1

Architecture, religion and ideology in Colonia Dacica Sarmizegetusa (I)

Ioan Piso and Ovidiu Țentea

A comprehensive discussion on the architecture of Sarmizegetusa, namely intra and

extra muros, in relation to religion and ideology, would have far exceeded the page limit. As
such, we have decided to begin by taking into consideration only the architectural elements
and inscriptions identified intra muros. In a second part, we intend to deal with the extent of
the pomerium, the extremely vast area sacra north of the city walls and the votive monuments
with uncertain find spot (fig. 4.12.). Finally we shall be able to compile a complete list of
deities attested at Sarmizegetusa (Daicoviciu 1974, 611-655; Piso 2005, 435-457; Schäfer
2007; Boda 2015, 281-304; Szabó 2018, 16; Piso 2021, 213-254).
The name given to the city on its foundation is that of colonia Ulpia Traiana Dacica
Sarmizegetusa, recorded as such in the building inscription of Trajan’s forum (forum vetus:
Piso 2006-2007, 158-161 = AE 2007, 1203 = ILD II 880 = AE 1998, 1084 = 2006, 1139):

[Im]p(erator) Ca[es(ar)] Div[i] Ne[r]v[a]e f(ilius) Nerva Trai[anus Opt(imus)

Aug(ustus) | Ger]m(anicus) [Dacicus Parthicus p]ontif(ex) max(imus) trib(unicia)
pot[est(ate) XX oder XXI imp(erator) XIII co(n)s(ul) VI | pater patriae coloniae Ulpiae
T]ra[i]anae Dacic(ae) [Sar]miz[egetusae] forum(?) cum(?) ......(?) dedit(?)].

Based on an analogous inscription from the forum of Poetovio (Mráv 2000, 80, 92 = AE
2000, 1189), Diaconescu noticed that we are dealing with a building inscription of the forum,
and not with a foundation inscription of the colonia (2006-2007, 95-106). The epithets Ulpia
Traiana were taken from the founder (Galsterer-Kröll 1972) and the epithet Dacica marked a
first distinction from other Trajanic foundations; unlike colonia Ulpia Traiana (Xanten),
which, as the first city founded by Trajan, didn’t need any distinctive epithet (Eck 2014,
106.). As the epithet Augusta was added only under Hadrian (Piso 2021, 217-218), the
complete name became colonia Ulpia Traiana Augusta Dacica Sarmizegetusa. This name
would be recorded in full in inscriptions whenever the colonia itself dedicated monuments
which predominantly happened in the two fora.
The city was founded around 108/110 following an ancient ritual. The founder was the
emperor Trajan himself, but the founding act was performed by his representative, the
governor D. Terentius Scaurianus, after observing the auspices (AE 2006, 1140 = ILD I 238 =
 2

CIL III 1443; AE 1972, 465; IDR III/2, 1 - For D. Terentius Scaurianus see Piso 1993, 13-18,
no. 2; Piso 2013, 13-15, no. 2):

Auspiciis | [Imp(eratoris)] Caes(aris) Divi Nervae f[il(ii) |Nervae] Traiani Augusti |

[Germ(anici) Dac(ici)] condita colonia |5 [Ulpia Traiana Augusta] Dacica | [Sarmizegetusa]
per | [D(ecimum) Terenti]um Scaurianum | [legatum] eius pro pr(aetore) | [- - - - - -].

Further on, he fixed the groma into the ground, and its shade indicated the sacred east-
west axis, the decumanus maximus, while the perpendicular drew the sacred north-south axis,
the cardo maximus (Catalano 1978, 440-453, Boda 2015, 281-282; for the deductio coloniae
of Philippi see: Collart 1937, 224-227; Brélaz 2018, 20-27).

Trajan’s forum (forum vetus)

To understand the political-religious meaning of the foundation of Trajan’s forum
(forum vetus, Figs 2-3), we need to focus on the building inscription. It shows in all clarity
that the emperor was the one – and could have been the only one - to offer a forum to the
colonia Sarmizegetusa. The same principle applies to all of Trajan’s foundations, including
his forum in Rome (Piso 2014, 255-273). In this phase of the Principate, the extent of one’s
generosity was conditioned by the place occupied in the political hierarchy. Only the emperor
could afford to offer something similar in grandeur to his forum in Rome or to the basilica
Ulpia, which compels us to open a discussion about their building inscriptions. For example,
the inscription on the architrave from the entrance to the ‘sala trisegmentata’, which served as
southern propylon of the forum, can now, with the help of the inscription from Sarmizegetusa,
be completed as follows (Piso 2014, 267-268; AE 2014, 138 = AE 2003, 211): [Imp(erator)
Cae]sar Nerva Traia[nus Aug(ustus) Germanicus Dacicus senatui populoque Romano forum
dedit]. The proposed reconstructions of the great inscription with forum dedit on the attica
found on the ‘parete trisegmentata’, as well as of the inscription supposed to have been
located on the southern side of basilica Ulpia’s architrave (Piso 2014, 268-269; for the
remarkable recent research of Trajan’s forum in Rome, see Meneghini 2009, 117-163;
Meneghini 2014, 69-85; Packer 1997, 100-101; Seelentag 2004, 300). Despite the spectacular
aspect of the column and of the equus Traiani, one must accept that they represent nothing
else but a modest response of the Roman Senate and the People to the generosity of the
emperor. This new step in the evolution of the Principate’s political regime revolutionizes the
official architecture in the whole empire since Trajan’s reign (Seelentag 2004, 320).
 3

