What, Where, When, and Why...On Some Dipinti and Stamps from The

CENTRE D’ARCHÉOLOGIE MÉDITERRANÉENNE DE L’ACADÉMIE POLONAISE DES SCIENCES ÉTUDES et TRAVAUX XX 2005

PIOTR DYCZEK

What, where, when, and why..... On some dipinti and stamps from the Pontic region 70 PIOTR DYCZEK

It is not without some trepidation that I undertake this article for the volume in honor of Zofia Sztety³³o, an eminent scholar and expert in the field. I had not realized until I started collecting material for this text what scrupulousness, patience, perseverance and comprehensive knowledge Professor Sztety³³o has always represented in her work. To paraphrase words from another sphere and time, hardly ever do objects so small require so Herculean an effort for their secrets to be revealed. My interest in stamps and dipinti grows from a study of the finds originating from the excavations at Novae, where this category of epigraphical evidence is frequent in the as- semblage of pottery sherds belonging to amphorae. Naturally, the inscriptions cannot be studied out of a broader context. The provisional results of various petrographic and other studies have indicated the presence among the finds from Novae of a certain group of pottery containers originating from the Black Sea manufacturing centers (Fig. 1). Whole and fragmentary amphorae have been found in an area designated as Sector IV, situated in the praetentura of the fortress of the First Italic Legion. They come from two legionary buildings: the baths and a hospital1 (Fig. 2). The baths were erected in the sec- ond half of the 1st century A.D. and dismantled by the end of the age.2 The construction of the valetudinarium fell in the early 2nd century A.D. and it was not abandoned until the times of Caracalla.3 The amphorae were gathered in the tabernae of the baths and in the small vestibules preceding the rooms for patients in the hospital, as well as in special

1. Localisation of Novae in Moesia Inferior (after J. KOLENDO, V. BOLOVA, Inscriptions greques et romaines de Novae (Mésie Inférieure), Bordeaux 1997, Fig. 1.

1 P. D YCZEK, Novae – Western Sector (Section IV), 1997–1999, Archeologia 51, 2000, pp. 89–96; ID., Rzymski szpital legionowy w Novae, Archiwum Historii i Filozofii Medycyny 63, 2, 2000, pp. 113–128. 2 P. D YCZEK, Novae – Western Sector, 1996, Archeologia 48, 1998, pp. 43 f. 3 P. D YCZEK, Remarks on supply of the Roman army from the point of view of the valetudinarium at Novae (Moesia Inferior), Limes XVIII. Proceedings of the XVIIIth International Congress of Roman Frontier Studies held in Amman, Jordan (September 2000), BAR IS 1084 (II), 2002, pp. 685–694. ON SOME DIPINTI 71

2. Castrum of Legio I Italica (elaborated P. Dyczek, J. Janowski). amphorae stores inside the hospital.4 Typologically, these vessels are not very varied, rep- resenting all of five types: Zeest 64-94/Dyczek 28,5 Zeest 75/Dyczek 32,6 Zeest 77/Dyczek 33,7 Zeest 90/Dyczek 258 and Zeest 93/Dyczek 299 (Fig. 3).

4 P. D YCZEK, Remarks on the Roman Amphorae at Novae from the first to the third century A.D., Novensia 9, 1997, pp. 91–96. 5 P. D YCZEK, Roman Amphorae of the 1st–3rd centuries A.D. found on the Lower Danube. Typology. Warsza- wa 2001 [= Roman Amphorae], pp. 202 f. 6 Ibid., p. 233. 7 Ibid., p. 239. 8 Ibid., pp. 173–176. 9 Ibid., p. 221. 72 PIOTR DYCZEK

3. Types of amphorae from North Black Sea region (after the author).

Amphorae of the first type, Dyczek 28, differ considerably in details of the form, while preserving the same principal tectonic features and the general characteristic of the ceramic matrix. The clay used in their manufacture is of a light brown color, hence Zeest’s classification of “svetloglinjenyje”.10 In reality the ceramic matrix can vary from light red to light brown (Munsell soil color chart codes 5YR 7/2, 5YR 7/3, 7.5YR 7/4, 7.5YR 7/6, 7.5YR 8/4, 10YR 7/4). Sand is apparent in quantities in the break, and so are plagioclases, crushed pottery and black pyroxene particles. Repetitive features of shape include a slightly everted rim forming a narrow roll on the outside. The long slender neck tends to bulge a bit at the point of handle attachment. The handles consist of two joined rolls of clay. The plain heart-shaped body terminates in a small cylindrical solid foot. The multitude of variants encompassed by this amphora type has resulted in the amphorae being classified differently by Russian archaeologists11 as well as by scholars from other countries.12

