THE BRONZE AND GOLD WORKING WORKSHOP OF

Sorin Cociș, George Bounegru

Abstract: In 2015, rescue excavations was carried out in the southern area of (Municipium / Colonia Aurelia Apulensis). With this occasion, 9 Roman features were discovered. Of these, 8 are graves (5 incinerators and 3 inhumation tombs), one being a waste pit, located at the end of the perimeter under investigation. The pit had three different levels of filling, all of which contained different archaeological materials. The archaeological material collected from the uppermost level of this feature, contained 23 pieces of clay moulds and one bronze brooch pin. The diversity of material, which included also a mould destined for obtaining gold ingots along with the rest of the fragments coming from other clay moulds points to the fact that we must presume the existence of a workshop in the adjacent area of the rescue excavation. Keywords: brooch, mould, workshop, cast bronze, gold

The archaeological excavations conducted in the important economic centre of Roman , Apulum, yielded, until today, no evidence of any officinae for the production of bronze or precious metals1. In 2015, rescue excavations were made in the southern side of Alba Iulia Municipality, at approximately 100 m east the Partoș2 quarters. The latter lies on top of the first urban devel‑ opment at Apulum, Municipium/Colonia Aurelia Apulensis. The excavation unearthed prehis‑ toric complexes and material that belonged to the Noua culture, two Roman inhabitancy levels as well as a bi-ritual cemetery still dating to the Roman period. The research of 2016 confirmed the extension of both the cemetery, by identifying further eight graves as well as of the civil inhabitancy3. The 2016 research aimed at finding the archaeological heritage in the surface designed for the construction of a building and obtaining the archaeological discharge permit4. As a result, nine Roman period complexes were discovered. Amongst, eight are graves (5 cremations and 3 inhumations), identified at depths between 0.38 and 1.60 m. In the southern corner of the examined surface, an irregularly-shaped pit that exited the investigated perimeter was excavated. It had three filling levels, all containing Roman period archaeological materials. One of the levels distinguished itself by the presence of a significant quantity of ash, charred wood fragments and of certain pieces of vitrified material. The archaeological material collected from the pit, in above mentioned layer, comprises 23 fragments of clay moulds and a bronze brooch pin. Overall, any workshop in existence within the empire is determined based on finds of moulds, patterns, crucibles or half-finished

1 BENEA 2008, 124,141, 143. 2 Novel research G. Bounegru, I. Lascu, C. Florescu, F. Ciulavu. 3 Novel research G. Bounegru. 4 The research was conducted for archaeological discharge prior the construction of a building, beneficiary Mezei Mihaela, no.12, E. Cuza street. Ephemeris Napocensis, XXVII, 2017, p. 213–227 214 Sorin Cociș, George Bounegru pieces, scrap and so on, discovered within a well-delimited area. Based on the first examination of the pieces from Apulum we may argue that a bronze and also gold ingots casting workshop likely existed in the area adjacent to that where the rescue excavation was performed. For the beginning we shall reference here a gold ingots casting mould. The piece is tri- valve (pl. 1/1) and has the following sizes: 14.8 cm in width, surviving length of 12.5 cm, and thickness of 4.7 cm. Cut-out sizes differ: they preserve on a maximum length of 4.2 cm, a width of 1.7 cm and a maximum depth of 0.9 cm. Similar pieces were discovered at Ulpia Traiana5, Tibiscum6 and (2 specimens)7. Within the empire, several resembling moulds have been recently published for the workshops of Magdalensberg8. Some moulds are used to cast bronze ingots but also those of gold9. Two moulds also exhibit a negative stamp/ing: (aurum) C(aii) Caesaris Aug(usti) Germanici imp(eratoris) ex Noric(ismetallis), being ascribed to an officina under direct control of the imperial house10. The hypothesis that these moulds were used to cast gold ingots was also expressed in the Romanian scholarly literature11. The metallographic analysis of the piece from Apulum evidenced that gold was cast in this mould12. Although there existed an imperial monopoly on gold production, few gold quantities were also cast in the provinces in the form of either ingots upon the order of prosperous citizens or for jewellery making. Unfortunately, the composition of the entire lot of pieces does allow but a mere hypo‑ thetical statement regarding gold jewellery making at Apulum. The only indirect evidence for gold working in Dacia includes a few crucibles with gold traces discovered at Dierna, Tibiscum, and Porolissum13. The remaining moulds, found together with the above described, are small (between 1.2 cm and 5.3 cm) and evidence the casting of daily use objects. For only a single mould, which preserves just the casting nozzle area (pl. 1/2), we are unable to establish the cast piece type. Four clay mould fragments indicate the production of small bronze objects, namely the lunula (pl. 1/6) and link-rings (pl. 1/3–5). For such piece types, most relevant parallels are those of Ilișua14, Porolissum15, Tibiscum16 or Brigetio17. All the other moulds clearly evidence the production of Roman bronze brooches. The brooch production in counts amongst the best known at scale of the Roman empire18. The first mould is a fragment broken after the brooch was cast for the removal of the product made (pl. 2). In negative, one may still note the brooch foot with vertical catchplate and terminal knob, while the body still preserves the end part with three incisions. The surviving print allows us to clearly identify the brooch type this officinalproduced, namely the late Aucissa brooch (type 14d, pl. 4/3–4) in our typology19. Other two fragmentary moulds further evidence

