shared living space defined by a contubernium and the im-
plications for the soldiers’ lives, and not to acknowledge only that they
used one type over another (see Barrett 2006; for an approach to light-
ing equipment drawing ideas from social theories, see Eckardt 2000).
84 Dávid PETRUȚ / Monica GUI / Horea TRÎNCĂ

6. 3D Model: premise and results

After establishing the main types of lamps employed in the military
milieu and suggesting some patterns in their use and deposition, the
next thing to do is to see them at work in the context of a Roman bar-
racks. What it meant to share a contubernium for 25 years is something
most can hardly imagine today. We might get a vague idea by visiting
reconstructed barracks, like those in Saalburg (perhaps a bit too ideal-
istic) or South Shields, but, in any case, the whole experience would be
personal, subjective, and thus impossible to quantify. However, light-
ing can be measured and its impact assessed in some way.
Since there are no reconstructions of this sort in Romania, the
alternative was to create a 3D model. This also allowed us to play
a little with the furnishing, to try different variants of materials, ar-
rangements and lighting schemes. For the recreated chamber, a size
of 3.5 × 3.5 m was chosen based on the data from Buciumi; we set-
tled on a height of 3 m. The walls were painted white (which is the
best case scenario when it comes to lighting), the floor was made of
beaten earth and the ceiling of timber. As for the furniture, we relied
on the information from the work by Johnson (1983). Though the
interpretation of the evidence from the ala fort at Heidenheim now
seems outdated (Hodgson / Bidwell 2004, 141), we found nothing
else to go on. However, the suggested 2 × 0.80 m bunk beds (Johnson
1983, 171) could not be crammed into the envisioned area, so their
length had to be shortened to 1.75 m. Otherwise, it would have been
quite impossible not to obstruct the window, while at the same time
leaving the wall opposite to it clear, making room for a hearth (see
fig. 12). Admittedly, there is no evidence that single bunks were used.
In fact, communal bunk-beds are featured in the South Shields re-
constructions. The lamps were placed on a small table in the middle
of the chamber and on a shelf under the window; sheer imagination
was used at this point. However, a timber construction element from
a late 1st century A.D. ‘clay and timber’ building from London dis-
played some char marks as if left by flames form a lamp, suggesting
that there was not much concern over placing these close to daubed
walls (Goodburn 1991, 193-194, 202, fig. 5)31.
We settled on Firmalampen fuelled by olive oil (the fuel is, again,
a best case scenario). We used the data given by Ch.-H. Wunderlich,
who measured the lighting efficiency of such a lamp. For a flame of 2-3
cm it is 0,1 – 0,15 lm/W (lumens per Watt), the illuminance measured
from a distance of 1 m is 1 lux (lx), luminous intensity 1 Candela, re-
covery = 0,15 lm/W (Wunderlich 2003, 256). The intensity expressed
by illuminance (measured in lm/m2 = lx) refers to the light emitted by
the light source measured at a specified distance (i.e. the amount of
light striking a surface situated at a certain distance from the source),
whereas luminance (cd/m2) refers to the amount of light reflected by
the receiving surface (see Land / Nilsson 2004, 19-23, for an introduc-
tion to light intensity measurements).
The 3D model of the chamber (figs. 11, 12) was created in Autodesk
3ds Max Design to scale and it was designed to simulate the interior
illumination as accurately as possible. The light simulation was ana- 31
We wish to thank P. Franzen for
lysed using the Lighting Analysis tool included in the software, which pointing out this reference and for the
is intended to aid architects in light design and is accredited to be used trouble he went through to make it avail-
to attain the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) able for us to read.
LIGHTING ROMAN MILITARY BARRACKS... 85

