SOME OBSERVATIONS ON THE MILITARY FUNERAL ALTAR OF ADAMCLISI
Some unpublished fragments with inscriptions pertammg to the Ad�m clisi «Mausoleum» are to be found in the lapidarium of the Bucharest National Museum of Antiquities. A study of these fragments, as well as the attempt of locating them within the complex of the «Mausoleum» inscriptions, led th� author to a closer and more thorough analysis of some of the problems risen by this monument, which is of outstanding documentary value for the events on the Lower Danube towards the last years of the first century of our era. The discovery of the «Mausoleum» at the end of the last century stirred up great interest among the scientists of that time, which displayed much ingeniousr_es� in the analysis of its complex problems. Later on, however, the «Mausoleum•> was shadowed by the stately triumphal monument, and, but for a few and highly valuable exceptions, it was mentioned only when it could serve as explanatio::-_ for some of the Trophy problems. ln the meantime (there are more than 60 years since its discovery) many of the problems of the Roman domination in these provinces have been resumed, either on the basis of archaeologic investigatior_s ' results, or on the basis of general studies about the politica! and military history of the Roman Empire in the fîrst and second centuries - and regarded in a new light, thus making possible for the author to take up again some of the problems connected with the Adamclisi «Mausoleum». In the years 1895 -- 1896, the excavations in a hillock at about 200 m -=�st of the Tropaeum brought to light a square construction having a 16.20 m side. Only the foundation has been completely preserved. Of the super structure a few stair-steps were preserved, as well as a few architectonic fragm(nt.;; among which a corner-pilaster, a frieze-fragment adorned with acanthus leaves, the fragment of a column sode and some cornice fragments should be mention ed . Only the foundations of the building could be reconstituted with the:se fragments ; each wall had a length of 11.67 m and a height of 6 m, while fîve steps led to each of the four sides. For the roof, severa! variants of reconstitution were proposed. Accordin.� to the hypothesis put forward by S. Theiss, the building had a pyramidal t:ile roof. He considered that a flat terraced roof would have required the exister_ce 346 Di l i.I.\ l>Ol\LTil: of supporting columns, while an earth or massive stane pyramid would have been impossible since the walls were much too weak to resist such a pressure 1• As the interior was unprocessed, the discoverer thought it was filled with earth, and that it was not a room. The opinion has also been put forwa::d that funerary urns had been stored in the room ; however the reports of the excava tions record nothing of the kind in the interior. The walls were externally plated with slabs, 1. 30 m long, 0.9.0 m wide and 0.30 m thick, covered with inscrip t:ions. C. Cichorius assumed that there had been three superposed files of 12 slabs each, on each side of the building. Only five slabs and a block-fragment from the east side, one slab from the north side and some smaller fra;;ments were preserved. They had been discovered either on the spot, or later on, during excavations at the Tropaeum Trajani Stronghold. The front fa c;ade is the eastern side. The slabs discovered there are engraved with fragments of the Emperor's title (Fig. 1/1, 2 and Eg. 2) : -
I_IMP ; lGJE[RMANICUSJ ; [TRI]B. POT.
(great, capital letters), as well as part of the dedication written on two lines (Fig. 1/3, 4, 5,6 and Fig. 2) :
IN HONOREM ET] MEMORIAM FORTIS [SIMORVM VIRORVM] QV I PVGNANTES] PRO RE.P. MORTE OCCVBV lERVNT
Below, the name of the commandant follows, of which only the domus, the resid ence, and part of his function indications were preserved (Fig. 1/4, 5, 6 and Fig. 2):
C] OL. [PO] MP. DOMICIL. NEAPOL. ITALIAE PRA ... then follow, engraved with smaller letters, the lists comprising the names of the fallen praetorians and legionaries (Fig. 1/3, 4, 5, 6 and Fig. 2). The slab discovered on the north side shows names of soldiers 2:-iaving fought in auxiliary units (Fig. 3 a and No fragment of inscription was bfound ). on the south and west sides. It is however assumed that the lists with the names of the fallen soldiers continued over all sides and it has been reckoned that there must have been in all 3 800 names engraved 2• This figure might be somewhat exaggerated. The new fragment we examined, reconstituted out of 18 pieces, has a length of 85 cm and a width of 90 cm, that is equal to the slabs already k1 own. The author has found no indication whatsoever on the circumstances in which these fragments were discovered, except a photograph in Mss. no. 5 130, of Or. Tocilescu, in the R.P.R. Academy Library. However, it seems highly probable that they were found in the Stronghold, where they had been used as bLilding material, like other fragments discovered during the Stronghold excavc;.tions.
