ANALELE BANATULUI, S.N., ARHEOLOGIE – ISTORIE, XX, 2012 http://muzeulbanatului.ro/mbt/istorie/publicatii/ab.htm

THE END OF THE ROMAN HABITATION AT STOLNICENI, VÂLCEA COUNTY

Silviu I. Purece*

Cuvinte cheie: Buridava, Stolniceni, Gallienus, Valerianus, orizont de tezaure. Keywords: Buridava, Stolniceni, Gallienus, Valerianus, horizon of hoards.

! e End of the Roman Habitation at Buridava (Stolniceni, Vâlcea County) (Abstract) # e fi ve archaeological levels identifi ed in the Roman baths complex area at Stolniceni, dated in the period of the existence of Province, were chronologically dated as following: the 1 st level: - the fi rst part of Antoninus Pius’rule, the 2 nd level: the last part of Antoninus Pius’rule up to Commodus’rule, the 3 rd level: the Commodus – Caracalla period, the 4th level: the Caracalla – Philippus Arabs period and the 5 th level: the Philippus Arabs-Aurelian period. # e end of these fi ve levels mentioned above was brought about by fi re and destruction, the most powerful ones were characteristic to the 3 rd and 4 th levels. Even if the archaeological information is scarce, we believe that we can rely on the supposition that some phenomena that were identifi ed in the thermae area might have had a great impact on the whole settlement. # e diff erence between accidental destructions and intentional destructions can be established due to a vast array of information obtained not only form the site in question but also from a larger area. # us, we consider that this approach should rely entirely on the historical information obtained as a result of a thorough analysis of the hoards horizon. Every hoards horizons represented in the region are associated with one destruction moment from the Roman baths, with one exception the horizon from the year 260. # is situation determine us to reevaluate the chronological situation and to establish that is very possible to place the end of the Roman Buridava not in the time of Aurelian but at the beginning of Gallienus reign as sole emperor.

entioned by Tabula Peutingeriana, Buridava buildings in the thermae area were set up during Mis located between Pons Aluti and Phillipus Arabs’ rule 4. Traiana 1 on the Roman road along the Valley # ere are fi ve archaeological levels identifi ed stream and identified with the settlement that in the baths complex area at Stolniceni that were was near Pârâul Sărat out fall into the Olt River. chronologically dated as following 5: Unfortunately, there is little information about the –the 1 st level: Trajan – the fi rst part of Antoninus role played by Buridava in the political, economical Pius’rule and demographic system of Dacia Inferior Province, –the 2 nd level: the last part of Antoninus Pius’ rule or Malvensis , although there are some clues that indi- up to Commodus’ rule cate that it really played a major role 2. –the 3 rd level: the Commodus – Caracalla period # e archaeological researches undergone in the –the 4 th level: the Caracalla – Philippus Arabs period area are not enough to allow us to have a global –the 5 th level: the Philippus Arabs – Aurelian period 6 perspective on the Roman habitation because they # e end of these fi ve levels mentioned above mainly focus on the baths complex that was identi- was brought about by fi re and destruction, the fi ed here. However, in the context of the researches most powerful ones were characteristic to the 3 rd made on this baths area, Gh. Bichir was able to and 4 th levels 7. # e last habitation level, namely the identify many moments of destruction followed 6th level, belongs to the post-Roman period. by reconstructions and alterations – with only Even if the archaeological information is scarce, one exception, that of the fi nal one 3. # e latest we believe that we can rely on the supposition that some phenomena that were identifi ed in the thermae * Lucian Blaga University from Sibiu, , e-mail: [email protected]. 4 Bichir-Bardaşu 1983, 337. 1 Tabula Peutingeriana, segmentum VII . 5 Bichir-Bardaşu 1983, 336. 2 Tudor 1968, 20, Bichir 1982, 53, Ardevan 1998, 98–99. 6 Bichir 1982, 50. 3 Bichir 1988, 101–117. 7 Bichir 1982, 50.