8.1 certification (Reinhart / Landry / Breton 2009). In order to comply

with the LEED specification, only accepted shaders (mental ray Arch
& Design) were used, physically based light sources (photometric) and
realistic render settings. Additionally, experimental data shows that
best results – with errors within 11% relative to measurements of real
data – are achieved only when using Lambertian surfaces (Reinhart /
Breton 2009). The model complies with this restriction, since the ma-
terials used (wood, cloth and earth) are essentially Lambertian as they
only have diffuse reflection (Oren / Nayar 1995). The lamp’s flame was
simulated using a 3 cm tall, 1 cm in diameter cylinder light, having the
required intensity of 1 lux and the correlated colour temperature of
1800° K, typical for bright candle light.
The simulation was computed for three lighting scenarios.
Scenario # 1 had only one lamp on the table in the centre. Scenario
# 2 had one lamp on the table and one on the shelf beneath the win-
dow. Finally, scenario # 3 had two lamps on the table and two on the
shelf. Nine points of interest were considered: the table and each of
the eight beds in the room. These are the places where soldiers would
spend most of their time while inside, owing to lack of space. The
light reaching these points (illumination) was measured, picking the
highest values. The light reflected by paper (luminance) was also sim-
ulated, in order to be able to determine readability. To achieve this,
virtual cards mimicking 90% reflecting white paper were placed at
the interest points. Simulating how soldiers would search for the best
reading position, the paper cards were angled towards the sources of
light to get the maximum reflectance. The results are presented in the
table above (fig. 2)
Regarding other sources of artificial light, hearths must also be
mentioned. In Dacia, this kind of installation is reported inside the
barracks, in forts like Buciumi or Ilișua, although, unfortunately, no
precise descriptions are available in the publications (for Buciumi, see
Chirilă et al. 1972, 23 and Landes-Gyemant / Gudea 2001, 145-147,
Abb. 15-16, though due to frequent rebuilding it is impossible to de-
termine their location with respect to the contubernia; for Ilișua see
Protase / Gaiu 1999, 418). Furthermore, we were unable to find any
information about the amount of lighting produced, so they had to be
excluded from the simulation.
Interpreting the results can be difficult because each human per-
ceives light slightly differently. First of all, it should be noted that the
images of the barracks interior included in this paper (figs. 11, 12) are
only illustrative, suffering a fair amount of brightening in order to be
used for viewing purposes. These depict the room’s layout and show
how light reaches different surfaces. However, they are not representa-
tions of the absolute level of illumination. Such pictures would be, as
our study suggests, too dark to be printed, and details in the shadows
would simply appear black. In order to establish a term for compari-
son, a circumstance that would be familiar to a modern audience was
selected (i.e. trying to read under a certain light). According to a study
on readability in low light conditions, contrast, age and light colour are
all factors that determine the reader’s performance (Welsh / Rasmussen
/ Vaughan 1977). Figs. 3 and 4 show the required luminance for text at
several contrast ratios to be readable when viewed by individuals rep-
resenting three age groups: young (aged 20-25), middle-aged (aged 40-
86 Dávid PETRUȚ / Monica GUI / Horea TRÎNCĂ

Fig. 11. The 3D model of the 3.5 × 3.5

m chamber designed in Autodesk 3ds
Max from different angles, with the
points of interest where lighting was
measured marked with numbers

46) and old (aged 60-70). The data is reprinted from this study, having
luminance values converted from fL (foot Lambert) to International
System Units, cd/m2 (candela per square metre).
Unfortunately, we only have data that applies to printed text (an
8pt sized Futura Demibold font) and none for hand-written. However,
these experimental results can still be used to get an idea of what the
lighting conditions were like during the night. A contrast ratio of 16.2:1
was achieved using 441 Pantone colour, which is a very light grey. For
young and middle-aged subjects, a minimum luminance of about 0.45
cd/m2 is required for readability. In the first scenario, the single lamp
produced enough light for readability only on the table it was placed
on. In the second scenario, conditions for the lower beds didn’t im-
prove much. However, the two upper beds closer to the lamp on the
shelf got enough light for readability. Finally, in the third scenario, al-
though conditions improve a lot overall, points 3, 4, 5, 6 and 9 are still
very close to the required threshold, meaning that light reaching those
places would have been barely enough for soldiers to read.
The simulation shows that multiple lamps were needed in order to
properly illuminate a room such as the one in our model. Also, furni-
ture and light placement greatly influence light levels available for each
bed. Soldiers would have had to seek for the best places and orienta-
tion towards the source of light. This suggests that activities like read-
ing and writing would have been quite difficult by lamp light, especial-
ly when considering the medium for writing (leaf or stylus tablets)32.
Furthermore, we can imagine gaming being equally strenuous under
these circumstances, probably making it hard to distinguish mark-
ings on counters at least in the scenarios with one or two lamps. Our
conclusion seems to be supported by aforementioned timber building
from London: one of the timber studs showed char traces at about 1.26
and 0.56 m form the floor, indicating that light was needed at different
levels in order to achieve proper lighting (Goodburn 1991, 202).
The authors of a recent study argue that a symposium could be
conducted with the aid of a single oil lamp, in the context of a 4th cen-
tury Greek house with access to little or no natural light (Moullou et
al. 2012, 107-113). The hypothesis is based on the results of measure- 32
However unlikely these activi-
ments that show that, in some points of the room, reading was possi- ties might seem in the case of the rank
and file, the evidence from sites like
ble. Furthermore, the lowest levels of illuminance were close to ground Vindolanda or Vindonissa (see Bowman
level, below the height of the lampstand (Moullou et al. 2012, 113). 1994; Speidel 1996) give some pause for
The evaluation of the required circumstances for reading, however, is thought.
 LIGHTING ROMAN MILITARY BARRACKS... 87