5 COCIȘ 1987, 187 fig .4 (c-d). 6 BENEA 2008, 121, 124, with complete bibliography. 7 TIMOC 1998, 53–55. 8 GOSTENČNIK 2016. 9 GOSTENČNIK 2016, 27–30. 10 GOSTENČNIK 2016, 27–30. 11 COCIȘ 1987, 178; Benea 2008. 12 We thank this way again our colleague A. Lucian for the performed tests. 13 BENEA 2008, 144.137. 14 GAIU, 2007, 171, pl. 1. 15 BENEA 2008, 160. 16 BENEA 2008, 160. 17 SEY 2015, fig. 2/16. 18 COCIȘ 1995; RIEDERER, COCIŞ 2000; RĂDEANU/COCIŞ 1999/2000; COCIŞ 2004, 35–36; COCIȘ 2006; COCIȘ 2007; COCIŞ/BÂRCĂ 2013; COCIȘ 2016. 19 COCIŞ 2004, 81–82. The bronze and gold working workshop of Apulum 215 the production of this brooch type. The first (pl. 3, 7/2a–2b) exhibits scrap traces as early as the heating stage of the mould, the brooch type reconstruction being made based on x-ray. Lastly, the third piece that may be ascribed to the same type is a mould fragment resulted after the brooch removal, with the brooch head of type 14d (pl. 4/1) still visible. The last element to certify the production of this type in the officina at Apulum is a finished brooch pin that was supposed to be attached to the axle thus forming the hinged fastening mechanism (pl. 4/2). Type 14 brooches are hinged. The head is rectangular, with two semi-circular sides in some cases, arched body (triangular in cross-section) with a middle rib and a stepped flattened knob by the base. The decoration includes zigzag lines. The foot is short and ends in a stepped knob. The catchplate may be trapezoid or rectangular and vertical. They are made of two metal pieces, while sizes vary between 6.5 and 3.5 cm. The area where this type was formed is that of Superior. They are the last regional development stage of the traditional Aucissa type, evolving under the influence of the strongly profiled brooches, from which they adopted the body notch (rendered in the new flattened type), the “wolf’s tooth” decoration, the terminal knob and even the catchplate type. Type 14d spreads in 95% in the two Moesias20 and Dacia21. They rarely emerge in other provinces as well, like for instance in Pannonia22, Noricum23 and the Barbarian world24, as well. The few specimens in the two Roman provinces may be explained as the result of trade exchanges or carriage by individuals arriving there from their maximum diffusion area. In Dacia, until today, around 80 specimens of type 14d are known. From Apulum come 7 specimens25 (pl. 4/3,4). In what their typological framing is concerned, D. Bojović deems them a special type (type 14) and dates it to the 2nd century AD26. D. Grbić, close to our assumptions, admits that by typology (type II/ 2) they derive from the ancestral form (the Aucissa brooch)27. Chronologically, this type emerges, according to D. Grbić, at the time when the strongly profiled brooches start to go out of use, respectively the second half of the 2nd century AD, their end being pushed until the end of the following century. E. Genceva catalogues the type as a pseudo-Aucissa type (type 15d) and dates them to the interval between mid 2nd century – early 3rd century AD28. In the repertory dedicated to the brooches of Serbia, S. Petković classifies the discussed brooches in type 11, while placing them chronologically between mid 2nd century and early 3rd century AD29. Similar pieces from Augst were termed by E. Riha as hinged strongly profiled brooches (type 6.1)30. The two specimens discovered there are dated between mid 2nd century – mid 3rd century AD and deemed a local form of the province of Raetia, established under the influence of the strongly profiled brooches from the provinces of Noricum and Pannonia31. When the brooches of Vindobona were published, a specimen found there provides S. Schmid with the opportunity to resume the issue of this type at empire scale. The author concludes, based on