91 ANALELE BANATULUI, S.N., ARHEOLOGIE – ISTORIE, XX, 2012 area might have had a great impact on the whole set- # e only horizon of hoards that must be left tlement. We are tempted to believe that all major out of this chronological analogy is the one that destructions were caused by some attacks coming emerged in the year 242. It was probably gener- from beyond the Roman border when, in fact, they ated by the hasty retreat of some Barbarian armies might have been caused by accidental causes. # e along the Roman road between Drobeta and diff erence between accidental destructions and and later on, along the Olt Valley road intentional destructions can be established due to to Pons Aluti 14 , the Roman camp, where they pass a vast array of information obtained not only form through Muntenia. # e fact that the retreating the site in question but also from a larger area. # us, Barbarians were not heading North of Ioneştii we consider that this approach should rely entirely Govorii ( Pons Aluti ) can explain why there was on the historical information obtained as a result of no destruction at Stolniceni during Gordianus a thorough analysis of the hoards horizon. III’s rule. As result, we believe that this horizon Among the horizons of hoards that are charac- of hoards cannot give any chronological elements teristic to Oltenia region, there are fi ve of them that that can be associated with any level of destruc- belong to the North-Eastern region. Out of these tion at Buridava , and for this reason it will not be fi ve, four horizons of hoards emerged as a result of mentioned any more. important political and military events that took As mentioned above, there is a possibil- place at the beginning of Commodus’ rule, in the ity that two of the destructions identifi ed at context of the events that marked the years 242, Stolniceni were caused at the same time with 245 and 260 8. # e fi fth horizons of hoards that the emergence of two of the horizons of hoards. was identifi ed in the North-Eastern part of Oltenia # e fi rst destruction that marks the end of the contained coins issued by Elagabalus 9 and raises 2nd level dates back to Commodus’ rule and can some questions related to the possibility that the be chronologically associated with the hiding of two great published hoards from Pădureţu 10 and the hoard from Râmnicu Vâlcea 15 and possibly, Frânceşti 11 and the hoard fragment from Slăviteşti the hiding of the thesaurus from Flămânda- – Băbeni 12 were part of a single monetary deposit. Cremenari 16 , considering that the settlement # e rarity in Oltenia of the hoards ended with at Râmnicu Vâlcea was set on fi re and so was Elagabalus coins determined us to consider that is the settlement at Ocniţa – “Downstream the very strange to have three monetary deposits ended Dam” 17 . All these archaeological and coin- with the same kind of coins in the neighboring areas related evidence concentrated near the site indi- of Băbeni town 13 , and to accept this possibility. cate the fact that the destruction that took place If we have to report the chronological dates at the end of the 2 nd level was not just an isolated established for the destructions moments identi- phenomenon, in fact, it was caused by external fi ed at Stolniceni by Gh. Bichir and the emergence factors that aff ected a larger area. of the horizons of hoards we have this situation: # e second destruction that can be clearly asso- ciated with the emergence of a horizon of hoards ! e destructions of the took place during Philippus Arabs’ rule at the end Hoards horizons thermae at Buridava of the 4 th level. # e horizon of hoards emerged as # e fi rst part of – a consequence of the attacks of the in the Antoninus Pius’rule year 245 and also included the hoard from Ioneştii # e beginning of Commodus Govorii 18 . # e hoard was hidden in the Pons Aluti Commodus’rule thermae 19 , and soon after the Roman baths were Caracalla – # e year 242 set on fi re. # e fact that the Carpi crossed the Olt – (Gordianus III) River at Pons Aluti and headed North along the # e year 245 Roman road made Buridava the next site to have Philippus Arabs (Philippus Arabs) been aff ected by them, and the destruction that – # e year 260 (Gallienus) 14 Aurelian – Purece 2008, 97–100. 15 Dumitraşcu 1996, 101; Purece 2008, 94. 16 Purece 2008, 94; Purece 2011, 30. 8 Purece 2008, 91–113. 17 S. I. Purece, I. Tuţulescu, M. Iosifaru, Roman Coins 9 Purece 2008, 95–97. Discovered at Ocniţa – “Downstream the Dam”, lecture 10 Preda1996, 109–116. presented at the XXVII-th National Symposium of Numismatics, 11 Depeyrot – Moisil 2004. Râmnicu Vâlcea, 2010. 12 Purece 2007, 25–32. 18 Mitrea 1968, 209–222. 13 Purece 2008, 95–97. 19 Vlădescu 1983, 90.