Fig. 12. Artistic impression of the lit up

contubernium

expressed in terms of illuminance (lux) rather than luminance (cd/

m2), and so does not take into account the parameters regarding the
surface that was illuminated during the process of reading (type of
reflection produced, contrast, angle etc.). Consequently the degree of
illumination achieved with one lamp in the context of a room measur-
ing 4.4 × 4.5 m might have been overestimated.
As pointed out in a study published 20 years ago, the concept of
‘blanket lighting’, i.e. uniform lighting (‘flooding’) throughout the en-
closed spaces was unknown in antiquity. Instead, a combination of
light and shadow, alternating with completely dark spaces, was used to
create the social atmosphere of the Roman house. As the author of the
respective study cautiously stated at that time, perhaps darkness was
indeed the norm, but at the same time the perception of lighting was
very different (Ellis 1994, 70-71).

7. Conclusions
The investigation so far has shown that the conspicuously low number
of lamps discovered in the studied military installations was probably
insufficient to provide alone a suitable amount of artificial light. The
use of alternative sources of light, as asserted in other cases, must be
considered here as well, though there is little archaeological evidence
to substantiate this. Due to research deficiencies in this field, it is near-
ly impossible to establish chronological tendencies in the lamp usage
inside the barracks. Still, the figures from the fort at Buciumi indicate
a possible peak in lamp consumption at the end of the 2nd century AD.
However, the very low numbers of lamps taken into consideration, as
well as the ambiguous dating methods employed, induce a high level
of uncertainty in this respect.
The compared figures from the military sites discussed here also
indicate some potential differences. The finds from the legionary for-
tress at Potaissa clearly show considerably more intensive lamp con-
sumption compared with the auxiliary forts discussed. It is likely that
this discrepancy is not simply a consequence of the difference in the
dimensions of the respective military facilities, and might be connect-
ed with the idea that legionary fortresses have enjoyed a more pro-
longed and relatively constant supply of olive oil. The relatively high
number of lamps adapted to the use of tallow and other animal fats
from the auxiliary fort at Buciumi could indicate a shortage in the ol-
ive oil supply.
88 Dávid PETRUȚ / Monica GUI / Horea TRÎNCĂ

We believe that the virtual light intensity simulations have dem-

onstrated that the lamps within the individual contubernia could not
provide sufficient light for activities that required focus on detail (such
as reading or gaming), even if these activities were centred in the im-
mediate vicinity of two or more lamps hypothetically situated on a ta-
ble. Even as the number of lamps was gradually increased, reaching in
the end four simultaneously working pieces, the overall effect can be
described as insubstantial. Light availability was highly localised and
restricted to the immediate vicinity of the lamps. Based on this, and
previous enquiries on the subject, our view on the use of lamps can be
slightly adjusted. It is fair to assume that the oil lamps in the context
of enclosed spaces, such as the contubernia, could not have ensured
the continuation of day-time activities after sunset even if we consider
the adaptability of the human eye, as well as the addition of alternative
means of lighting. Therefore, the primary purpose of these items can
be more adequately established as devices that facilitated orientation
and movement within these rooms after dusk.
Acknowledgements
This work was supported by a grant of the Ministry of National
Education, CNCS-UEFISCDI, #PN-II-ID-PCE-2012-4-0618 and
#PN-II-PT-PCEE-2013-3-0924.