20 BOJOVIĆ 1983, 37; GENĆEVA 2004, 106–107, pl. XIII/1996; GRBIĆ 1996, 88; REDŽIĆ 2007, pl. XII/119–124; pl. XIII/125–129; PETKOVIĆ 2010, 67, pl. x, map 3. 21 COCIȘ 2004, 81–82. 22 KOVRIG 1937, 71, pl. XIV/141, 143; SCHMID 2010, 41, pl. 158/216. 23 GUGL 2000, 241, pl. 28/9; WEBER 2007, 221, pl. 17, F48. 24 BICHIR 1984, 157, pl. XXXVIII/6. 25 MOGA/CIUGUDEANU/COCIŞ/RODEANU 1997, pl. II/18; CIOBANU/GLIGOR/DRÂMBĂREAN RODEANU 2000, pl. XV/1; BOGDAN/COCIŞ, 2006, pl. II/10–11; three novel pieces are in the collection of the National Museum of the Union in Alba-Iulia. 26 BOJOVIĆ 1983, 37. 27 GRBIĆ 1996, 87–89. 28 GENĆEVA 2004, 106–107. 29 PETKOVIĆ 2010, 67. 30 RIHA 1979, 164, cat.1422–1423. 31 RIHA 1979, 164. 216 Sorin Cociș, George Bounegru the distribution area, that they are brooches specific to the provinces by the Lower Danube32. The discussion on these brooches from Noricum and Raetia has been recently resumed by G. Grabherr33. The Austrian scholar identifies, based on most recent finds, five specimens of type 14d in our classification, in the area of the Middle Alps, believing they are pieces of the Danubian type. Morphologically though, only specimen 2434 frames our classification, the rest being local forms emerging on the background of the hinged brooch production in respective area. In terms of the sub-divisions to which above artifacts may be framed (3 moulds, 1 brooch pin), only the mould fragment with imprinted hinge (pl. 4/1) may be ascribed with certainty to variation 14d4. However, one may not exclude that the other variations (type 4 d1–14 d3) were also produced. Apulum is the single centre within the empire where the production of this brooch type is recorded with certainty. The radiographic test of another mould fragment, scrapped as early as the heating stage (pl. 6/1), provided us with the possibility to identify the brooch type to be made. The x-ray clearly shows that inside the mould a zoomorphic brooch was imprinted, with a running horse stylistically rendered (pl. 7/1a–1d, 3). The fastening mechanism is hinged. Zoomorphic brooches disseminate in all empire provinces and also in the Barbarian world35, with the note that those enamelled are found in larger numbers in the western prov‑ inces36, while those without enamel dominate in Noricum37, Pannonia38, Moesia39 and Dacia40. Their bodies depict various animals: horses, rams, dogs, rabbits, roosters, ducks, pigeons, peacocks, dolphins, etc. In all zoomorphic brooches from the aforementioned prov‑ inces, the fastening mechanism is composed of pin and spring, while starting with the second half of the 2nd century, it is replaced on large scale by the hinged mechanism with vertical catchplate. The discussed zoomorphic variation is spread in Dalmatia, Pannonia, Noricum and Moesia. The repertory of the pieces drafted by A. Busuladžić for Bosnia Herzegovina includes 2 brooches (variant 3) dated to the 3rd–4th centuries AD41. Identical pieces from Singudunum (type 28/4) are dated to the 3rd century AD42. S. Petković (type 25/A1) suggests a broader dating for this type, namely mid. 2nd century AD and first decades of the 4th century43. E. Genceva classifies said brooches to type 29b and proposes a dating to the 2nd century AD44. R. Koščević (type 20) dates the pieces from Pannonia to the 2nd century AD45. Identical brooches published by W. Jobst (type 29) are dated to the 3rd–4th century AD46. The brooch known in our reper‑ tory as type 22a4 may be chronologically framed within the territory of Dacia after mid 2nd