The imperial prerogatives (auspicium imperiumque) entitled the emperor to interact

with the divinity in the name of the community, but it certainly did not allow him to offer
anyone a Capitolium, respectively Jupiter himself (Mommsen 1887, I 76, 135-136). The
forum that we encounter in the first two centuries of the Principate, with a civilian part
comprising the basilica and the curia, and a religious part comprising the Capitolium,
separated by a decumanus, leaves place to fora spatially separated, one predominantly civilian
and administrative, and the other religious (Ward-Perkins 1970, 7-13; Piso and Diaconescu
1985-1986, 166-168; Gros 1996 I 207, Piso 2014, 255-256, 271). This is also the case at
Sarmizegetusa (Fig. 4.15.). There is also a third type of forum, labelled by us ‘provincial’, to
the north of the colonia’s walls, where we assume the existence of an ara Romae et Augusti
(Piso and Diaconescu 1985-1986, 182, Szabó 2018, 175-187).
Trajan’s forum (forum vetus) was built at the intersection of the sacred axes cardo
maximus and decumanus maximus. It has the plan of a forum of principia type (Grenier 1958,
350-352; Piso and Diaconescu 1985-1986, 161-183; Balty 1990, 357-364), it measures 88,5 x
67,5 m and is oriented north-south. We must specify that in the earlier bibliography, the
complex was known as Palace of the Augustales (aedes Augustalium: Daicoviciu 1924, 242-
249; Daicoviciu 1927-1932, 516-537; Daicoviciu 1974, 648; Daicoviciu and Alicu 1984, 145-
159) identified as forum by Ioan Piso and Alexandru Diaconescu (Piso and Diaconescu 1985-
1986, 173-183; Étienne, Piso and Diaconescu 1990, 273-296; Balty 1991, 350-354; Étienne,
Piso and Diaconescu 2002-2003, 59-154; Étienne, Piso and Diaconescu 2006, 79-210; Piso
2014, 255-262; Piso 2017a, 20-31; Piso 2021, 223-234).
The first religious act accomplished here, that we take notice of, seems to be the burial
beneath the slabs of the courtyard of a double lead ingot of 95 kg, with the stamp C(oloniae)
Ulp(iae) D(acicae) S(armizegetusae) (Piso 2005, 122-124; AE 2005, 1300 a-d.). The action
can be interpreted in relation to a construction sacrifice (Piso 2021, 218.). The building
inscription, which is located above the entrance to the tetrapylum (Fig. 4.14/1: Étienne, Piso
and Diaconescu 2006, 91-102), informs us that the forum was gifted to the colonia by the
emperor. A similar content must have had the lost inscription from above the entrance to the
basilica (Fig. 3/34). As a response to the emperor’s generosity, the colonia dedicated him, on
the same north-south sacred axis, an altar on the locus gromae (Fig. 4.14/B 33.f), in front of
the tetrapylum, and a tropaeum in the centre of the courtyard (Fig. 4.14/B1: Étienne, Piso and
Diaconescu 2006, 139-141). Only the foundations of the initial monument of the groma have
been preserved (B 36/fig. 4.14). Due to the completion of the construction, it was moved 2.25
m to the north (B 33/fig. 4.14), up to the steps of the tetrapylum (Étienne, Piso and
 4

Diaconescu 2006, 96-97; Diaconescu and Bota 2009, 29-36, 175). The inscription that made
reference to the foundation of the colonia was probably engraved on the monument of the
groma, while the tropaeum was dedicated to the emperor, [condit]o[ri s]uo, by
Sarmizegetusa in 116/117, after the completion of the forum (AE 2003, 1515 = ILD I 239 =
Piso 2006, 217-218, no. 4; Thamugadi: CIL VIII 17841 = ILS 6842 ). It is worth noting that
under Antoninus Pius the groma monument was sheltered by an edifice supported on the side
of the decumanus maximus by four marble columns (fig. 4.14/2). Together with the
tetrapylum, this propylon created a coherent and very spectacular ensemble (Étienne, Piso and
Diaconescu 2006, 96). It should also be noted that along the east, north and west sides of the
courtyard, the colonia Sarmizegetusa erected 25 statues over the course of time (Fig. 4.14 / B
2-B 26), mostly imperial, among which five statues representing emperors in a quadrigae
(Piso and Diaconescu 1999, 131-132, 136-137). The sacred north-south axis was and would
continue to be a sort of channel of dialogue between the emperor and the colonia.
If we consider the forum vetus as a civilian and administrative forum, this certainly does
not imply that, as a whole and in its component parts, it did not provide the venue for any
religious functions. We see in it a necessary result of the perfect twinning between Roman
religion and official or private institutions. The approximately 100 inscriptions discovered in
the forum vetus provide us with an unique information, which can be applied to most of the
known Roman fora.
We shall begin with the curia (fig. 4.14/35), that represented the seat of the ordo
decurionum, the senate of the colonia. It opened, as other seats of institutions, in the basilica
iudiciaria (fig. 4.14/32). In front of the steps three statues were erected: the one dedicated
Concord(iae) [or]din[i]s stood at its centre (AE 2003, 1519 = IDR III/2, 195, Piso 2006, 235-
239, no. 18-20):

Concord(iae) | [or]din[i]s | [quam? Ulp(ius) D]omi[t(ius) | Hermes Aug(ustalis)

col(oniae) |5 ob] hon[orem or|na]m(entorum) dec(urionalium) [promis(erat) | V]al(erius)
[Threptus] | et [Domiti(i)] | Regulu[s Hippon(icus)] |10 Her[mes Onesimus | Aug(ustales)
col(oniae) h(eredes) p(onendum) c(uraverunt) l(oco) d(ato) d(ecurionum) d(ecreto)].