Bibliography Cluj-Napoca. Volume IV. Part II. Terracotta lamps.

AE = L’Année épigraphique. Paris.
1888-.
Bailey, D. M. 1988. A Catalogue of
the lamps in the British Museum III.
Roman provincial lamps. London.
Bailey, D. M. 1980. A Catalogue of the
lamps in the British Museum II. Roman
lamps made in Italy. London.
Barrett, J. C. 2006. Agency, the duality
of structure, and the problem of the
archaeological record. In: Hodder, I.
(ed.). Archaeological Theory Today.
Cambridge. 141-164.
Bărbulescu, M. 1997. Das Legionslager
von Potaissa (Turda) / Castrul legionar
de la Potaissa (Turda) (= Führer zu
archäologischen Denkmäler aus Dacia
Porolissensis 7 / Ghid al monumentelor
arheologice din Dacia Porolissensis 7).
Zalău.
Bărbulescu, M. 1994. Potaissa. Studiu
monografic. Turda.
Bărbulescu, M. 1987. Din istoria
militară a Daciei romane. Legiunea V
Macedonica și castrul de la Potaissa.
Benea, D. 1996. Lampenproduktion in
Tibiscum. In: Zabehlicky-Scheffenegger,
S. (ed.). Rei Cretariae Romanae
Fautorum Acta 33. Congressus
Undevicesimus Rei Cretariae Romanae
Fautorum in Dacia Habitus MCMXCIV.
Abingdon. 59-62.
Bernárdez Gómez, M. J. / Guisado di
Monti, J. C. 2007. Las referencias al lapis
specularis en la Historia Natural de
Plinio El Viejo. – Pallas 75, 49-57.
Bidwell, P. 1997. The Book of Roman
Forts in Britain. London.
Bishop, M. C. 1986. The distribution
of military equipment within Roman
forts of the first century A.D. In: Unz, C.
(ed.). 13 Internationaler Limeskongress
Aalen 1983 (= Studien zu den
Militärgrenzen Roms III). Stuttgart.
717-723.
Bowman, A. K. 1994. Life and Letters on
the Roman Frontier. Vindolanda and its
People. London.
Broneer, O. 1930. Corinth. Results of
excavations conducted by the American
School of Classical Studies at Athens.
Cambridge, Massachusetts.
Carroll, M. 2005. The preparation and
consumption of food as a contribut-
ing factor towards communal identity
in the Roman army. In: Visy, Zs. (ed.).
Proceedings of the 19th International
Congress of Roman Frontier Studies
held in Pécs, Hungary in September
2003. Pécs. 363-372.
Cătinaș, A. 2002. Opaițele romane din
Potaissa. Diss. Cluj-Napoca.
Chirilă, E. / Gudea, N. / Lucăcel, V. / Pop,
C. 1972. Castrul roman de la Buciumi.
Contribuții la cercetarea limesului
Daciei Porolissensis. Cluj.
CIL = Corpus inscriptionum Latinarum.
Berlin 1863-.
Connolly, P. 1998. The Roman Fort.
Oxford.
Coulston, J. C. N. 2004. Military identity
and personal self-identity in the Roman
army. In: De Ligt, J. / Hemelrijk, E.
A. / Singor, H. W. (eds.). Roman Rule
and Civic Life: Local and Regional
Perspectives. Impact of Empire 4,
Proceedings of the fourth workshop