92 took place during Philippus Arabs’ rule was the minted by Trabonianus Gallus 27 . Even though most powerful of all 20 . there was a small number of coins and only 1/3 of # e attacks of the Carpi in the year 245 had dev- it was recovered, the thesaurus from Râureni has astating eff ects in many regions of . a great importance due to its emergence nearby # e Sub-Carpathian region was heavily aff ected the Roman settlement at Stolniceni, and the fact and as the living quality decreased; Philippus Arabs that it was hidden indicated a particular anxiety made numerous attempts to re-establish the pros- felt here. perity that the region once had, but to no result. In order to understand the causes that led to Gh. Bichir stated that this phenomenon was iden- abandoning the thermae at Stolniceni, we should tifi ed at Buridava, where the 5 th level and most of consider the current situation in the North-Eastern the large thermae were no longer in use between region of Oltenia throughout the chronological Philippus Arabs’ rule and Aurelian’s rule, and some periods established by Gh. Bichir, from the begin- rooms were turned into dwellings inhabited by ning of the 5 th level to its end, namely the period soldiers. Many armament pieces were discovered between the years 245–271. It is hard to believe in these rooms (spear and arrow points) 21 . # e that the habitation of the thermae by a possible archaeological evidence belonging to the 5 th level is army unit lasted until Aurelian’s rule. However, less dense than the one belonging to the previous the coins that were discovered here during the ones 22 , indicating that the rooms from the large researches do not go beyond Gordianus III’s rule 28 . thermae were not fully used. # ere are no coins discovered in the mili- From what has been mentioned before, and tary complexes from the North-Eastern part of according to the chronological periods established Oltenia 29 in the period after Philippus Arabs’ rule. by Gh. Bichir in the context of the researches made Even if O. Dudău added an Antoninianus issued in the thermae, it can be stated that all the horizon by Gallienus for Salonina 30 in the list of coins made of hoards, except for the last one, are associated to for , this is the result of an error that a level of destruction identifi ed at Stolniceni. It is we will try to explain in this paper. # e discovery diffi cult to understand why the horizon emerged of an Antoninianus issued during Gallienus’ rule from the hoards hidden immediately after Valerian in a Roman camp from the North-Eastern part was held captive is not associated with any destruc- of Oltenia seems to be surprising, and this is the tions identifi ed in the thermae area, even if this one reason why we checked again the bibliography is best represented in the North-Eastern region of sources. In the work dealing with the monetary Oltenia and it is characteristic only to this region circulation in the auxiliary Roman camps from of Dacia 23 . Roman Dacia, O. Dudău has referred to the follow- # e horizon includes three hoards coming from ing coins discovered at Castra Traiana (Sâmbotin, Olteni, Râureni and Stăneşti. # e hoard from Vâlcea County): “2 Denarii issued by Commodus, Stăneşti is the largest of all, containing 1127 coins 1 Denarius issued by Caracalla, 1 Antoninianus issued between Hadrian’s rule and Valerian’s rule, issued by Gallienus for Salonina, and coins from the last coin is dated between the years 254–255 24 . Vespasian, Domitian, Trajan, Hadrian, Antoninus # e second hoard in terms of the numbers of coins Pius, Caracalla, Elagabal, Severus Alexander”, that were contained comes from Olteni, having indicating the following bibliography: “Tudor – 259 pieces issued between Septimus Severus’ rule Nubar – Purcărescu 1970 31 , 249; Tudor 1978 32 , and Valerian’s rule. # e coins issued by Valerian 271; Poenaru – Mitrea 1990 33 , 306; Poenaru – are dated back in the year 254 25 . # e last hoard Mitrea 1994–1995 34 , 469; Avram 1983/1992 35 , comes from Râureni, but only 33% of it was 94; Găzdac 2002 36 , 586”. After having done the recovered, 26 coins out of those 80 found here 26 ; check-up we managed to re-associate the coins it is very possible that the last coin of this hoard with the bibliographical sources: to been issued in time of Valerian’s reign period, although the last piece that was recovered was 27 Purece 2008a, 73. 28 Dudău 2007,135; Purece 2007, 111–130. 29 Dudău 2007, 95–148. 20 Bichir 1982, 50. 30 Dudău 2007, 131. 21 Bichir et alii 1992, 266. 31 Tudor et alii 1970, 245–250. 22 Bichir – Bardaşu 1983, 337. 32 Tudor 1978. 23 Purece 2008, 106–108. 33 Poenaru Bordea – Mitrea1990, 303–306. 24 Purece 2005, 142. 34 Poenaru Bordea – Mitrea 1994–1995, 459–477. 25 Mitrea 1971, 140. 35 Avram 1992, 92–94. 26 Nubar – Purcărescu 1972, 161–171. 36 Găzdac 2002.