The statue of Concordia is framed by two others, dedicated Minervae Aug. (CIL III
1426 = IDR III/2, 271) and Genio ord. (CIL III 1425 = ILS 7137 = IDR III/2, 219). The curia
was, consequently, a templum or an aedes dedicated, as at Thamugadi (CIL VIII 2341 =
17811), to an abstract personification, Concordia, that symbolised not only a fundamental
 5

characteristic, but above all the highest ideal of the institution (Boda 2015, 289 positions the
statue of Minerva in the centre, which is contradicted by the example of Thamugadi). It
should be noted that these three statues were erected at the expense of an Augustalis, Ulpius
Domitius Hermes, who had received the ornamenta decurionalia.
The basilica iudiciaria (Fig. 4.14/32) was the space used, among other activities, by the
supreme magistrates, the IIviri iure dicundo (Ardevan 1998, 135-139), whose most
conspicuous duty was to deliver justice. At the eastern and western extremities, two tribunalia
were located (Fig. 4.14/34 and 33). In the basement of the eastern tribunal (fig. 4.14/34) a
prison was set up (carcer: Étienne, Piso and Diaconescu 2006, 152-156.). The western one
(fig. 4.14/33) seems to have been set up for the imperial cult, according to the discovery of a
colossal marble arm holding a globe (Diaconescu 2004, II 62; Diaconescu and Bota 2009,
265, no. 50; Müller, Piso, Schwaighofer –and Benea 2012, 84-85, SA 9.). We could, for
example, be dealing with a sort of Augusteum of smaller dimensions (Vitruvius V.1.7,Étienne
- Piso - Diaconescu 2006, 157). The basilica iudiciaria is not devoid of votive monuments. At
the left of the entrance to the tabularium (Fig. 4.14/42+43), an altar or statue base was
dedicated Fortunae Aug(ustae) (Fig. 4.14/B 41, IDR III/2, 210.).
The rich epigraphic harvest allows us to locate in the forum vetus three cult places,
especially created for this purpose: the aedes Augustalium (fig. 4.14/40+41) at the eastern side
of the curia and attached to it, the aedes collegii fabrum (fig. 4.14/16-22) in the south-eastern
corner of the forum and the aedes Fortunae (fig. 4.14/10-12) in its north-western corner (AE
2003, 1523 (= CIL III 1509 = IDR III/2, 3). The aedes Augustalium and the aedes Fortunae
were built by the same euergetai, M. Procilius Niceta, IIvir et flamen col. Sarmiz., item
sacerd. Laurentium Lavinat., and his son, M. Procilius Regulus, dec. col., eq. publ. (CIL III
6270 = ILS 7136 = IDR III/2, 2; AE 2003, 1523 (= CIL III 1509 = IDR III/2, 3.).. The aedes
collegii fabrum was dedicated in 183/185 to the health of the emperor Commodus (AE 1912,
76 = IDR III/2, 6 = AE 2003, 1518). The archaeological data supports the idea that the aedes
collegii fabrum and the aedes Fortunae were built concurrently. All these three buildings, or
at least their elaborated phases, emerged consequently under the emperor Commodus.
The Augustales were a category of rich freedmen, who, due to their unfree birth were
not allowed to belong to the ordo decurionum nor to become magistrates. However, as their
large resources could be profitable for the community, they have been organized as a distinct
category, and sometimes even as an ordo inferior to the ordo decurionum. It was very
important for these parvenus that as Augustales they were able to fulfill an official role in the
imperial cult, even if only in the name of their own category (Ardevan 1998, 250-258; Piso
 6

2006a, 101-116. For the aedes Augustalium see Étienne, Piso and Diaconescu 2006, 167-
169.). For their seat (fig. 4.14/40+41) we have no less than three building inscriptions (CIL III
6270 = ILS 7136 = IDR III/2, 2: - - - aedem Augustalibus - - - faciend(am) instituit - - -; Piso
2006, 262-263, Nr. 40 (= IDR II/2, 4 = AE 1982, 831); IDR III/2, 5 = AE 1982, 832.). To the
right of the entrance to the aedes, P. Antonius Super, dec. col. Sarm. metropolis, erected a
column ordini Augustalium (fig. 4.14/B 43: AE 1933, 241 = IDR III/2, 134). One can
consider this as an answer to the gesture of politeness of the Augustalis, who had honoured
the curia with three statues (see above). The location of the aedes Augustalium next to the
much more impressive curia reflects nonetheless the true relation between the two ordines.
For the aedes collegii fabrum (fig. 4.14/16-22) we have four building inscriptions (AE
1912, 76 = IDR III/2, 6 = AE 2003, 1518; AE 2003, 1517; CIL III 7960 = ILS 5548 = IDR
III/2, 13; IDR III/2, 10.). The collegium fabrum had, similar to other occupational collegia,
also the duty of practicing the imperial cult in the name of its own members (Ardevan 1998,
296-303). It is also worth noting that the first two building inscriptions mentioned were set up
for the health of the emperor Commodus. The professional patron deity of the fabri was
however Volcanus, who appears on a fragmentary inscription found in the aedes (AE 2003,
1522).
It is far more difficult to assign the role of the third building (fig. 4.14/10-12: Étienne -
Piso - Diaconescu 2006, 119-120). In the building inscription (AE 2003, 1523 (= CIL III 1509
= IDR III/2, 3), it is exactly the name of the deity that got lost in the lacuna. It is however
substituted by the fact that the goddess Fortuna with cornucopia (Piso 2021, 231) is
represented on the left margin. Maybe it is not fortuitous that in the colonia Oescus, the
temple of Fortuna was also placed in the north-western corner of the forum under Commodus
(Ivanov 1997, 550-551, fig. 18-19.). The strong relationship between Fortuna and the
imperial cult is based on the display of some imperial busts in the aedes Fortunae from
Sarmizegetusa (Diaconescu 2004, II 56-58, nos. 9-12; Diaconescu - Bota 2009, 247-254;
Müller – Piso - Schwaighofer – Benea 2012, 97-98, SA 30-33), while the special connection
with Commodus results from the placement of some marble slabs with the representation of
Hercules’ labours there (Diaconescu - Bota 2009, 254-262).
Room no. 7 (Fig. 4.14), which communicates with the tetrapylum (fig. 4.14/1), deserves
to be addressed. Two stone pondera (AE 2006, 1169, 1170) were found here during the recent
archaeological excavations and this may also have been the location of the statera publica
attested by an inscription (AE 1999, 1289= IDR III/2, 14). Two fragmentary inscriptions
found in the immediate neighbourhood and maybe also a third one, dedicated Mercurio Aug.
 7