32 SCHMID 2010, 41. 33 GRABHERR 2013, 301–302 34 GRABHERR 2013, pl. 2/24. 35 AMBROZ 1966, pl. 15/9–21; NOWAKOWSKI 2016. 36 ETTLINGER 1973, pl. 3; Riha 1979, pl. 66/1708–1725; FEUGÈRE 1985, 383–416. 37 JOBST 1975, 113–115; pl. XXX; MATOUSCHEK/NOWAK 1979, 81–110; MATOUSCHEK/NOWAK 1982, 131–182; MATOUSCHEK/NOWAK 1985–86, 101–222; WINTER 1985–1986, 323–370. 38 PATEK 1942, pl. XIX; KOŠČEVIĆ 1980, pl. XIX/141; SÁRÓ 2014, 178–181, type X3c. 39 BOJOVIĆ 1983, pl. XXX; GENĆEVA 2004, 106–107, pl. XXVI-XXVII; PETKOVIĆ 2010, pl. XXXVI. 40 COCIȘ 2004, pl. C-CII. 41 BUSULADŽIĆ 2010, 184, no. 238. 42 BOJOVIĆ 1983, 67–68, pl. XXX/295–299. 43 PETKOVIĆ 2010, 359. 44 GENĆEVA 2004, 119, pl. XXVI/13–14. 45 KOŠČEVIĆ 1980, 31. 46 JOBST 1975. pl. 46/320–321. The bronze and gold working workshop of Apulum 217 century AD and first decades of the following century47. Another zoomorphic brooch with a horse-shape body is known at Apulum, being discovered in the northern cemetery at Stația de Salvare (Ambulance Station)48. Identified within the layer, the piece undoubtedly comes from a grave disused at a later date. Zoomorphic brooch moulds, yet with spring fastening mechanism were identified in Dacia in the workshop at Napoca49. Other 13 mould fragments resulted from the removal of the brooches represent foot or catchplate parts (pl. 5/1–12.) or brooch support (pl 6/2), impossible to ascribe with certainty to any of the types. The soldiers were generally the bearers of both types of brooches identified in Dacia based on archaeological contexts. The raw material used for casting the pieces of Apulum is bronze in the ancient meaning of the word50. In order to be made, bronze was obtained by melting waste/scrap in crucibles, namely unfinished, disused or damaged pieces51. We shall not discuss herein the execution tech‑ nology of these artifacts, well known from other finds in Dacia52 and the empire53, but only note an unknown aspect, specifically that regarding the how the hinged fastening mechanism of the brooches was made. In the clay model for casting the zoomorphic brooch we noticed two orifices in the upper part, respectively the area of the bar which fixed the pin in the middle. The holes were made in the soft fabric prior firing of the mould. The bronze or led-made imprinting model had by the bar/support ends two small cepuri that pierced the mould. It was originally composed of two bands of soft clay pressed against the model, later removed by detaching the two bands. Subsequently, after the casting nozzle was cut out pâlniei de turnare, the two halves were joined, attached alongside their length, while the resulting mould, previously dried, was fired in small kilns. When the piece was cast, into the two holes was inserted a perishable mate‑ rial rod, which allowed the preservation of the orifice inside the bar. The piece was removed from the mould upon its destruction. Then, unless exhibiting casting flaws, the brooch was polished and decorated. The pin was made separately of a bronze wire hammered by one end and perforated. The final stage consisted in assembling the pin to the fastening support. A cut was made by the middle of the bar, with the aid of a small knife, possibly even a thin file. A thin bronze axle was inserted towards the middle, through the pin hole and pushed to the end of the support. The rod ends were occasionally riveted. Although only seven brooch workshops are known (, Porolissum, Dierna, Ilișua, Micia, Apulum, Dacia Porolissensis) in Dacia, admittedly, such crafting complexes operated in numerous civil and military centres. They might have been mixed, with diversified production (brooches, household pieces, military equipment, gold and silver jewellery casting and making) or manufactured only brooches like in the case of the workshop at Napoca.