Dobrudscha : Ein Erklănmgsversuch, 1 From volume 5 129 of Tocilescu's mss„ f. Berlin, 1904, 30. 206 -207. p. 2 C. Cichorius, Die rămischen Denkmăler in der TllEWLI TAHY l·T'.'\EIUL ALTAH OF ADA�!CLISI
Of the inscription, 13 lines have been preserved, with 4 cm high letters (Fig. 4 a and Although the edges are worn out, the text may be satisfactorily completed, exceptb). the last two lines, of which a few letters only have been preserved. 1 L. Macrin(ius) ... . Valerius [Su]rus Agrip(pina) 11 . Lollius [Se]cund(us ?) Agrip(pina) . Iulius [V] ? al(ens ?) Agrip(pina) 5 A. [A]lbanius M[ac]edo Agrip(pina) P. [P] ompon(ius) M[a]nsuet(us) Alba . Voconius . TAT. Pol(lentia) Valerius [Sat]urn(inus) Ag[rip(pina) C. [S]tratoni(us) .. . 10 C. [Va]leri[us]. A ...C A .. . I[ul]ius [G]er[m]an(us) Agr(ippina)
TC.IV ...S ... 10 Iuva(vo) .. [?An] NIV S .... I ....
Line 2, middle, a gap of two letters ; line 3, middle, a gap of two letters ; line 4, a gap ;)f one or two letters, then the sloping hasta of a letter V; line 5, beginning the lower part ·-:Jf an A, then a gap of one letter and lbanius ; the same line, middle, half an M, then a gap of two letters ; line 6, beginning, letter P, then a gap of one letter ; middle, an M and a gap -:Jf one letter ; line 7 middle, a gap of one letter, then a blurrred sign, a T?; line 8, m�ddle, a gap of three letters ; end of the line AG and a gap of two letters ; line 9, beginning, C, 6en a gap of one letter and the upper half of a T; line 10, beginning, upper half of the ringlet o: a C and a gap of two letters ; in the same line, after LERI follow a gap of three letters, an A, a gap of three letters, then CA, and a gap of two letters ; line 11, beginning, lower half of an I and a gap of two letters ; middle, gap of one letter, then ER, gap of one letter and AN ; line 12, beginning, T, then half of an O, gap of one letter, lower half of an I and of a V; middle of the same line, gap of faur or five letters, then IO ; line 13, beginning, gap of thre� letters, then NIVS ; in the second part of the line nothing but a doubtful I can be distinguish�.
The inscription comprises a list of names of Roman citizens, which, judging by their origin, had served in a legion. Thus the place of this frc.gment îs presumably the front side of the building, together with the slabs com:�Jrising names of Praetorians and legionaries. To the same category belongs the name on another fragment, the photo, graph of which îs to be found in vol. 5 130 of the Manuscripts. The fragme::it was discovered during the 1901 excavations at the « Marble Basilica » and it wa5 probably left at the Stronghold, since it has not been included in the collectic·m of the Bucharest NMA. The fragment is cut out of the right side of a slab (Fig. 5) ; sv ND.IV ...Alexa]nd. lu[vavo ALENS.BO ...V]alens Bor nnae ?
EMEN . . ...Cl]emen ls ...... FP
It comprises the last part of fi.ve lines, with part of the cognomen and of the domus of the dead. H · I·: .\ I I I.I. \ I 11: l "I' 11
On the same photograph there is yet another fragment of the same inscrip, tion, discovered at the « Marble Basilica »:1• This fragment has not been included m the NMA collections, either (Fig. 6) .