(AE 2006, 1147, 1148, 1149), refers to a building with an economic purpose (fig. 4.14). From
approximately the same area fragments of a construction plaque came to light that inform us
that M. Procilius Niceta, the founder of aedes Augustalium and aedes Fortunae, initiated the
building of a third cult place as well (AE 2006, 1153). All these elements justify the
hypothesis that room no. 7 represented an aedes Mercurii (Piso 2006, 247, ad no. 27).
The citizens who, due to their social status, did not have the right to aquae digitus (CIL
X 4760 = ILS 6296), used water from the public fountains. The Aquae Traianae will have
been introduced from the very beginning of the city (Piso - Băeștean 2000, 223-229). The
Aquae Hadrianae were added in 132, to which not only the nymphaea in front of the forum
vetus were connected, but also the great water evacuation canal along the decumanus
maximus (fig. 4.14/D7: CIL III 1446 = IDR III/2, 8: - - - aqua inducta colon(iae) Dac(icae)
Sarmiz(egetusae) - - -; see Piso – Băeștean 2000, 229). Not even a public utility project as
common as water supply could escape the display of some specific gods and the imperial cult.
Epigraphic sources regarding the Hadrianic nymphaea from the north-eastern and north-
western corners of the forum (fig. 4.14/B 39 and B 40) are now lost. However, the building
inscriptions of the later nymphaea (fig. 3/B 36 and 37) supported by the porticus (fig. 4.14/5
and 3) survived. They were dedicated in honorem domus divinae, which bring us to the
Severan era (AE 2003, 1520 = AE 1968, 441 = IDR III/2, 2 for the two nymphaea, see
Étienne - Piso - Diaconescu 2002-2003, 120-126; Diaconescu – Bota 2004, 470-501; Étienne
- Piso - Diaconescu 2006, 124, 126-127; Bota – Diaconescu 2009, 192-233):

In honorem domus divinae

L(ucius) Ophonius Pap(iria) Domitius Priscus
IIvir col(onae) Dacic(ae) pecunia sua fecit
l(oco) d(ato) d(ecurionum) d(ecreto)

In the niches behind the basin, three statues were erected. The one from the centre
represents the god Neptunus leaning his right foot against a dolphin and bearing the head of
Septimius Severus (Diaconescu – Bota 2004, 480-484, fig. 10-11; Diaconescu 2004, II 133-
138, pl. LIV/1-2; Müller – Piso - Schwaighofer – Benea 2012, 83-84, SA 7-8). If so, the
monument aimed to convey a political message, referring to the overseas voyages of the
imperial family and notably their return to Rome in 203 (Piso 2006, 246, ad no. 25).
After passing through the functions fulfilled by the forum vetus, a question remains
unanswered. The Roman coloniae were, according to Aulus Gellius, quasi effigies parvae
 8

simulacraque populi Romani, which means that they had the religious and political
institutions of Republican Rome (A. Gellius 16, 13, 9). Where and how did the cult of Jupiter,
the supreme deity of the Greco-Roman pantheon, and that of the Capitoline Triad take place
at Sarmizegetusa before the construction of the Capitol? The same question remains
unanswered also in other cases, as for example in the case of the colonia Claudia Savaria
(where the Capitol seems to have been built under the Flavian dynasty (Scherrer 2003, 69), or
even in the case of Rome, founded in 753 BCE, but whose Capitol was dedicated only in 509
BCE.

Macellum
Under Trajan, the area south of the forum vetus served as a builder’s yard for the
construction of the forum. At the end of his reign and the beginning of Hadrian’s reign, a
macellum, i.e. an economic market, oriented west-east (fig. 4.13/2), was built of limestone
and sandstone (Piso 2017, 32; Piso 2021, 234-235). The placement of a macellum in the
immediate neighbourhood of the forum is quite natural (Paci 1990, 118.). It measured
approximately 75 by 40 m, but only the northern half has been uncovered. The northern side,
and probably also the southern side, were bordered by a range of tabernae with porticus. A
fish tank stood in the centre of the courtyard. The west-east axis of the macellum passed
through it, departing from a sanctuary situated on the western side and covered today by the
northern end of the Capitol’s steps (1/fig. 4.13.). The access to it will be never possible, but
the existence of a sacellum in this location is quite mandatory (Gros 1996, II 453-464). We
might be dealing, for example, with an abstraction or a deity, such as Aequitas, Mercurius,
Fortuna or Genius macelli, without excluding an association to the imperial cult (Marengo
1990, 125-127). The presence of the predicate dedicavit in the building inscriptions of some
macella, such as at Puteoli (CIL X 1701), Cuicul (AE 1916, 35-36) or Thugga (ILAfr 559 =
ILT 1499 = AE 1969/1970, 652; CIL VIII 26530+26533 = ILAfr523), suggests at any rate a
certain sacred character of such a complex. As the macellum was replaced by another
construction after a generation, it is not surprising that no epigraphic evidence concerning it
has survived. We could ask ourselves where the economic functions of the macellum were
subsequently practiced. We recall in this respect that the function of ponderarium was
fulfilled, probably since the reign of Commodus, by room no. 7 from the forum vetus, where
we assume the existence of an aedes Mercurii.