BIBLIOGRAPHY AMBROZ 1966 A. K. AMBROZ, Fibuly juga europejskoj casti SSSR, Archaeologija SSSR, D1/30, Moskva, 1966.

47 COCIȘ 2004, 116,119, cat. no. 1410–1414. 48 COCIȘ ET ALII 2004, p. 281. 49 COCIȘ 2004, type 22f2, pl. CLXXI/3. 50 COCIȘ 2004, 23. 51 COCIȘ 2004, 26. 52 COCIȘ 2004, 24. 53 DRESCHER 1973; HUDECZEK 1988; BAYLEY/BUCHER 2004. 218 Sorin Cociș, George Bounegru

BAYLEY/BUCHER 2004 J. BAYLEY, S. BUTCHER, Roman Brooches in Britain: A Technological and Typological Study Based on the Richborough Collection Reports of the Research Committee of the Society of Antiquaries of London, 2004 BENEA 2008 D. BENEA, Ateliere de prelucrare a bronzului, argintului şi aurului în Dacia romană, în: Dacia în sistemul socio-economic roman Cu privire la atelierele meşteşugăreşti locale, BHAUT VII, Timișoara, 2008, 107–179. BICHIR 1984 Gh. BICHIR, Geto-dacii din Muntenia în epoca romană, București 1984. BOGDAN/COCIŞ 2006 D. BOGDAN, S. COCIş, Roman brooches from Apulum, Apulum XLIII/1, 2006, 219–230. BOJOVIĆ, 1983 D.BOJOVIĆ, Rimske fibule Singidunuma, Belgrad, 1983. BUSULADŽIĆ 2010 A. BUSULADŽIĆ, Morfologija antičkih fibula iz zbirke Zemaljskog muzeja Bosne i Hercegovine, /The morphology of antique fibulae in the collection of the National Museum of Bosnia and Herzegovina Zemaljski muzej Bosne i Hercegovine, Sarajevo 2010. CIOBANU/GLIGOR/DRÂMBĂREAN/RODEAN 2000 R. CIOBANU, A. GLIGOR, M. DRÂMBĂREAN, N. RODEAN, Raport privind cercetările arheologice de salvare din Dealul Furcilor şi str.Arhim Iuliu Hossu (Brânduşei) Alba Iulia. Campaniile 1996–1999 (2), Apulum XXXVII/1 2000, 293–339. COCIŞ 1987 S. COCIŞ, Tipare romane de la Ulpia Traiana Sarmizegetusa, SCIVA, 38, 2, 1987, 175–179. COCIŞ 1995 S. COCIŞ, Ateliere de bronzieri din Dacia romană, ActaMN, 32, I, 1995, 385–391. COCIŞ 2004 S. COCIŞ, Fibulele din Dacia romană, Cluj- Napoca, 2014. COCIŞ 2006 S. COCIŞ, Atelierul de artizanat de la Dierna (Orşova), Producţia de fibule, RB, XX, 2006, 111–123. COCIŞ 2007 S. COCIŞ, Un nou atelier de fibule din Dacia Porolissensis, în (eds.), S. Nemeti, F. Fodoreanu, S. Cociş, I. Nemeti, M. Pâslaru. Dacia Felix Studia Michaeli Bărbulescu Oblata, Cluj Napoca, 2007, 402-413. COCIŞ 2016 S. COCIŞ, Fibelwerkstätten im römischen Dakien, in: H. U. Voß, N. M.Scheeßel, (eds.), Archäologie zwischen Römern und Barbaren, Zur Datierung und Verbreitung römischer Metallarbeiten des 2 und 3. Jahrhunderts n. Chr. im Reich und im Barbaricum, Bonn, 2016, 513–522. COCIȘ ET ALII 2004 S. COCIȘ, H. CIUGUDEAN, V. DELEANU, Fibule romane de la Apulum (II), Apulum, XLI, 2004, 279–286. COCIȘ/BÂRCĂ 2013 S. COCIȘ, V. BÂRCĂ, The workshops and production of “sarmatian” brooches (Almgren Group VII, Series I), Dacia, LVII, 2013, 161–175. DRESCHER 1973 H. DRESCHER, Der Guβ von Kleingerät, dargestellt an Funden aus provinzialrömischen Werkstätten, Medieval Studies, 6,1973, 48–62 ETTLINGER 1973 E. ETTLINGER, Die römischen Fibeln in der Schweiz, Bern 1973. The bronze and gold working workshop of Apulum 219