10 I. B. ZEEST, Keramièeskaja tara Bospora, Materialy i issledovanija po arheologii SSSR 83, 1960, [= Keramièeskaja tara], pp. 118. 11 I. S. KAMIENIECKIJ, Svetloglinjanyje amfory iz Ninie-Gnilovskovo gradišèa, KSIA 94, 1963, pp. 15 f; D. V. DEOPIK, O. JU. KRUG, Evoljucja uskogorlych svetloglinienych amfor z profilovanymi ruèkami, S.A. 3, 1972, pp. 111; D.B. ŠELOV, Les amphores d’argile claire des premiers siècles de notre ère en Mer Noir, BCH, suppl. XIII, 1986 [= Les amphores], pp. 385–400; S. JU. VNUKOV, Prièernomorski amfory I v. do n.e.–II v. n.e. (morfologija), Moskwa 2003 [= Prièernomorski amfory], pp. 117 f. 12 H. S. ROBINSON, The Athenian Agora. Pottery of the Roman Period. Chronology V, Princeton-New Jer- sey 1959 [= Athenian Agora], pp. 51, 93; A. RADULESCU, Amfore romane ºi romano-bizantine dîn Scythia Mi- nor, Pontica 9, 1976 [= Amfore romane], pp. 102, Pls. I 2, 2a, 3, 3 a; C. SCORPAN, Contribution à la connaisance de certains types céramiques romano-byzantins (IV–VII siècles) dans l’espace Istro-Pontique, Dacia XXI, 1977 ON SOME DIPINTI 73

In my opinion, the typological series Zeest 64, 94, 104, 105 and perhaps the small form Zeest 50 constitute a single typological series.13 Various scholars have also pointed out the formal ties of the discussed type with amphorae of the Dressel 28 and Gauloise 3 form.14 While such formal ties indeed exist, the different genesis, separate areas of occurrence and the chronology of these types lead one rather to conclude that the similarities are due to an independent quest for an optimal form taking into consideration volume and the mode of transport. These containers are not big, 0,73 m in height at most,15 yet thanks to their specific form they had a relatively capacious volume, reaching from 4 to 8 liters of liquid (about 8 choinices).16 Both Rhodian17 and Coan18 products have been suggested as the source for this type of amphora. However, physico-chemical analyses carried out on the material from Novae have proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that the manufacturing centers for these containers were located at Sinope.19 Recently other scholars have begun to share this view.20 The place of manufacture considered, it is hardly surprising that containers of this type are widespread in the Bosporan Kingdom and adjacent territories. Finds have been reported from: Tanais,21 Olbia, Scythian Neapolis, Iluraton Kimeryk, Tiritake, Mirmekion, Kerè, Pantikapaion, Fanagoria etc.22 Amphorae of this type were especially popular among the Carpes who populated the region of modern Moldavia between the Prut and the Dniester in the 2nd and 3rd centuries A.D.23 They are also present on many sites in both the Moesia provinces,24