93 ANALELE BANATULUI, S.N., ARHEOLOGIE – ISTORIE, XX, 2012

Tudor – Nubar – 1 Denarius issued by year 260. Alongside the emergence of this thesau- Purcărescu 1970, 249 Caracalla rus collection in the year 260, the last level of the Tudor 1978, 271 – Roman habitation at Stolniceni came to an end. Poenaru Bordea – Mitrea “coins issued by Vespasian, # is seems to be suggested by the fact that this 1990, 306 Domitian, Trajan, Hadrian, horizon of hoards is the only one that cannot be asso- Antoninus Pius, Caracalla, ciated with any destruction levels that took place at Elagabal, Severus Alexander” Stolniceni, except for the horizon of hoards formed Poenaru Bordea – Mitrea 1 Denarius issued by in the year 242 40 that we agreed to ignore, due to 1994/1995, 469 Commodus the above-mentioned arguments. Considering that Avram 1983/1992, 94 1 Denarius issued by the end of the 5 th level was chronologically placed Commodus according to the historiographical tradition, with Găzdac 2002, 586 – no solid arguments, we believe that it should be dated in the year 260. As a conclusion, we believe None of the above-mentioned bibliographi- that it is necessary to correct the chronological cal sources refers to the Antoninianus issued superior limit of the 5 th level at Stolniceni proposed by Gallienus for Salonina. # e fact that it was by Gh. Bichir, to the year 260 when the Roman included in the list of the coins found at Castra habitation came to an end here in the context of Traiana is maybe the result of a printing error. It the events brought about by Valerian’s captivity and seems extremely diffi cult to fi nd the archaeological the application of Gallienus’ new defensive concept arguments which allow an accurate chronological in the Danube area 41 . division of the fi nal period of most of the Roman camps from Alutanus . Due to the lack of such arguments, in some cases, the use of the BIBLIOGRAPHY Roman fortifi cations was arbitrary pushed until 37 Ardevan 1998 Aurelian’s retreat . Such a case is the Roman camp R. Ardevan, Viaţa municipală în Dacia romană , from Racoviţa ( Praetorium ), that was set up in the Timişoara (1998). fi rst half of the 3 rd century and used for a very short period of time, its end being chronologically estab- Avram 1992 lished, with some reserve, during Aurelian’s rule 38 . R. Avram, Sâmbotin (Castra Traiana), jud. Vâlcea, It is not easy at all to fi nd some archaeological Cronica Cercetărilor Arheologice , Bucureşti, (1983/1992), evidence that leads to establishing a chronological 92–94. superior limit of the levels of habitation belong- rd Bichir 1982 ing to the second half of the 3 century, there- Gh. Bichir, Cercetările arheologice de la Stolniceni- fore the only solution adopted by archaeologists Râmnicu Vâlcea, Buridava 4, (1982), 43–54. seems to be the association with Aurelian’s retreat, even though this chronological limit related to Bichir 1988 Aurelian’s rule also met some reserve as in the case Gh. Bichir, Continuitatea în Dacia după retragerea of the Roman camp at Racoviţa. # is chronologi- romană. Aşezarea din secolele III-IV de la Stolniceni- cal hesitation is also expressed by Gh. Bichir in one Rîmnicu Vîlcea (Buridava romană), TD IX 1–2, (1988), of his studies focused on the levels of the Roman 101–117. habitation at Stolniceni, stating that: “fi ve are Bichir-Bardaşu 1983 Roman and date back to Trajan – Aurelian’s ruling Gh. Bichir, P. Bardaşu, Şantierul arheologic Stolniceni- periods (Gallienus?)“ 39 . Buridava (jud. Vâlcea), MCA XV, (1983), 336–343. # e emergence of the hoard horizons in the context of the events that took place in the year Bichir 1985 260 allows us to record a troubled situation which Gh. Bichir, Centrul militar de la Buridava, TD VI, might have had more complex eff ects. We believe 1–2, (1985), 93–104. that these events aff ected the Eastern region of Bichir et alii 1992 Oltenia at least, and consequently no solid argu- Gh. Bichir, A. Sion, P. Bardaşu, Aşezarea de la ments could support the idea that the Roman Stolniceni-Buridava, jud. Vâlcea, MCA XVII, (1992), camps from were used after the 255–268.