of the international network Impact of
Empire (Roman Empire, c. 200 B.C.-
A.D. 476), Leiden June 25-28, 2003.
Amsterdam. 133-152.
Crnobrnja, A. N. 2008. Economic aspects
of the use of Roman oil lamps in Moesia
Superior. In: Gergova, D. / Bozhkova,
A. / Popov, Chr. / Kuzmanov, M. (eds.).
Phosphorion. Studia in honorem Mariae
Čičikova. Sofia. 408-412.
Davison, D. 1989. The Barracks of
the Roman Army from the 1st to
the 3rd Centuries A. D. (= British
Archaeological Reports, International
Series 472). Oxford.
Eckardt, H. 2011. Heating and lighting.
In: L. Allason-Jones (ed.). Artefacts in
Roman Britain. Their purpose and use.
Cambridge. 180-193.
Eckardt, H. 2002a. Illuminating Roman
Britain (= Monographies Instrumentum
23). Montagnac.
Eckardt, H. 2002b. Candlesticks in
Roman Britain. – Lucerna 24, 15-16.
Eckardt, H. 2000. Illuminating Roman
Britain. In: Fincham, G. / Harrison,
G. / Holland, R. / Revell, L. (eds.).
Proceedings of the Ninth Annual
Theoretical Roman Archaeology
Conference, Durham 1999. Oxford. 8-21.
Ellis, S. P. 1994. Lighting in Late Roman
Houses. In: Cottam, S. / Dungworth, D.
/ Scott, S. / Taylor J. (eds.). Proceedings
of the Fourth Annual Theoretical
Roman Archaeology Conference. Held
at the Department of Archaeology,
University of Durham, 19th and 20th
March 1994. Oxford. 64-71.
Fellmann, R. 2009. Römische
Kleinfunde aus Holz aus dem
Legionslager Vindonissa (=
Veröffentlichungen der Gesellschaft Pro
Vindonissa Band 20). Brugg.
Gaiu, C. 2010. Opaițele ceramice de la
Arcobadara. – Revista Bistriței 14, 217-
244.
Gaiu, C. 2007. Lucernele de bronz din
castrul roman de la Ilișua. In: Nemeti, S.
LIGHTING ROMAN MILITARY BARRACKS... 89
/ Fodorean, F. / Nemeth, E. (eds.). Dacia
Felix. Studia Michaeli Bărbulescu oblata.
Cluj-Napoca. 414-429.
Gaiu, C. 2006. Ilișua – castrul traianic.
In: Teodor, E. S. / Țentea, O. (eds.).
Dacia Augusti Provincia. Crearea
provinciei. Actele simpozionului
desfășurat în 13-14 octombrie 2006 la
Muzeul Național de Istorie a României,
București. București. 207-217.
Gogâltan, F. 1996. Iluminatul în preis-
torie. O posibilă abordare. In: Mitu,
S. / Gogâltan, F. (eds.). Viață privată,
mentalități colective și imaginar social
în Transilvania (= Studii de istorie a
Transilvaniei 2). Oradea / Cluj-Napoca.
13-23.
Goodburn, D. 1991. A Roman tim-
ber framed building tradition. –
Archaeology Journal 148, 182-204.
Gudea, N. 2008. Castrul roman de la
Feldioara. Încercare de monografie
arheologică / Das Römerkastell von
Feldioara. Versuch einer archäologi-
schen Monographie (= Interferenţe
etnice şi culturale în mileniile I a.
Chr. – I p. Chr., Vol. 11. /Ethnische
und Kulturelle Interferenzen in 1.
Jahrtausend v. Chr. – 1. Jahrtausend n.
Chr., Bd. 11). Cluj-Napoca.
Gudea, N. 1997. Castrul roman de la
Buciumi / Das Römergrenzkastell von
Buciumi (= Führer zu archäologischen
Denkmäler aus Dacia Porolissensis 2 /
Ghid al monumentelor arheologice din
Dacia Porolissensis 2). Zalău.
Gudea, N. / Cosma, C. 2008. Die Lampen
aus dem Römerkastell von Buciumi
(Dacia Porolissensis). In: Roman, C. /
Gudea, N. (eds.). Lychnological Acts 2.
Acts of the 2nd International Congress
on Ancient and Middle Age Lighting
Devices, Zalău – Cluj-Napoca, 13th-
18th of May 2006 (= Patrimonium
Archaeologicum Transylvanicum, Vol.
2). Cluj-Napoca. 117-128.
Haalebos, J. K. 1992. D. P. Davison, The
Barracks of the Roman Army (review).
– Bonner Jahrbücher 192, 653-657.