Forum novum
 9

The macellum was demolished around the year AD 150 and a new forum was built in its
place, named by us forum novum, bordering, like the macellum, the forum vetus and oriented
west-east (Piso 2017a, 23, 32-38; Piso 2021, 234-237). The terminus ante quem for its
construction is AD 153, when the colonia Sarmizegetusa erected a statue for M. Sedatius
Severianus in the northern cryptoporticus of the forum (Daicoviciu 1927-1932, 538-540,
Daicoviciu 1974, 648; Piso - Marcu - Țentea - Cupcea - Varga 2012, 119-123; Piso 2017a,
32-38; Piso 2021, 234-237). The fact that this senator had something to do with the
accomplishment of this project is also suggested by the fact that he was the patronus of the
colonia (Piso 1993, 61-65).
The forum novum measures approximately 97 by 50 m. Only its northern half has been
uncovered. Its western part is dominated by the Capitolium, the northern side is enclosed by a
cryptoporticus, the southern side probably by broad thermae, and the eastern side by a series
of rooms (fig. 4.15/5) used presumably as the seat of the governor when he administered
justice at Sarmizegetusa, whereas the magistrates of the colonia exercised the jurisdiction in
the basilica iudiciaria from the forum vetus. The west-east axis unites the Capitolium, a great
imperial quadriga or seiugum base, possibly for Antoninus Pius, and a hemicyclum on the
eastern side, part of building no. 5. From the northern cryptoporticus one enters, close to the
western end, a large sanctuary (fig. 4.15/6), measuring 16 by 16 m, which is currently being
investigated. If we take into consideration the date of the forum’s construction and the
analogy from Rome, we could be dealing with a templum Antonini et Faustinae. However, at
this moment we do not have any certain epigraphic evidence to prove this hypothesis.
The Capitol of Sarmizegetusa is a hexastyle temple, peripteros sine postico, built on a 2
m high podium (Piso - Marcu - Țentea - Cupcea - Varga 2012, 119-123; Piso 2021, 236-237);
it measures 27.6 m (east-west) by 18.7 m (north-south). Fragments from the statue of Jupiter
were found, among which a 6 cm wide thumb. Observing the proportions, the statue of Iupiter
tronans could have been 4.5 m tall. Taking into consideration the height of the podium, the
supreme Roman deity could see from his throne the walls of the city that he had to protect
(Vitruvius I.7.1).
For the Capitol of Sarmizegetusa, we have indirect epigraphic information. The
fragment of a marble monument from Sarmizegetusa (with uncertain find spot) attests that it
was dedicated on an epulum Iovis, on the 23rd May - (ante diem) X K(alendas) Iun(ias) – of an
unknown year (AE 1978, 666 = IDR III/2, 242). In AD 205, on a column in Apulum that
served as a statue base for Jupiter, the following date is recorded: Augg(ustis) nn(ostris)
Imp(eratore) Ant(onino) et [[Geta]] co(n)s(ulibus) | (ante diem) X K(alendas) Iun(ias) |
 10

lun(a) XVIII die Iovis (CIL III 1051 = ILS 7144 = IDR III/5, 164). In AD 205, the 23rd May
coincided with a dies Iovis (Thursday), which seems to have had a certain significance for the
dedicator. On the other hand, the sole epulum Iovis that we know so far in the Roman world
was celebrated on the 13th of September (Idibus Septembribus), on the dies natalis of Rome’s
Capitol. By corroborating all these data, I. Piso concluded that the 23rd of May was a holiday
not only for Sarmizegetusa and Apulum, but for the whole Dacia. The dedication of
Sarmizegetusa’s Capitolium around AD 150 meant the official introduction of the cult of
Jupiter in the province (Piso 1991, 163-164 = Piso 2005, 186-187). Similar situations were
observed in Pannonia and in Hispania Tarraconensis (Piso 2017, 142-145).
The sole elements of imperial cult identified so far in the forum novum are the above-
mentioned imperial statue on the west-east axis, and the imperial temple that opened from the
cryptoporticus (fig. 4.15/6). Along the northern wall of the northern cryptoporticus, statues of
the province’s and colonia’s dignitaries were lined up, while equestrian statues of Dacia’s
governors are to be found along the northern border of the courtyard (Piso and Diaconescu
1999, 132-133, 137).