. . . AQVIL. . . ..Aqui l' a I3ITHI . ..Bithi (f.) SEVT ...Seutli (f.)? A MANO ...Amand[ us DAS ...Das[i (f.)
It comprises the cognomen, respectively the patronymic of five soldiers of an auxiliary unit. Y et another unpublished fragment of the « Mausoleum » inscription is to be found at the NMA. It is a small fragment of a slab on which there is engraved in monumental characters the letter D and a fragment of the hasta of an I probably, from the line below (Fig. 7). It was discovered in 1904 during the diggings in the Stronghold « in the walls of a later building on the main street, near the south, ern gateway » 4• Taking into account its size, the fragment seems to be part of the third line. However, there is no D in the text of that line as completed by Gr. Tocilescu and Th. Mommsen, so that ist appearance would reopen the prob lem of the Mausoleum inscription in monumental characters, while offering by no means sufficient elements for its reconstitution. It may be inferred from the inscription that the building was erected in memory of the soldiers fallen in a war. Notwithstanding, since in the interior nothing was found to justify the term of Mausoleum, the author considers mili, tary fu neral altar - a term widely used in the literature - as being more adequate to the character of this monument. That is why it shall be used here instead of that of « Mausoleum » given by its discoverer. No elements allowing of a precise dating have been preserved in the inscription. Since it was built in the neighbourhood of the triumphal monument of 109, the discoverer voiced the assumption, shared by other scholars as well, that the altar was erected by the emperor Trajan to commemorate the warriors fallen in the battles on the Lower Danube, in the southern Dobrudja, during the Dacian wars. The discovery of the altar in the neighbourhood of the Tropaeum came as a corroboration of the assumption that the war against the Dacians was waged on both sides of the Danube, concurrently explaining the presence in this place of the triumphal monument, « a celebration of the war against the Dacians as a whole », while the funeral monument « was erected in honour of the soldiers fallen in the only battle in which the Emperor seems to have actually taken part » 5• ln support of this dating, some inscription elements have alsa been used : the absence of the gentilicia of the emperors which succeeded to Trajan and the presence of some of the T. Flavii ; the country of the soldiers varies almost
« 5 129, f. 163 and 164). :i The two fragmcnts were publishcd in Mate· rnss„ v. riale», II, p. 593, nos. 67 and 68 where only thesc -' Gr. Tocilescu, mss„ v. 5 129, f. 181. two photogrnphs were ernployed. A new presentation 5 Gr. Tocilescu, Fouilles et recherches arc lh'olo seerned welcorne, as indications found in the manus gicptes en Ro1mia11ic, 1901, pp. 74-76 and 83. cript allowed of a more correct reading (Gr. Tocilescu, ii TllJ·: "11.lT.\HY IT :\J·:H.\I. .\ l.T.\ H CIF .\ ll.\ \TC:LJ:-;f from case to case - thus the monument ought to be dated before Hadrianu�, when the system of local recruitment had not yet been introduced ; stylisL: analogies have been sought for in the ornaments of the architectonic fragmen::s of the altar and of the Tropaeum 6• Gr. Tocilescu's interpretation of the funeral altar of Adamclisi as a monu, ment commemorating Trajan's battles on the Lower Danube was based less cn the inscription's elements than on its connection with the Tropaeum. A thorough analysis of the inscription moved C. Cichorius to attribute the altar to events on the Lower Danube during the reign of Domitianus 7• According to him, Dom�, tianus dedicated the altar to the soldiers and to their commandant, Corneliu.s Fuscus, the Prefect of the Praetorian Guard fallen in a battle lost on the very spot indicated by the monument. As stressed above, the inscription