[ = Contribution]. p. 260; A. OPAIT, Consideratii preliminare asupra amforelor romane ºi romano-bizantine dîn Dobrogea, Peuce VIII, 1980 [= Consideratii], p. 301; J. W. HAYES, The Villa Dionysos Excavation. Knossos, the Pottery, BSA 78, 1983 [= Villa Dionysos], p. 144; B. BÖTTGER, D.B.ŠELOV, Amphorendipinti aus Tanais, Pontus Septentrionalis I, Tanais 1, Moskau 1998 [= Amphorendipinti], p. 32. 13 DYCZEK, Roman Amphorae, p. 202. 14 F. LAUBENHEIMER, Les amphores gauloises sous l’Empire. Recherches nouvelles sur leur production et leur chronologie, Collection d’École Française de Rome 114, 1989, type 3; D.P.S. PEACKOCK, D. F. WILLIAMS, Amphorae and the Roman economy. An introductory guide, London 1986, class 29, 31; G. BERTUCCHI, Les amphores massalietes à Marseille: les differentes productions, Études massalietes 2, 1992, Fig. 2, type 6,7 15 Ibid., 147. 16 loc.cit.; ŠELOV, Les amphores, p. 397; OPAIT, Consideratii, pp. 301–302. 17 I. B. BRAŠINSKIJ, Standarty rodoskih amfor, Kratkije soobšèenija Instituta arheologii AN SSSR 156, 1978 [= Standarty], pp. 11–16. 18 E. M. ŠTAERMAN, Keramièeskije klejma i¿ Tiry, Kratkije soobšèenija Instituta materialnoj kultury XXXVI, 1951, p. 39; ŠELOV, Les amphores, p. 400. 19 DYCZEK, Roman Amphorae, pp. 214 f. 20 VNUKOV, Prièernomorski amfory, pp. 147–150. 21 T. M. ARSEN’EVA, S. NAUMIENKO, Kompleks nahodok iz podvala MB II–III v. po Chr., Vestnik Tanaisa I, 1994, pp. 73–74, Fig. 16, 1. 22 ZEEST, Keramièeskaja tara, pp. 118, 121–122; BRAŠINSKIJ, Standarty, p. 184; D. B. ŠELOV, Uskogorlyje svetloglinienyje amfory pervih vekov našej ery. Klasyfikacija i hronologija, Kratkije soobšèenija Instituta arheologii AN SSSR 156, 1978, p. 19, type F; A.V. KROPOTKIN, V.V.KROPOTKIN, Severnaja granica razprostrenie- nija amfor rimskovo vremeni v Vostoènoj Evropie, in: Mogilniki èernjakovskoj kultury, ed. V.V. KROPOTKIN, Moskva 1988, p. 170, Fig. 1. 23 GH. BICHIR, Archaeology and History of the Carpes, BAR IS 16, 1976, p. 3. 24 L. BJELAJAC, Amfore Gornjo Mezijskogo Podunavlja, Beograd 1996, [= Amfore], pp. 66–67; A. BARNEA et al., Tropeum Traiani I, Bucureºti 1979, 179, Pl. 144, 3; S. SANIE, Douna mici depozite de amfore romane 74 PIOTR DYCZEK