The Palmyrene temple III

In the western part of insula II, separated from the forum vetus through a cardo, a
residence built at the beginning of the 2nd century can be followed throughout two phases
(Țentea-Olteanu 2020). The fact that the owner belonged to the municipal elite is proved by
the water adduction in the dwelling (Piso and Țentea 2011, 115). At the end of the 2nd
century, or the beginning of the 3rd century, a Palmyrene temple was built over the former
dwelling (fig. 3, 4: Piso - Țentea 2011, 115-121; Piso - Țentea - Matei-Popescu 2019, 245-
254). It is the third temple of this type known at Sarmizegetusa. The two other temples are
located extra muros: the temple I on Dealul Delineștilor, to the west of the city’s walls
(Téglás 1900, 111-121; Téglás 1906, 321-330; Rusu-Pescaru - Alicu 2000, 84-90; Diaconescu
2008-2009, 148-158, 182-185; Nemeti 2005, 175-178). The temple II is a presumed one,
located probably beyond the north-eastern corner of the city, and the assumption of its
existence is based on two altars dedicated to the god Malagbel (IDR III/2, 263 and CIL III
12580 = AE 1912, 303 = IDR III/2, 264).
In the case of temple III, we are dealing with a tetrastyle temple oriented towards the
east, composed of a cella and a pronaos built on a podium of 8,75 by 8,75 m (fig. 4.16/1),
towards which marble steps ascend from a courtyard (fig. 4.16/2). On its two lateral sides
there are covered spaces (fig. 4.16/3-4), at least one of which served for cultic banquets
 11

(Buchmann 2016, 114-125). The entrance was accessible through a porticus (fig. 4.16/5)
which bordered the cardo. The richness of inscriptions found in this temple is striking. A cult
object or part of the construction was dedicated by the imperial freedman Philomusus pro
salu[te] d[d(ominorum) n]n(ostrorum Augg(ustorum) in hon[or(em) domus] divinae (AE
2019, 1287). The two emperors are Septimius Severus and Caracalla, which means that the
beginnings of the temple can be dated under Septimius Severus. In the cella, it is justified to
assume the existence of three statues of Palmyrene deities. The best preserved inscription
belongs to a statue base dedicated [Deo So]li Inv[icto - - -] | Mal[a]gbel(i) Hie[ribolo? - - -]
under Severus Alexander (Piso - Țentea 2011, 116-117, no. 2 = Piso - Țentea, CIL,
Auctarium 2014, 480 = AE 2011, 1085 = Țentea 2017, 90, nr. 43):

[Deo So]li Inv[icto - - -] | Mal[a]gbel(i) Hie[ribolo? - - - | p]ro salute d(omini) n(ostri)

Imperatoris Ca]es[aris | M(arci) A]urel[i]i S[everi [[Alexandri]] P]ii Fel[i]cis |5 [Aug(usti)
I]ul[iae Mameae Aug(ustae) totiusque d]omus eius | [- - - sacerdos dei eius]dem | [- - -]
pec[unia s]ua fe[c(it)].

A fragmentary marble construction plaque was dedicated by the Cult[ores Dei S]olis
Ma|lagb[eli] (Piso - Țentea 2011, 118-121, no. 3 = AE 2011, 1085 = Țentea 2017, 89, no.
42):

Cult[ores Dei S]olis Ma|lagb[eli ....]e cena|culu[m a solo(?) e]xstrux(erunt) | quo[rum

nomina infra] s(cripta) sunt ||5 Sped(ius) V[- - -] | col(oniae) | Marcu[s - - -] | M(arcus)
Aur(elius) Iu[- - -] |10 Sped(ius) [....]anu[s] | S[ped(ius? ....] Aug(ustalis) col(oniae) |
Pom[p(onius)] Avitus | Val(erius) [....]nus | Sped(ius) Primanus Rex | Aurel(ius) Aquilinus
/15 Aurel(ius) Zopyrus | Cominius Maximinus | Aurel(ius) Viator | Ant(onius) Barbas |
Ael(ius) Geminus ||5’ [- - -]s Marcus | [- - -] L<au>[r]entinus | [- - -] Antipater | [- - -]
Crescentio |10’ [- - -] Eutyches | [- - -] | Val(erius) Rufus | Aurel(ius) V[i]talianus Esurio |
Domitius I?[- - -].

It contains a list of 23 cultores, among whom surprisingly not even one has a Palmyrene
name. The most recently found fragment of this inscription informs us about the existence of
a cenaculum, which must be understood as a hall where the cultic banquets took place (AE
2007, 1471 b - Antiochia in Pis.; Gospel of Marcus 14, 15; Gospel of Luca 22, 12).
 12

Related to the find spot of the previous fragment is space no. 3. In this temple Deus
[Sol? Ierh]abol (= Yarhibol) is also attested, probably in connection with the fountain that
opened towards the portico (fig. 4.16/5: AE 2004, 1216). We must not forget that Yarhibol
was originally, among other attributes, master of the Efqa spring (CIS II/3, 4064, 4065; OGIS
II 634 - Palmyra).
Some aspects are to be retained regarding this Palmyrene temple. First of all, worth
noting is its highly prestigious location in the immediate proximity of the forum vetus. Such a
location could be obtained only as late as under the reign of Septimius Severus and thanks to
its profound involvement in the imperial cult. The second aspect refers to the contribution that
Malagbel could have had in the genesis of the cult of Sol invictus, imposed by Aurelianus
(Dirven 1999, 174-175).

Dolichenum
In 1924 C. Daicoviciu reported the existence of a Dolichenum in the south-western
corner of the colonia, close to the corner tower. He sustained this identification with a relief
representing Victoria, accompanied by an aquila and particularly with a fragmentary votive
inscription which he interpreted as a dedication to Iupiter Dolichenus (Daicoviciu 1924, 250-
251, nr. 2; for the find spot p. 263; see Daicoviciu 1974, 615-616). From all the proposed
readings and interpretations, the most convincing is the one of Á. Szabó, who agrees in
principle with the interpretation of C. Daicoviciu (Szabó 2004 = AE 2004, 1212 = AE 1927,
56; AE 1977, 668 = Nemeti 2019, 243, n. 1074.):

[I(ovi) O(ptimo) M(aximo) Dolicheno? pro salute] | [d(omini) n(ostri) Imp(eratoris)

Caes(aris) Divi Severi Pii nep(otis) | Divi Magni Ant]on[ini f(ilii) M(arci) Aur(elii) Sev(eri) |
[[Alexand]ri]] Pii fel(icis) Inv(icti) Aug(usti) /5 et num(eri) P]almyr(enorum) O[- - - | ....]Ị
Abraen(us) Fl(avius) M[....... | ...] Cassi(us) Marinu[s ...... | Ma]ximus Gora Lu[cius? ... | ....]
Maximus Bars[emon? |10 [sace]rdot(es) templum [a solo] | ex suo fecer(unt).