contains no precise dating element : of the emperor's name, nothing, or next to nothing was preserved ; the name of the Prefect who was probably in general command of the troops is defi.nite1y lost, and of the names of military units, a single one was preserved, that of t}·_ e Cohors II Batavorum. However, some information is to be gained from the lists of the soldiers' names. First, the existence of some of the T. Flavii and the absence of the Ae1L and Aurelii restricts the circle of investigations to the Flavio,Trajanic period. Moreover, it was established that one of the front,side slabs comprises names of the Praetorians (Fig. 1/3 and Fig. 2), most of them Italian,born ; since it was the period when Italians were recruited only in Praetorian Cohorts 8• The other front side slabs contain names of legionaries - native from several differem provinces (Fig. 1/5,6, Fig. 4 and 5). Thus, from the fragments published so far it is known that four legionaries are coming from Germania Inferior (Agrippina), two from Gallia Narbonensis (Forum Iulii and Vienna), two from Noricum (Celeia and Juvavum), one frcm Alpes Maritimae (Cemenelum), two from Italia (Roma and Dertona), one frc·m Dalmatia (Aequum), one from 11acedonia and four from Asia Minor : two frnm Nicaea (Bithynia), one from Isinda (Pisidia), one from Caesarea (Cappadoci::.). The new fragments presented here attest the names of seven legionar:es from Germania Inferior (six from Agrippina and one from Bonnae), one from Gallia Narbonensis (Alba),9 one from Noricum (Juvavum) and one from Italia (Pollentia). The names preserved by all these fragments point to a unity in the co::n, rosition of the troops, the distinctive feature of which is the prevalence of
6 Rejected with good reason by A. Furtwăngler, Danube legions under Domitian, in JRS, XVIII. _, 7, in Da� Tropaion t•on Adamklissi u,1d pr01·i11zial 1928, p. 4 thinks the assumed Praetorians on �he riimische Kunst, « Ak »., in Abh. der Bayer. ad XXII, altar might have been soldiers of Legion I Italica. J, 1905, 472 473. The l o Fla·.>io pp. composition of this egi n during the O/>. cit., 25 G. 7 p. sq. Trajanic epach in Porni, Il reclutamento delie Gr. Fo uillcs 70. Th. Mommsen, ·" Tocilescu, ..., p. legioni da Augusto a Diocleziano, Milan -Rome, ;n CIL, III, 14 214; the problem of thc rccruiting 1952, p. 216. of Practorian cohorts in the first two e h or ccn luri s of t c " Eithcr Alba Augusta Al ba lleh-oru m, [- „1 h E1npire, Ro1nc, RE, col. I 299. in „A. Passcrini, Le coorti jnct
10 E. Ritterling, Rheinische Legionare an der Agrippina are attested. However the participation 11nteren Donau, in «Germania», XI, 3, 1925, p. 142, of Legion XIV Gemina in Trajan's Dacian wars n. 4. seems unlikely. At this time it is attested by bricks 11 See bibliography on this problem in G. Porni, in its Vindobona camp ; cf. E. Ritterling in RE, XII, I op. cit., p. 76 and n. 1. col. I 738 and 741. For the problem of the Danube 12 Ibidem, p. 79. legions around the year 100 of our era, see also R. Syme 13 E. Ritterling, op. cit., p. 141 -145. The first garrison of Trajan's Dacia, in Laureae Aquin· u E. Ritterling, in RE, XII, col. 1 2 77. censes, I, 1938 (DissPann, ser. 2, no. 10), pp. 267 -
15 Ibidem, col. 1278-1279; R. Syme, op. cit., 268 ; A. Betz, Zur Dislokation der Legionen in der p. 41-55. Zeit vom Tode des Augustus bis zum Ende der Prinzi· 16 E. Ritterling, in RE, XII, col. 1 277 and I 735 ; patsepoche, in Carnuntina, 1956, pp. 17-24 ; R. Syme, o/>. cit., p. 50; Th. Mommsen in a corn· G. Alfoldy, Die Trup/>enverteilung der Donau mentary to CIL, III, 14 214, expresses the opinion legionen am Ende des I. ]a lirlwnderts, in ActaArch, that the legion on the altar might be identified with XI, 1959, pp. J!}-141. Legion XIV Gemina, in which some soldiers of 17 G. Porni, o/>. cit., p. 215 and 2 î I. 7 �111.l'L\ l\Y Fli;\Ell.\T. AT.'L\ 11 AIH�IC.LISI TLI E OF 351