Lower Moesia in particular, e.g.: Aegyssus, Callatis, Dimum, Dinogetia, Kaliakra, Novio- dunum, Odessos, Tomi, Troesmis, Tropeum Traiani. Single examples of the type have been recorded in assemblages from the Athenian Agora, Corinth, Crete, Ostia and Rome.25 The first amphorae of this type are known from 1st century B.D. contexts, but they did not become widely popular until the 2nd and 3rd centuries A.D. At Novae sherds of these amphorae were discovered in assemblages together with fragments of terra sigillata from southern Gaul from before A.D. 79, a bronze coin of Drusus of A.D. 23 and a denarius of Marc Antony.26 At Barboºi examples of these amphorae came from contexts dated by coins of Marcus Aurelius, Septimius Severus, Severus Alexander, Gordian III, Philip Arab and Gallien,27 while the vessels discovered at Tanais originated from the first half of the 3rd century A.D.28 Stamped inscriptions are seldom found on these amphorae. When they do occur, they constitute the names of producers, e.g.: and – presumably abbreviations of names, either Diomedes or Diomenes.29 Abbrevia- tions of names were much more frequently rendered in paint on the vessel’s walls, sug- gesting that they referred to wine manufacturers responsible for the content of these containers. Some are abbreviations of Greek names: AËE, ANTIMA, APÄ, BAÃ, ZA, MEN, OP, ÓAM, XAP; others like APÄAP- PAK -ïò are apparently Iranian in origin, such names being characteristic of the Sarmatian inhabitants of Tanais.30 To judge from the above, it would appear that the inscriptions refer to the contents, providing data on the specific lot of wine and giving names of the owners presumably. Wine was the chief product transported in these containers. Most of the inscriptions executed in red paint on the surface of the vessels refer to the contents. The dipinti can be found in one of three positions: under the rim or in the upper part of the neck, in the middle part of the neck and on the shoulders. Statistically speaking, all three positions were equally eligible.31 Some of these inscriptions record the vessel’s volume, e.g. or , descoperite în Moldavia, Studii ºi Cercetãri de Istorie Veche 19, 1968 [= Douna mici], pp. 349–350; GH. BICHIR, Ceramica de import amfore, Bucureºti, 1973, pp. 90–92; ID., Archaeology and History of the Carpes, BAR IS 16, 1976 [= Archaeology], pp. 80–81; RADULESCU, Amfore romane, p. 102; SCORPAN, Contribution, pp. 269– 270; OPAIT, Consideratii, pp. 325–326; SANIE, Douna mici, pp. 130–144, Pls. 28, 31, 32, 35, 37, 4; A. SUCEVEANU, Les thermes romains, Histria VI, 1982, p. 104, Pl. 10. 25 K. W. SLANE, The Deposit from the Early Roman Cellar Building, Hesperia 55, 1986 [= Deposit], p. 298; HAYES, Villa Dionysos, p.147; C. PANELLA, Oriente e Occidente, considerazioni sul alcune anfore “egee” di età imperiale, Ostia III. Studi Miscellanei 26, 1986, p. 628, Fig. 27. 26 M. ¯MUDZIÑSKI, Wstêpne wyniki badañ laboratoryjnych amfor z jamy 4 w principia w Novae, Novensia 11, 1997, p. 185. 27 S. SANIE et al., Noi descoperiri de ceramica romana cu inscriptie în Moldova, Studii ºi Cercetãri de Istorie Veche 26, 1975, [= Ceramica romana], pp. 191–195; S. SANIE, Civilizatia Romana la est de Carpati þi romanistatea pe teritorium Moldovei, Secolele II î.e.n. – III e.n., Iaþi 1981, pp. 130, 134. 28 K. V. KOSTRIN, Issledovanija smolistovo osadka iz drevnih amfor najdenyh pri razkopkah Tanaisa, S.A.3, 1971, p. 265. 29 B. F. GAJDUKIEVIÈ, Keramièeskij kompleks II v. po Chr. iz Mirmekija, Kratkije soobšèenija Instituta arheologii AN SSSR 95, 1963, p. 29; BICHIR, Archaeology, p. 81; SANIE et al., Ceramica romana, pp. 191–197; ID., pp. 138–144, Pls. 35, 36, 37. 30 BÖTTGER, ŠELOV, Amphorendipinti, pp. 74–80. 31 Ibid., p. 40. ON SOME DIPINTI 75 and .32 Others describe the contents. A good example is a dipinti executed in black paint – a rarity with regard to these amphorae – on a vessel from the Athenian Agora: Ýò û/!"#, which means that “the wine, which had been seasoned in a dolium for a year, was poured into the amphora in the fourteenth year of Hadrian’s reign”, that is, in A.D. 131.33 Another inscription, from Skalistoje in the Crimea, says: $! %&&&' () )* $+ ,*, which means “sample from pithos 19, from which 12 jugs have been drawn”34. The following two inscriptions were recorded on amphorae found at Tanais: () * $ -*, that is, “(sample) from the first pithos, from which 477 jugs were drawn” and $!+ () )* $ *, which means that this was a sample from the ninth pithos, from which 330 jugs were drawn.35 Dipinti often specify the kind of wine, for example: öïúíéî is red wine and ÖÜëåñíïò is the famed Phalernian wine. Of considerably greater interest, however, are the dipinti which refer to contents other than wine. They inform not merely of the products that were the object of trade exchange, but, in an indirect manner, of the economic life of Tanais. The following have been noted: êñßèéíïò ïßíïò or barley beer, ãÜëá or milk, ìÝëéôôá or honey. There are also other special products, like barley flour recorded with the abbreviation AËÖ, presumably Üëöéôá, balsam or âÜëóáìïí, some sort of dye – âÜììá, and dates – âÜëáíïò.36 An unusual substance, ./)0 or crude oil, has been recorded on many amphorae.37 This was presumably used as fuel in lighthouses, perhaps also in oil lamps and for domes- tic use. Amphorae classified as Zeest 93/Dyczek 29 are occasionally mistaken with the previ- ous form and its variant D in particular,38 all the more so as they are also commonplace in assemblages of the 2nd and 3rd centuries A.D. in similarity to the Dyczek 28 type of vessel. The rim is everted and triangular in section. A short conical neck gently turns into the shoulders which join it to the heart-shaped body with shallow ridging. A small, undis- tinguished, hollow foot has a concave underside. The color of the clay used in the manufacturing of these amphora is identified as 5YR 7/8, 2.5YR 7/8 on the Munsell soil color charts. The maximum height of the vessels is 0.97 m and the volume is 17 liters. The source of origin of these vessels has yet to be conclusively identified. Some scholars believe they were manufactured in Kos.39 This suggestion appears to be confirmed by the frequent occurrence of grains of pyroxene in the clay matrix of many of these amphorae. Other scholars argue for another location, namely the central part of the Bosporan King-