The importance of this temple results also from the fact that the number of priests is six,
and not the usual three, all of them apparently Syrians (AE 2001, 1796). This temple would
have been built or gained in importance during the Severan dynasty.

Praetorium procuratoris
 13

The praetorium of the financial procurator of Dacia Superior / Apulensis (Fig. 4.17.)
was partially uncovered intra muros between 1979 and 1988 (Daicoviciu et al. 1983, 246-
277; Daicoviciu and Alicu 1984, 132-145; Rusu-Pescaru – Alicu 2000, 112-113; Piso 1998,
153-155, fig. 1; Piso 2005, 443, 454, fig. 7; Piso 2019, 127-129, fig. 1.). The excavations have
continued since 2012 under the supervision of A. Diaconescu and C. Ciongradi in what seems
to have been the domus procuratoris (Piso 1993, 38, 90; Haensch 1997, 345-346). It is
bordered to the west by the cardo maximus, to the south by a decumanus and to the north and
east by horrea. Between the northern horreum (H 1), the small thermae (T 1), the spaces S3-
S4 and unknown buildings to the south, an area sacra can be identified, dominated in the
western part by a sanctuary (C) composed of a pronaos, accessible through three steps, a cella
and two adjacent rooms. Considering the profoundly official character of a praetorium used
by a high-ranking imperial dignitary, this sanctuary could have been dedicated, exempli
gratia, Genio Augusti or Numini Augusti (Fishwick 1991, II/1, p. 375-422).
In a second phase, a wall (Z 1) was partially demolished and the area sacra was
extended to the south in order to construct an edifice of 3.8 m (north-south) by 6.8 m (east-
west), divided through a longitudinal wall. The inscriptions demonstrate that we deal with a
Serapeum, bordered to the west by a crypta (Piso 2019, 128-129, fig. 3).
Approximately 50 altars, statue bases or construction plaques come from the area sacra
of the financial procurator’s praetorium. Their original place and exact order of display is
unknown, as most were reused in modern times in building primitive drains. Additionally,
only tiny fragments of sacred statues have been preserved. This was probably the work of a
community of Christians, who, after the official abandonment of Dacia in 271, completely
destroyed the ‘idols’, but not the inscriptions, which they could not read anymore. The same
explanation may apply to the fact that in the fountain of the Asklepieion, north of the city
walls (Rusu-Pescaru - Alicu 2000, 32-37), decapitated statues of the gods of medicine and
broken votive reliefs were thrown.
In what follows, we will list the deities attested in the area sacra of the financial
procurator’s praetorium, or those who originated with great probability from here (Daicoviciu
1928-1932, 83-88; Piso 1983, 233-251; Piso 1998, 253-271; Nemeti 2005; Carbó García
2010; Piso 2013). We will start with the Greco-Roman pantheon: Iovi O. M., Iunoni Reginae,
M[i]nervae, omnibus dis immortalibus (CIL III 1423; IDR III/2, 244); I. O. M., Iunoni,
[M]inervae, diis consentibus, Saluti, Fortunae Daciar.(AE 1930, 138; AE 1933, 16; IDR
III/2, 209); [D]is immortalib. et Numini sanctissimor. Augustorum (IDR III/2, 225); Fortunae
reduci, Apollini, Dianae vi[c]trici, Nemesi, Me[r]curio, Herculi, Soli invicto, Aesculapio,
 14