During 100 - 102, another three legions were brought over on the Danube from the Germanic army : Legion I Minervia, of Germania Inferior and Legions X Qemina and XI Claudia, of Germania Superior 18• Of these, Legion I Minervia set up by Domitianus in 83 with many elements of Germania Inferior - as shown by fi.gures gathered by G. Forni regarding the Legion's soldiers in the period under discussion 19 - might at the first sight be taken into consideration for identification with the legion on the altar. However, some objections which cannot be got over arise. First, as remarked by Ritterling in the quoted article, the legion mentioned on the altar suffered very heavy losses : if the ranks enumer ated on the fragments published by H. Dessau in ILS, 9107 and D. Tudor in
Materiale, II, p. 590 - 592, nos. 61 -63, belonged, as it stands to reason, to this legion, it means that the legion lost a great number of rank-holders, the most important of these being the five signiferi and the three imaginiferi 20 (Fig. 8). However, not only did Legion I Minervia survive the wars, being attested in 107 in its Bonn camp, but it also scored successes in the second Dacian war ; and this moreover, after it must have faced heavy fighting during the first war in south ern Dobrudja, according to the assumptions of those authors which consider that battle (which according to others, is highly problematic) was the reason for the erection of the altar and of the Adamclisi trophy. Secondly, Legion I Minervia, recruited on the Rhine, was brought to the Danube only for this war, hence the presence of oriental soldiers in its ranks could not be explained. The legion mentioned on the altar is a Rhine legion which had been station ing on the Lower Danube for some time. Such a legion is Legion V Alaudae, one of the Lower Rhine legions, garrisoned at Vetera until 69, when it accompa nied Vitellius to Rome 21• After the defeat of Vitellius in the battle of Cremona, the legions which had fought in his army were sent to Illyricum, as reported by Tacitus 22, as a result of measures taken by Vespasian. Legion V Alaudae was transferred to Moesia and appears to have been garrisoned at Viminacium together with Legion VII Cla11dia 23• Like the other Legions of Moesia, I Italica,
18 XII, col. 22 Hist., Rheinische Legio E. Ritterling, în RE, 1 282 ; R. Syme, III, 35 ; E. Ritterling, The fîrst garrison of Trajan's Dacia, p. 273. nare ..., p. 143 ; R. Syme, in JRS, XVIII, 1, 1928. 1 OJ>. cit., pp. 216-217. p. 45. 209 The doubt expressed by D. Tudor in «Mate 23 Ibidem, pp. 45 -46. The older opinion that riale», II, p. 590, as to the link existing among the Legion V Alaudae was disbanded by Vespasian ir. fragments published under the numbers 61-2 is 70 has been abandoned ; cf. A.v. Domaszewski, unjustified : on a photograph in Gr. Tocilescu's Die Thierbilder der Signa, in AEM, XV, p. 190 and manuscripts, v. 5 130, the letters of the last line of n. 40 ; E. Ritterling, in RE, XII, col. 1 569 ; Idem , fragment no. 61 are clearly scen to continue on the in «Germania», IX, 3, 1925, p. 143 ; R. Syme, in first line of fragment 62. Today these letters are JRS, XVIII, 1, 1928, p. 45. The single documen: blurred, the slab being strongly dammaged. The known by me about the period of his garrison in fragment published by D. Tudor under the number Balkans is the inscription found in Jugoslavia, a: 61 is now broken into two fragments, preserving Morane (Skopie) , cf. Spomenik Belgrad, XCVIII. however almost entirely the text published in ILS, 1941 - 48, p. 223, no. 441. K. Patsch, Der KamjJ_r 9107. um de11 Donauraum unter Domitian und Traja1t 2 1 E. Ritterling in Rheinische Legionare ... , (« Beitriige zur Vi:ilkerkunde von Si.idosteuropa», pp. 143-144 points out that it was quite uncommon V, 2), Vienna, 1937, p. 3, assumes the camp of h Lei;ion V Alaudae ro recruit a soldicr of Rome in a lcgion ; only t c wns at Durostorum. For the late� h The fint garrison asty mohili:ation of Vitcllius' fo rccs against Vcspa· question, see also R. Syme in .. ,, sian's party could cxplain this. p. 2 72. Ul ll.T.\ llOHl-TI\T 8