Haevernick, T. E. / Hahn-Weinheimer,
P. 1955. Untersuchungen römischer
Fenstergläser. – Saalburg Jahrbuch 14,
65-73.
Harris, W. V. 1980. Roman terracota
lamps: the organization of an industry. –
Journal of Roman Studies 70, 126-145.
Haynes, I. 1999a. Introduction. In:
Goldsworthy, A. / Haynes, I. (eds.).
The Roman Army as a Community
(= Journal of Roman Archaeology
Supplementary Series 34). Portsmouth /
Rhode Island. 7-14.
Haynes, I. 1999b. Military service and
cultural identity in the auxilia. In:
Goldsworthy, A. / Haynes, I. (eds.).
The Roman Army as a Community
(= Journal of Roman Archaeology
Supplementary Series 34). Portsmouth /
Rhode Island. 165-174.
Hodder, I. 1985. Postprocessual
Archaeology. In: Schiffer, M. B. (ed.).
Advances in Archaeological Method
and Theory, Vol. 8. New York. 1-26.
Hodgson, N. / Bidwell, P. T. 2004.
Auxiliary Barracks in a New Light:
Recent Discoveries on Hadrian’s Wall. –
Britannia 35, 121-157.
Hodgson, N. 2003. The Roman Fort at
Wallsend (Segedunum). Excavations in
1997-8. With contributions by Bailey,
D. / Brickstock, R. J. / Brogan, G. /
Clogg, P. W. / Croom, A. T. / Dickinson,
B. / Gidney, L. J. / Griffiths, W. B. /
Hartley, K. / Heslop, D. / McBride,
R. M. / McKelvey, J. / Tomlin, R. S.
O. / Snape, M. E. / Waddington, C. /
Worrell, S. (= Tyne and Wear Museums
Archaeological Monograph 2).
Newcastle upon Tyne.
Hodgson, N. 2002. `Where did they put
the horses?` revisited: the recent discov-
ery of cavalry barracks in the Roman
forts at Wallsend and South Shields
on Hadrian`s Wall. In: Freeman, Ph. /
Bennett, J. / Fiema, Z. T. / Hoffmann,
B. (eds.). Proceedings of the 18th
International Congress of Roman
Frontier Studies held in Amman,
Jordan in September 2000 (= British
Archaeological Reports, International
Series 1084 (II)). Oxford. 887-894.
90 Dávid PETRUȚ / Monica GUI / Horea TRÎNCĂ
ILS = H. Dessau. Inscriptiones Latinae
Selectae, vol. I-III. Berlin 1892-1916.
Iványi, D. 1935. Die pannonischen
Lampen. Eine typologisch-chrono-
logische Übersicht (= Dissertationes
Pannonicae 2.2). Budapest.
Jacobi, H. 1924. Die Ausgrabungen. –
Saalburg Jahrbuch 6, 1914-1924, 22-84.
James, S. 1999. The community of the
soldiers: a major identity and centre of
power in the Roman Empire. In: Baker,
P. / Forcey, C. / Jundi, S. / Witcher, R.
(eds.). Proceedings of the 8th Annual
Theoretical Roman Archaeology
Conference held at the University of
Leicester, April 1998. Oxford. 14-25.
Johnson, A. 1983. Roman Forts of the 1st
an 2nd centuries AD in Britain and the
German Provinces. London.
Land, M. F. / Nilsson, D. E. 2004. Animal
Eyes. Oxford.
Landes-Gyemant, A. / Gudea, N.
2001. Das Römerkastell von Buciumi.
Vorschläge für eine grafische
Wiederherstellung. – Saalburg Jahrbuch
51, 127-151.
Landes-Gyemant, A. / Gudea, N. 1984.
Castrul roman de la Buciumi, propuneri
pentru o reconstituire grafică, I-IV. –
Acta Musei Porolissensis 8, 165-210.
Loeschcke, S. 1919. Lampen aus
Vindonissa. Ein Beitrag zur Geschichte
von Vindonissa und des antiken
Beleuchtungswessen. Zürich.
Macdonald, G. / Park, A. 1906.
The Roman Forts on the Bar Hill
Dumbartonshire. Glasgow.
Manning, W. H. / Painter, K. S. 1967.
A Roman Iron Window-Grille from
Hinton St. Mary, Dorset. – The British
Museum Quarterly 31, 3/4, 122-130.
Marcu, F. 2009. Organzarea internă a
castrelor din Dacia (= Bibliotheca Musei
Napocensis 30). Cluj-Napoca.
Mattingly, D. 2004. Being Roman: ex-
pressing identity in a provincial setting. –