FEUGÈRE 1985 M. FEUGÈRE, Les fibules en Gaule Méridionale de la conquête à la fin due V siècle après J.-C., Revue Archéologique de Narbonnaise, Supplément 12, Paris 1985. GAIU 2007 C. GAIU, Vestigii ale metalurgiei bronzului în castrul roman de la Ilişua, Revista Bistriței, XXI/7 2007, 169–168. GENĆEVA 2004 E. GENĆEVA, Les fibules romaines de Bulgarie de la fin du Ier s. av. J.-C. la fin du VIe s. ap. J.-C. Sofia 2004 GRBIĆ 1996 D. GRBIĆ, Fibulae as Products of Local Workshops at Diana, Roman on the Middle and Lower Danube, Belgrade, 1996, 87–91. GUGL 2000 CHR. GUGL, Archäologische Forschungen in Teurnia Die Ausgrabungen in der Wohnterassen 1971/1978, Österreichisches Archäologisches Institut Sonderschriften Band 33, 2000. GOSTENČNIK 2016 K. GOSTENČNIK, Eisen – Bronze – Gold. Zum Metallhandwerk in der romischen Stadt „Alt-Virunum“ auf dem Magdalensberg, Carinthia I 2016 (206), 11–35. GRABHERR 2013 G. GRABHERR, Identität oder Technologie – Scharnierfbeln im zentralen Alpenraum în Relations Abroad Brooches and other elements of dress as sources for reconstructing interre‑ gional movement and group boundaries from the Punic Wars to the decline of the Western Proceedings of the International Conference from 27th–29th April 2011, Innsbrucker Klassisch Archäologische Universitätsschriften, Band 8, G. Grabherr, B. Kainrath, Th. Schierl (Eds.) Innsbruck, 2013, 299 –316. HUDECZEK 1988 E. HUDECZEK, Zu den Kleinbronzegießereien in Flavia Solva (Steiermark), în: K. Gschwantler; A. Bernhard-Walcher (eds.) Griechische und römische Statuetten und Großbronzen, Akten der 9 Internationalen Tagung über antike Bronzen, Wien, 21–25 April 1986, Wien, 1988, 341–345. JOBST 1975 W. JOBST, Die römischen Fibeln aus Lauriacum, Forschungen in Lauriacum 10, 1975, Linz 1975. KOŠČEVIĆ 1980 R. KOŠČEVIĆ, Antičke fibule s produčja s Siska, Zagreb 1980. KOVRIG 1937 I. Kovrig, Die Haupttypen der kaiserzeitlichen Fibeln in Pannonien, DissPann. Ser.2, 4, 1937. MATOUSCHEK/NOWAK 1979 J. MATOUSCHEK, H. NOWAK, Unpublizierte Pferdefibeln aus Wiener Privatsammlungen, RÖ 7, 1979, 81–110. MATOUSCHEK/NOWAK 1982 J. MATOUSCHEK, H. NOWAK, Unpublizierte Hasen und Hundefibeln aus österreichischen Privatsammlungen, RÖ 9–10, 1981–1982, 131–182. MATOUSCHEK/NOWAK 1986 J. MATOUSCHEK, H. NOWAK, Unpublizierte Tierfibeln und Fibeln mit theriomorphen Gestaltungselementen aus österreichischen Privatsammlungen, RÖ 13–14, 1985–1986, 101–222. MOGA/CIUGUDEAN/COCIŞ/RODEANU 1997 V. MOGA, H. CIUGUDEAN, S. COCIŞ, N. RODEANU, Fibule romane de la Apulum, ActaMN 34, I, 1997, 536–558. NOWAKOWSKI 2016 W. NOWAKOWSKI, Items with the Ox-Head on the Shores of the Baltic Sea in the Roman Period, Archaelogia Baltica 23, 2016, 129–139. 220 Sorin Cociș, George Bounegru