32 BICHIR, Archaeology, p. 81. 33 ROBINSON, Athenian Agora, p. 51, Pl. 59. 34 N. A. BOGDANOVA, I.I. GUŠCINA, Novyje mogilniki II–III vv. Po Chr. u c. Skalistoje v Krimu, Kratkije soobšèenija Instituta arheologii AN SSSR 112, 1967, p. 136, Figs. 47, 48. 35 D. B. ŠELOV, Tanais i Ninyj Don v pervyh vekah našej ery, Moskva 1972 [= Tanais], p. 159; BöTTGER, ŠELOV, Amphorendipinti, p. 100. 36 BöTTGER, ŠELOV, Amphorendipinti, pp. 84–90. 37 KOSTRIN, Issledovanija, p. 264; ŠELOV, Les amphores, p. 161; BöTTGER, ŠELOV, Amphorendipinti, pp. 90–92. 38 D. B. ŠELOV, Uskogorlyje svetloglinienyje amfory pervih vekov našej ery. Klasyfikacija i hronologija, Kratkije soobšèenija Instituta arheologii AN SSSR 156, 1978, p. 18; BöTTGER, ŠELOV, Amphorendipinti, pp. 28–30. 39 ŠTAERMAN, Keramièeskije klejma, p. 40; see also: PEACOCK, WILLIAMS, Amphorae, p. 108. 76 PIOTR DYCZEK dom, perhaps even Tanais itself.40 Finally, they could have been produced in at least two other centers on the Black Sea, one of these being the coastal area around Dobrudja. Hy- potheses abound, but there is still no agreement on where exactly these amphorae could have been produced. The prevalent view nowadays is to localize the manufacturing centers in the southern regions of Pont.41 In similarity to the previously discussed type, these amphorae are also widespread in the northern Black Sea littoral as well as on the lower Danube.42 Stamped necks are a characteristic feature of these amphorae. Interestingly, among the obviously Greek names: 1 ,43 there also occur Roman ones: 2.) – Rufus. Dipinti identifying the volume are rarer, e.g., ie or 15 ksestai; the same is true of red- painted abbreviations of names, both Greek and Roman, just as in the case of the stamps, e.g. . These may have been the names of negotiatores. Amphorae classified as Zeest 75/Dyczek 32,44 were made of well-kneaded clay of a reddish-orange color, 5YR 7/8, 2.5YR 7/8 according to the Munsell soil color charts. Since they also occur on the Lower Danube, they have been recorded in Opait’s, Scorpan’s and Kuzmanov’s typologies.45 The rim has a triangular section and characteristic undercut at the base. The widening neck is finely ridged, the oval body also covered with dense ribbing. Unlike the previously described type, Dyczek 32 vessels attain a height of 1.38 m and a volume up to 60 l. The centers of the northern Black Sea littoral and of the southern littoral perhaps, too, have been indicated by some scholars as the place of manufacture of this type of containers. Pantikapaion, Fanagoria and the European part of the Kimmerian Bosporus have been suggested.46 Nonetheless, one should keep in mind V. Grace’s theory about the production of these vessels on the islands of Samos or Kos.47 These amphorae can be found in the Black Sea littoral and in Moesia, and apart from that they occur singularly in Athens and Rome.48 Red-painted dipinti occur occasionally on the surface of these vessels. On the grounds of paleographic studies, most of these inscriptions appear to have been executed by the owners of the amphorae. Two kinds of painted inscriptions can be distinguished. The first identifies in ksestai the mass/volume of the product transported in these vessels, e.g.