Journal of Roman Archaeology 17, 5-25.
Moga, V. / Drâmbărean, M. 2007. Note
epigrafice apulense. – Apulum 44, 175-179.
Moullou, D. / Bisketzis, N. / Tselonis,
Ch. / Egglezos, D. / Filippopoulou,
O. / Topalis, F.V. 2012. Methods and
tools for the study of artificial il-
lumination in antiquity. In: 2nd
ARCH_RNT ΠΑΝΕΠΙΣΤΗΜΙΟ
ΠΕΛΟΠΟΝΝΗΣΟΥ Archaeological
Research and New Technologies.
Kalamata. 107-113.
Negru, M. 1996. Some Aspects of
the Lamps Discovered in the Roman
Forts of Muntenia. In: Zabehlicky-
Scheffenegger, S. (ed.). Rei Cretariae
Romanae Fautorum Acta 33.
Congressus Undevicesimus Rei
Cretariae Romanae Fautorum in Dacia
Habitus MCMXCIV. Abingdon. 75-78.
Oldenstein, J. 1982. Der obergerma-
nisch-rätische Limes des Römerreiches /
Fundindex. Mainz am Rhein.
Oren, M. / Nayar, S. K. 1995.
Generalization of the Lambertian Model
and Implications for Machine Vision. –
International Journal of Computer
Vision 14, 227-251.
Petolescu, C. C. 2009. Cronica epigrafică
a României (XXVII-XVIII, 2007-
2008). – Studii și cercetări de istorie
veche și arheologie 59-60, 213-239.
Protase, D. / Gaiu, C. 1999. Le camp
romain et l’établissement civil d’Ilișua.
Les résultats des fouilles archéologiques
effectuées dans le courant des annés
1978-1995. In: Gudea, N. (ed.). Roman
Frontier Studies. Proceedings of the
XVIIth International Congress of Roman
Frontier Studies, Zalău, September
1997. Zalău. 415-429.
Protase, D. / Gaiu, C. / Marinescu,
G. 1997. Castrul roman de la Ilișua.
Bistrița.
Regep, S. 2002. Opaițele din fier din
Dacia romană. – Apulum 39, 265-272.
Reinhart, Ch. / Breton, P.-F. 2009.
Experimental Validation of Autodesk® 3DS
Max® Design 2009 and Dysim 3.0. – The
Journal of the Illuminating Engineering
Society of North America, Vol. 6, No. 1.
Reinhart, Ch. / Landry, M. / Breton, P.-F.
2009. Daylight Simulation in 3ds Max
Design 2009 – Getting Started (= Autodesk
Whitepapers, http://images.autodesk.com/
adsk/files/3dsmax_started.pdf).
Roman, C. A. 2008. Lamps from Dacia
Porolissensis I. The Roman Forts from
Porolissum-Moigrad, Buciumi, Gilău,
Samum-Căşei / Lămpi din Dacia
Porolissensis I. Castrele Porolissum-
Moigrad, Buciumi, Gilău, Samum-Căşei (=
Bibliotheca Musei Porolissensis 7). Zalău.
Roman, C. A. 2000. Wheelmade
lamps of Roman Dacia. – Acta Musei
Napocensis 37, 1, 99-140.
Sommer, C. S. 1995. ‘Where did they put
the horses?’ Überlegungen zu Aufbau und
Stärke römischer Auxiliartruppen und
deren Unterbringung in den Kastellen. –
In: Czysz, W. / Hüssen, C.-M. / Kuhnen,
H. P. / Sommer, C. S. / Weber, G. (eds.).
Provinzialrömische Forschungen.
Festschrift für Günter Ulbert zum 65.
Geburtstag. Espelkamp, 149-168.
Speidel, M. A. 1996. Die römischen
Schreibtafeln von Vindonissa (=
Veröffentlichungen der Gesellschaft Pro
Vindonissa 12). Brugg.
Torma, K. 1866. Az Alsó-Ilosvai romai
állótábor és müemlékei. – Erdélyi Múzeum
Egyesület Évkönyve III, 1864-1865, 10-67.
Welsh, K. W. / Rasmussen, P. G. /
Vaughan, J. A. 1977. Readability of
Alphanumeric Characters Having
Various Contrast Levels as a Function of
Age and Illumination Mode. – Federal
Aviation Administration Office of
Aerospace Medicine, Technical Report #
DOT/FAA/AM-77/13.
Worrel, S. 2003. The Glass. In: Hodgson
2003, 195-200.
Wunderlich, Ch. H. 2006. Light
and economy. An essay about the
economy of prehistoric and ancient
lamps. – Nouveautés Lychnologiques /
Lychnological News, 251-263.
LIGHTING ROMAN MILITARY BARRACKS... 91