PATEK 1942 E. VON PATEK, Verbreitung und Herkunft der römischen Fibeltypen von Pannonien, DissPann. Ser. 2, 19, Budapest 1942. PETKOVIĆ 2010 S. PETKOVIĆ, Rimske fibule u Srbiji od I do V veka n.e, Beograd 2010. RĂDEANU/COCIŞ 1999–2000 V. RĂDEANU, S. COCIŞ, Un nou atelier de fibule din Dacia romană: Micia, Sargeţia, XXVIII-XXIX/1, 1999–2000, 205–209. REDŽIĆ 2007 S. REDŽIĆ, Nalazi rimskih fibula na nekropolama Viminacijuma, Arheologija I prirodne nauke 4, Beograd 2007. RIEDERER/COCIŞ 2000 J. RIEDERER, S. COCIŞ, Die Fiebelwerkstatt von Napoca: Vorläufige Angaben zur Metallanalyse, in: Al. Giumlia-Mair (ed.), Ancient Metallurgy between Oriental Alps and Pannonian Plain. Workshop-Trieste, 29–30 October 1998, Udine 2000, 189–192. RIHA 1979 E. RIHA, Die römischen Fibeln aus Augst und Kaiseraugst, Forschungen in Augst 3, Augst 1979. SCHMID 2010 S. SCHMID, Die römischen Fibeln aus Wien, Monografien der Stadtarchäologie Wien 6, Wien 2010. SÁRÓ 2014 CS. SÁRÓ, Kora császárkori fibulák a Wosinsky Mór Megyei Múzeum gyűjteményéből, 159 –223. A Wosinszky Mór Múzeum évkönyve 36, Szekszárd, 2014. SEY 2015 N. SEY, Roman Bronze Workshop in the Civil Town of Brigetio, Studia Archaeologica, Studia Archaeologica Nicolae Szabó LXXV Annos Nato Dedicate, editor László Borhy, avec Károly Tankó et Kata Dévai, Budapest 2015, 225–236. TIMOC 1998 C. TIMOC, Un tipar pentru turnat lingouri de metal de la Porolissum, , 21, 53–55. WEBER 2007 M. WEBER, Militärische Ausrüstungsgegenstände, Pferdegeschirrbestandteile und Fibeln aus demrömischen Vicus Pons Aeni/Pfaffenhofen. Bayer. Vorgeschbl. 72, 2007, 152–233. WINTER 1986 H. WINTER, Römische Vogelfibeln von österreichischen Fundstellen aus Privatbesitz, RÖ 13–14, 1985–1986, 322–369.

BHAUT = Bibliotheca Historica et Archaeologica Universitatis Timisiensis, Timișoara. The bronze and gold working workshop of Apulum 221

Pl. 1:1. Ingots casting mould; 2. Mould with casting nozzle; 3.–5, mould fragments for links casting; 6. Mould for lunula casting. 222 Sorin Cociș, George Bounegru

Pl. 2:1. Type 14 brooch mould. The bronze and gold working workshop of Apulum 223

Pl. 3:1. Type 14 brooch mould. 224 Sorin Cociș, George Bounegru

Pl. 4:1 Type 14d4 brooch mould; 2. Brooch pin for type 14; 3 brooches of type 14d4 from Apulum; 4. Type 14d3 brooch from Apulum. The bronze and gold working workshop of Apulum 225

Pl. 5:1–12. Mould fragments for brooch casting. 226 Sorin Cociș, George Bounegru

Pl. 6:1. Zoomorphic brooch mould; 2 mould fragments preserving part of the support; 3. Zoomorphic brooch (Drobeta). The bronze and gold working workshop of Apulum 227

Pl. 7: 1a–1d. x-ray of the zoomorphic brooch mould; 2a–2b x-ray of the type 14 brooch mould.