40 T. N. KNIPOVIÈ, Tanais, Moskva-Leningrad 1949, pp. 73, 136, draw. 28, 29; ARSENIEVA, NAUMIENKO, Ko- mpleks nahodok, pp. 70–71, Fig. 13, 2, 4. 41 BöTTGER, ŠELOV, Amphorendipinti, p. 30. 42 DYCZEK, Roman Amphorae, p. 223. 43 ŠELOV, Les amphores, p. 142, Fig.46; ZEEST, Keramièeskaja tara, Pl. XXXVII, 91; ŠELOV, Tanais, p. 121; BöTTGER, ŠELOV, Amphorendipinti, p. 30. 44 DYCZEK, Roman Amphorae, pp. 233 f. 45 SCORPAN, Contribution, p. 272; OPAIT, Consideratii, p. 308, G. KUZMANOV, Rannovizantijska keramika ot Trakija i Dakija (IV – naèaloto na VII v.), Razkopki i Prouèvanija XIII, 1985, pp. 11–12. 46 BöTTGER, ŠELOV, Amphorendipinti, p. 43. 47 V. G RACE, Stamped Wine Jar Fragments, Hesperia 10, 1956, p. 70; OPAIT, Consideratii, p. 308. 48 KNIGGE et al., Die Ausgrabungen im Kerameikos 1988/89, Archäologischer Anzeiger 3, 1991, pp. 385– 386, Fig. 23. ON SOME DIPINTI 77 or ksestai 54. A schematic branch is drawn next to some of the dipinti. The other type of painted inscription consists of abbreviations of Greek names: %ò' %ò' or ò %,' or ,.49 The said branch motif appears to be of particular interest. It is believed to be a sketched image of a grapevine or olive branch.50 To my mind, it is rather a pictograph signifying herbs/spices, most likely marjoram. There are two observations in favor of this idea. Firstly, the Greek measure recorded on the amphorae surface is too small with respect to the volume of these vessels. It could mean that the product filling the container had little mass even though it occupied substantial space. Secondly, the dipinto CAM also occasionally includes an identical branch motif incorporated into the letters. Similarly, the dipinto CAM has the final letter treated as a branch. And this abbreviation, I strongly believe, should be read as ", meaning marjoram. The spice is known to have been imported from the southern regions of Pont.51 Amphorae with the branch pictograph could have been used in the transport of herbs and spices, while the abbreviation served to inform the buyer which kind exactly was packed inside. On the whole, however, these amphorae were used for the transport of olive or other oil,52 although there are some who would defend the idea that wine was the transported commodity in this case.53 The next type of amphora, Zeest 77/Dyczek 33, in use from the 1st to the middle of the 4th century A.D., is of interest in view of an unique stamp – Faustina – found on the handle of one of the vessels. In a few cases, branches are also sketched on the body of the vessels. These amphorae have everted hooked rims and a cylindrical neck. Ridges are found below the rim and on the collar. The clay used for the manufacture of these containers was an orange-red or pink color, identified by the Munsell soil color chart codes 10R 7/8, 2.5YR 7/8. The vessels were produced in an unspecified center in the Pont region and its occurrence is limited to virtually the Pont region alone, mainly in rural settlements. The Zeest 90/Dyczek 25 amphora type belongs among the most frequent finds from the middle54 and lower Danube, among others, Dinogetia, Durostorum, Histria, Murighiol, Novae, Sexaginta Prista, Sacidava, Tomi, Buridava, Corabia, Drobeta, Mãtâsaru, Slãveni, Stolniceni, Sucidava, Orlea, Romula.55 They are also known from the Black Sea