Осветление на римски казарми.

Интердисциплинарен подход, основан
на данни от Дакия
Давид Петруц / Моника Гуй / Хоря Трънка

(резюме)
Статията цели да изследва ролята на осветлението за оформя-
не на социалното пространство в помещението на едно римско
военно отделение (contubernium). Фокус са осветителни тела,
открити в римски казарми в три крепости на помощни части в
Илишуа, Бучуми и Фелдиоара, както и в легионния форт Potaissa.
Смята се, че тези обекти са разнообразни, което би повлияло
върху резултата от проучването, в: размера на крепост / казарми,
архитектура на казармите, време на ползване, разчистване / въз-
становяване на помещенията, статут на военната част (легион,
помощна част от пехота или кавалерия) и не на последно място
в обхвата и метода на разкопаване, на публикуване на находките,
на осмисляне на фази в конкретната крепост.
Архитектурата на римски казарми от ІІ-ІІІ век показва, че
са слабо осветени чрез естествена светлина даже през деня.
Внимателно изследване на казармите в избраните римски крепо-
сти в Дакия разкрива слаб анализ на археологически данни с кон-
текст. Същевременно е налице ясно различие между бараките на
легионери и на помощни войници. То показва очевидни отлики в
живота на двете групи римски военни, които се отнасят и до из-
куственото осветяване на техните помещения. При това не става
въпрос за чисто количествен анализ на осветителни тела.
Обсъжда се типологията на лампите, но този аспект се оказва
по-малко информативен за Дакия и с недостатъчна хронологич-
на стойност. Вместо това фокусът е насочен към икономическата
страна на производство и разход ‒ как точно тези лампи са из-
ползвани в ежедневието. Затова се обръща повече внимание вър-
ху комбинация от значими морфологични белези. Те помагат да
се разграничат лампи, пълнени с масло, от тези, зареждани с лой,
предназначени за вътрешна или външна употреба лампи, ефи-
касни или скъпи такива.
Въз основа на данни от крепостта при Бучуми е направен 3D
модел на контуберниум, за да се разбере как се живее на изкуст-
вено осветление в него. Светлинните стойности са измерени в де-
вет точки. Три сценария са взети предвид: с една, с две и с четири
работещи лампи. За да обясним достъпно получените стойности,
ги свързваме с обичайна за съвременния човек ситуация на чете-
не на определена изкуствена светлина. Резултатът е, че дори чети-
ри глинени лампи от типа Firmalampen не осигуряват достатъчна
светлина за очите, когато се изисква повече внимание в детайла
‒ четене, писане, игри. Оказва се, че лампите с масло позволяват
само ориентация в контуберниума, но не и днешното обичайно
изкуствено осветление.
92 Dávid PETRUȚ / Monica GUI / Horea TRÎNCĂ

Dr. Dávid Petruț

Mureș County Museum
Str. Mărăști 8/a
RO-540328 Târgu Mureș
petrutdavid@gmail.com

Dr. Monica Gui

Romanian Academy. Institute of Archaeology
and Art History in Cluj-Napoca
Str. Mihail Kogălniceanu 12-14
RO-400084 Cluj-Napoca
monica_gui@ymail.com

Horea Trîncă PhD candidate

Babeș Bolyai University,
Faculty of Mathematics and Computer Science
Str. Mihail Kogălniceanu 1
RO-400081 Cluj-Napoca
thorea@cs.ubbcluj.ro