Hygiae, diis deabusque immortalibus (AE 1930, 135; AE 1933, 13; IDR III/2, 246; AE 1977,
673.); Genio col. Sarmizeget. (AE 1982, 828); Iunoni Reginae (AE 1930, 137; AE 1933, 15;
IDR III/2, 231); Minervae Aug.(CIL III 7918; IDR III/2, 272); [Aesculapio et Hygiae] (CIL
III 7899; IDR III/2, 158); [Aescu]lapio et [S]aluti (AE 1983, 837); Ἀσκληπιῷ καὶ Ὑγιείᾳ
θεοῖς φιλανθρώποις (CIG 6813; CIL III, ad 1422; IGRR I 546; ILS 3849a; IDR III/2, 157;
CIGD 104); Aesculapio, Saluti, Epionae, Veneri ubique, Neptuno, Salaciae, Cupidinibus,
Fontibus, Aquis (AE 1998, 1101); Apollini sancto (AE 1983, 835); Deae praesentissimae
Core (AE 1983, 840); Dianae Sanctae (AE 1983, 836); Fortunae Aug. (AE 1983, 831);
Fortunae reduci, Lari viali, Romae aeternae (CIL III 1422; IDR III/2, 206;); Herculi Aug.
(AE 1983, 826); Ter[rae matri?]; Volcano miti (AE 1983, 827). Next follow the Celto-
Germanic, Hispanic and African deities: Apollini Granno et Sironae (CIL III 74*; AE 1971,
376; IDR III 72, 191; AE 1983, 828); Θεῷ Γράννῳ Ἀπόλλωνι αἰεὶ καὶ πανταχοῦ (AE 1998,
1100); Invicto Mithrae, Marti Camulo, Mercurio, Rosmertae (AE 1998, 1100); Marti Singili
et Minervae (AE 1983, 829); Caelestis (AE 1993, 1345). The Oriental deities are not missing
either: Διὶ Ὑψίστῳ ἐπηκόῳ (SEG 25, 1977, 819; IDR III/2, 222; CIGD 105); Θεῷ Ὑψίστῳ
ἐπηκόῳ (AE 1930, 136; AE 1933, 14; SEG 25, 1971, 820; IDR III/2, 223; CIGD 106);
Numinibus praesentissimis Apollini et Bono Puero (AE 1983, 841). In five instances the
names of the deities are not mentioned, either because their sculptural representation was
considered sufficient (AE 1983, 838, 839; AE 1998, 1093, 1094), or because it has not been
preserved due to the fragmentary state of the monument (AE 1983, 832).
A special attention must be given to the Serapeum, which was added, as in other
command centres, as a result of Caracalla’s consultation of the oracle of Apollo at Claros
(Birley 1974, 511-514; Bricault - Deac - Piso, 48-51, fig. 7.2-7.3.). Two possible building
inscriptions must be mentioned, dedicated [Invicto deo Sera]pidi et Is[idi frugi]ferae (AE
1998, 1088 = ILD I 265 = RICIS 616/0204 = CIL III 7920 = SIRIS 684 + CIL III 7958; IDR
III/2, 227; AE 2017, 1196, Bricault, Deac and Piso 2021, 49, n. 35.) and Ζηνὶ θ[εῶ?]ν
π[άντων κρατοῦ?]ντι Σαράπι[δι?] (AE 1998, 1089 = SEG 48, 1998, 985 = ILD I 266 = CIGD
110 = RICIS 616/0206), as well as the following dedications: Invicto deo Serapidi (AE 1998,
1096= ILD I 273= RICIS 616/0207); [I]nvicto deo Serapidi (AE 1930, 134; AE 1933, 12;
SIRIS 685; IDR III/2, 331; RICIS 616/0205); [Invicto deo Serapidi?] (AE 1998, 1091= ILD I
268 = RICIS 616/0208, Bricault - Deac - Piso 2021,45-60).
A remarkable fragmentary marble plaque contains indications regarding the initiation
into the Isiac cult; they are to a great extent analogous to those found in Apuleius,
Metamorphoses XI (Piso 2020, 127-137). Taking into account the openness towards the
 15

whole humanity of the Isiac religion, it is hard to imagine that this Serapeum gathered only
devotees from the procurator’s office.
All monuments seem to have been erected by the procuratores themselves apart from
two, set up by the son of a procurator and probably the wife of a procurator respectively. As
we do not encounter here, unlike the rest of Sarmizegetusa, formulae such as votum solvit, or
votum solvit libens merito, it seems that the procuratores fulfilled such actions according to
their duty as servants of the emperor and not in fulfillment of vows (votum nuncupare / votum
solvere: Piso 1983, 234-235). A sole statue was erected for the emperor, more precisely for
Septimius Severus, in 195/197 (AE 1983, 830). The dedication [D]is immortalib. et Numini
sanctissimor. Augustorum cannot be foreign to the spirit of the imperial temple that
dominated the area sacra (IDR III/2, 225). Dedications made to deities such as the Capitoline
Triad, Hercules Aug., Fortuna Aug. or pro salute Imperatoris, have also an obvious
connection with the imperial cult. Others relate to the homeland of the dedicator, the
provinces through which he had passed during his career, his health, to magic or philosophy
of life. The latter aspects are well illustrated by the dedication made Deae praesentissimae
Core by the procurator M. Lucceius Felix together with his wife, Hostilia Faustina (AE 1983,
840), or the one by the procurator Q. Axius Aelianus to Aesculapio, Saluti, Epionae, Veneri
ubique, Neptuno, Salaciae, Cupidinibus, Fontibus, Aquis (AE 1998, 1101). In the case of
some procurators, such as C. Sempronius Urbanus (Piso 2013, 197-200, no. 95), M. Lucceius
Felix (Piso 2013, 221-226, no. 100) and Q. Axius Aelianus (Scheid 1998, 267-271; Piso
2013, 227-235, no. 102), one might even imagine that they exhibited their theological
knowledge rather than their authentic belief. Irrespective of the motives that motivated the
religious actions of Dacia’s procurators, their number and refinement cannot be explained
unless there was a well-informed audience, prepared to value them.
The closest analogy to the religious universe of the praetorium of the financial
procurators of Dacia Apulensis is that of Asturica Augusta, i.e. the financial procurators of
Asturia and Gallaecia, unfortunately only known through the inscriptions that were reused in
the late city wall (García y Bellido 1968, 191-209; AE 1968, 227-234; Scheid 1998, 271-275).
The resemblance is striking regarding the variety of deities, as well as the dedicators, as all
were set up by procurators. Isis and Serapis are equally well represented in Asturica
Augusta’s praetorium, insinuating the existence of a Serapeum (AE 1968, 230, 232.).
In the case of the Colonia Dacica Sarmizegetusa, it can be observed that some cult
edifices (especially those devoted to eastern divinities) were built within the city walls or in
close proximity to the more traditional temples, without being part of a designated sacred
 16

area. This process began during the Severan period, and the edifices can be found in the
south, south-west and west sections of the colonia, but not in the north where ‘traditional’
cults were honoured. This can be explained as a lack of available space in that particular area
(Boda 2015, 296, Piso and Țentea forthcoming).