49 ŠELOV, Les amphores, p. 161; BöTTGER, ŠELOV, Amphorendipinti, p. 105. 50 BöTTGER, ŠELOV, Amphorendipinti, p. 86. 51 J. I. MILLER, The Spice Trade of the Roman Empire, 29 B.C. to A.D. 641, Oxford 1969, p. 116. 52 D. B. ŠELOV, Ekonomièeskaja izn Tanaisa. Antiènyj gorod, Moskva 1963, p. 124; ID., 1989, p. 108. 53 V. H. BAUMANN, La céramique utilitaire du IVe siècle fabriquée par l’officina romana de Valea Morilor (Teliþa départament Tulcea), Études sur la céramique romaine et daco-romaine de la Dacie et de la Mésie In- férieure I, Timiºoara 1997, p. 46. 54 M. H. KELEMEN, Roman Amphorae in Pannonia IV, Acta Archaeologica Academiae Scientiarum Hun- garicae XLV, 1993, pp. 46–49. 55 G. STEFAN, Santierul Arheologic Garvãn (Dinogetia), Studii ºi Cercetãri de Istorie Veche 4, 1957; E. CONDURACHI, Santierul Histria, Materiale ºi Cercetãri Arheologice 6, 1959, p. 287, Fig. 9,1; SUCEVEANU, Les termes, pp. 104, 108, 112; P. ALEKSANDRESCU, Nekroploa tumulara, Histria II, 1966, p. 213, Pl. 100. VI, 1; SCORPAN, Contribution, p. 275, Fig. 11; BICHIR, Archaeology, p. 39, Pl. XXXV, 11; G. POPILIAN, Ceramika Ro- mana dîn Oltenia, Craiova 1976 [= Ceramika Romana], Pl. XV, pp. 195–199. 78 PIOTR DYCZEK littoral56 and from many Mediterranean sites, such as Ostia, Malta, Athens, Kencherai, Knossos, Paphos, Berenice and Mellieha.57 This state of affairs results in the amphora appearing in various classifications under different designations58. These vessels have four distinctive formal features: distinctly profiled rim, massive handles bent at a sharp angle in the upper part, conical neck and egg-shaped body. They were made of clay occurring in various shades of red to light brown, corresponding to the Munsell soil color chart codes: 2,5Y 8/4, 2,5YR 5/6, 6/4, 6/6, 6/8, 5YR 7/4, 7/6, 7,5YR 7/4, 10R 6/8. Although the height of these vessels reaches merely 1.0 m, the maximum volume could reach even 60 liters of liquid. As to the origins of the group agreement is lacking. Some scholars have suggested Kos as a possible place of manufacture on the grounds of stamps, primarily with the Greek name of a producer, , who is said to have worked in the island.59 A Dalmatian origin has also been considered.60 In my belief, the amphorae were made in Asia Minor.61 Most archaeologists, however, favor a Pontic source for this type.62 The said amphorae are interesting to archaeologists mainly because of the stamps and dipinti. The stamps were impressed usually on the upper part of the handle, less often under the rim. Although written in Greek letters, the names can sometimes be Roman as well63: 1 C %' 1 C 1%' C C %' C%' %' VC/VC %' . Data on the volume, given in sextarii, appears merely on a few of these containers, although there are some examples bearing Greek measures of volume. A red-painted dipinti on an amphora from Corabia, reading X64, corresponds to 82 sextarii, that is, 44-45 liters.