37 Vlădescu 1983, p. 79. 40 # is hoards horizon should not be mentioned due to the 38 Vlădescu 1982, p. 63. particularity of its emergence. See above. 39 Bichir 1985, p. 94. 41 Hügel 2003, p. 167.

94 Depeyrot – Moisil 2004 Purece 2005 G. Depeyrot, Delia Moisil, Le trésor de Frânceşti. Les S. Purece, Tezaurul de la Stăneşti , Bucureşti, (2005). débuts de la crise du denier (98–235) , Wetteren, (2004). Purece 2007 Dudău 2007 S. I. Purece, Discuţii privind un tezaur necunoscut Oltea Dudău, Circulaţia monetară în castrele de trupe de monede romane imperial descoperit la hotarul dintre auxiliare din Provincia Dacia , Timişoara, (2007). Slăviteşti şi Băbeni (jud. Vâlcea). In Monedă şi comerţ în sud-estul Europei , Sibiu, I, (2007), 25–32. Dumitraşcu 1996 A. Dumitraşcu, O puşculiţă cu denari romani imperiali Purece 2007a descoperită la Râmnicu Vâlcea, în BSNR 140–141 1992– S. I. Purece, Monede romane descoperite la Buridava 1993, (1996), 95–104. romană (Stolniceni, judeţul Vâlcea). In: Monedă şi comerţ în sud-estul Europei , Sibiu, I, (2007), 111–130. Găzdac 2002 C. Găzdac, Circulaţia monetară în Dacia şi provinciile Purece 2008 învecinate de la Traian la Constantin , vol. 1–2, Cluj- S. Purece, Orizonturile de tezaure din zona de sud a Napoca, (2002). provinciei Dacia – discuţii şi ipoteze. In: Monedă şi comerţ în sud-estul Europei , Sibiu, II, (2008), 91–113. Hügel 2003 P. Hügel, Ultimele decenii ale stăpânirii romane în Purece 2008a Dacia , Cluj-Napoca, (2003). S. I. Purece, Tezaurul de la Râureni (jud. Vâlcea). Completări numismatice şi istorice. In: Monedă şi comerţ Mitrea 1968 în sud-estul Europei , Sibiu, II, (2008), 71–83. B. Mitrea, Observaţii numismatice şi istorice asupra tezaurului de monede romane imperiale descoperit la Purece 2011 Ioneştii Govorii, SCN IV, (1968), 209–222. S. I. Purece, Discuţii privind momentul ascunderii tezaurului de la Flămânda-Cremenari (jud. Vâlcea), Studia Mitrea 1971 Universitatis Cibiniensis. Series Historica , Sibiu, VIII, B. Mitrea, Tezaurul de monede romane de la Olteni, (2011), 27–32. SCN V, (1971), 115–144. Tudor 1968 Nubar – Purcărescu 1972 D. Tudor, Centrul militar roman de la Buridava, H. Nubar, P. Purcărescu, Note pe marginea unui SMMIM 1 (1968), 17–30. tezaur monetar din epoca romană, descoperit la Râureni, jud. Vâlcea, Buridava 1, (1972), 161–171. Tudor et alii 1970 D. Tudor, H. Nubar, P. Purcărescu, Săpăturile Preda 1996 arheologice de la Castra Traiana (satul Sâmbotin, com. C. Preda, Tezaurul monetar imperial de la Pădureţu, Dăieşti, jud. Vâlcea), MCA IX, (1970), 245–250. jud. Vâlcea, BSNR 140–141 1992–1993, (1996), 109–116. Tudor 1978 D. Tudor, Oltenia romană , Bucureşti (1978). Poenaru Bordea – Mitrea 1990 Gh. Poenaru Bordea, B. Mitrea, Découvertes Vlădescu 1982 monnétaires en Roumanie – 1989 (XXXIII), Dacia C. M. Vlădescu, Castrele militare romane din sectorul N. S . XXXIV (1990), 303–306. de nord al limesului alutan, Buridava 4, (1982), 55–65.

Poenaru Bordea – Mitrea 1994–1995 Vlădescu 1983 Gh. Poenaru Bordea, B. Mitrea, Découvertes C. M. Vlădescu, Armata romană în Dacia Inferior , monnétaires en Roumanie – 1993 (XXXVII), Dacia Bucureşti (1983). N. S. XXXVIII – XXXIX, (1994– 1995), 459–477.

95