56 ZEEST, Keramièeskaja tara, p. 117; G. D. BELOV, Stielko djejatelnaja mastierskaja v Chersonese, Kratkije soobšèenija Instituta arheologii AN SSSR 116, 1969, p. 83, Fig. 24; ARSENIEVA, NAUMIENKO, Kompleks nahodok, pp. 151–153, Figs. 30, 31, 32: U.B. UENCEV, U. JA. JUROÈKIN, Amfory s voronkovidnym gorlom iz prièerno- morija, Chersonesski Sbornik IX, 1998, [= Amfory], pp. 100–109. 57 PANELLA, Oriente e Occidente, pp. 624–625, Figs. 22, 24; J. A. RILEY, Coarse Pottery, Excavations at Sidi Khrebish Benghazi (Berenice) II, LibyaAnt V, 1979, p. 206; ROBINSON, Athenian Agora, pp. J 50, M 235, P 16074, 56, Pl. 11; p. 106, Pl. 28; SLANE, Deposit, p. 298, Fig.18, p. 125; HAYES, Villa Dionisos, p. 147, Figs. 22, 46, 49. 58 DYCZEK,Roman Amphorae, pp. 173–176. 59 ŠTAERMAN, Keramièeskije klejma, p. 42. 60 D. TUDOR, Importul de vin ºi untdelemn in provincja Dacia, Apulum VII, 1968, p. 398. 61 DYCZEK, Roman Amphorae, pp. 182 f. 62 VNUKOV, Prièernomorski amfory, pp. 128 f. 63 D.TUDOR, Oltenia Romana, Bucureºti 1968 [= Oltenia Romana], p. 161, Nos. 76, 77; C. C. PETROLESCU, Note epigrafice (VII), Studii ºi Cercetãri de Istorie Veche 35, 1984, pp. 196–197; I. I. RUSSU, Inscriptile Grecesti dîn Dacia, Studi ºi Comunicari 12, 1965, p. 63; POPILIAN, Ceramika Romana, p. 141; ARSENIEVA, NAUMIENKO, Kompleks nahodok, p. 149, Fig. 28, 4, No. 154; pp. 153–154, Fig. 32, 2, No. 103; UENCEV, JUROÈKIN, Amfory, p. 105; BJELAJAC, Amfore, p. 58; V. EFFIMIE-ANDRONESCU, Stampila pe o amfore de productie locala cu imitarea literelor grecesti, Studii ºi Cercetãri de Istorie Veche 18, 1967, pp. 401–421. 64 TUDOR, Oltenia Romana, p. 467. ON SOME DIPINTI 79

4. Dipinti – amphora type Dyczek 25 (after the author).

There also occur names of alleged producers of the products inside the containers or the Greek and Roman negotiatores, e.g.: Sex. Cor. Ta., read as Sex(tus) Cor(nelius) Ta(urus). Other names include: Ta(tianus), Ant(onius) (sextarii), P(ublius), Athe(naeus) or Athe(odotus), or Athe(nodoros). Few of the dipinti actually refer to the contents. It is clear that olive oil was the most frequent commodity. An inscription in Latin has even been preserved: OLEVM. From Novae we have a Greek inscription, of which the only word to be legible is [...], (Fig. 4) identifying the source of the product. On another amphora from the valetudinarium the text reads: (Fig. 5); this is a combination of two Greek words: derived from almh, meaning “salt, brine”, and "!/"!, meaning “oyster”. Thus, we have proof from Novae that amphorae of Dyczek 25 type contained a kind of salsamenta or to be more precise, garum made from oysters. Amphorae of this type also provide the sole examples of what I firmly believe are dipinti giving the intended vessel recipient. The set of letters: LE V M, LVMPF, LVMANT, LVMVAL surely stands for Legion V Macedonian.65 And the inscriptions: LEG I ITAL, G I IT presumably refer to the First Italic Legion (Fig. 6). This review of amphora types and stamps and dipinti found on the vessel surface testi- fies to the intensity of the trade exchange in the Pontic region under Roman domination. The old trade contacts not only had not been interrupted, but continued to prosper in their own right. Three legions stationed along the lower Danube, a harbor of the Danubian fleet and Roman garrisons in the Crimea were all excellent pretexts for trading, both by the Greeks and by the Romans, who supplied the army with olive oil, wine and salsamenta manufactured in the Black Sea and Azov Sea littoral. The predominance of inscriptions in Greek clearly indicates who played an overbearing role in this trade.

65 See: R. IVANOV, Ziegel- und Dachziegelstempel mit Bezeichnung der Legion und der Garnison am untern Donaulimes (Bulgarien), Limes cura di Giancarlo Susini, Bologna 1994, pp. 8–9. 80 PIOTR DYCZEK

5. Dipinti of type of salsamenta (drawing by J. Rec³aw).

6. Dipinti Legio I Italica (drawing by J. Rec³aw).

The questions posed in the title can be answered briefly as follows: What ? – Basic commodities, but also some luxury goods. Where ? – From the Pontic region to the Roman garrisons on the lower and middle Danube, but also to important centers around the Mediterranean. When ?– Mainly from the 1st to the 3rd century A.D. Why ? – Because haulage of goods on a massive scale was cheap by ship; because the prices of the goods were not exorbitant compared to quality, because Greek and Roman negotiatores cooperated to achieve the highest profit and the presence of the military legions ensured a capacious market, which led in turn to growing production and the enrichment of the entire region.

P. Dyczek Institut dArchéologie, Université de Varsovie