VII Claudia and V Macedonica, it has taken part in Roman actions in Moesia and across the Danube, under the general command of Cornelius Fuscus 24• According to some informations of ancient authors, it appears that during these campaigns a legion was lost, and that even their commandant perished 25• Legion V Alaudae is no longer mentioned from the Flavian epoch on, and it has been stated that this legion was lost during the above,mentioned battles 26• The heavy losses suffered by the legion mentioned on the Adamclisi altar, to judge mainly according to the great number of fallen officers, enforced the opinion that the legion could not have survived the battles comemmorated by the altar and, as no other legion perished on the Lower Danube during the Flavio,Trajanic epoch, the connection between Legion V Alaudae which disappeared during Domi, tian's Dacian campaigns and the unknown legion on the altar seems quite plausi, ble 2;. The assumption is corroborated by the coincidence between the great number of the signiferi and iinaginiferi lost, mentioned on the altar, and the report by Dio Cassius of Trajan's armies having regained during the first Dacian war the eagles captured by the Dacians during Cornelius Fuscus' campaign of 87, on the northern Danute. The fragments discovered on the northern fac;:ade (Fig. 3), two of them part of the same slab, as well as a later discovered fragment during the diggings of the Tropaeum Stronghold, contain the names of soldiers of the auxiliary units ; on the first plate there are two columns : the left one is an enumeration of indica, tions regarding the origin of the soldiers mentioned on the adjoining plate, which is lost ; the right one comprises the beginning of a list of names. In the middle of this column, a name is engraved with bigger characters : Coh. II Bat. This is the only unity whose name was preserved on the altar. From the list of soldiers engraved below it, five fragments of names have only been preserved : Naso Cres[centis ?], Saurnus Co ... ; Martial . .. ; Mar . . . .. ; Via[tor ?] .... Roman names, solely composed of cognomen, patronymic and origin, the latter written on the adjoining plate. It is common knowledge that the main source for the history of the Batav, ian unities is Tacitus 28• He reports that they were one of the main elements of the auxiliary troops on the Lower Rhine. Nine cohorts and one ala formed of Batavians are recorded for the first half and the middle of the l5' century. In 69 they followed Vitellius in his Italian campaign. Because of the disagreements with the legions, the Batavian cohorts did not accompany Vitellius on his triumph, al march to Rome, being sent to Britain. On their way, they joined Civilis' rebellion and took par't in fightings în Germania Inferior during 69 and 70.
2J B. Filow, Die Legionen der Provinz Moesia 1925, p. 143 ; R. Syme, in JRS, XVIII, 1, 1928, 1906, 37 46 ; The first gan ison von Augustus bis Dioklezian, Leipzig, p. and p. Idem, ... , p. 269 and n. 2. 46 ; IX, 3, 1925, 143. XV I 1, 1928, 4 7 E. Ritterling, in «Germania», p. 27 R. Syme, in JRS, II , p. agrees VII, 10, 4: V 25 Orosius, Domitiairns tamen f>ra1,is with Legion Alaudae not having survived to thc sin1a elatus iactantia sub nomine su/>eratorum h'.lstium disaster of Cornelius Fuscus ; nonetheiess his opinion 14, at othcr Mocsian ele extinctis legionibus tri11m/>lu.11·it; Plinius, Pan, 1: is th legions also received soldiers LXVIII, 7:
After these events, they are no longer mentioned by Tacitus, and C. Cichorius assumed that they had been dissolved by Vespasian. Later epigraph�:: mentions of Cohortes Batavorum refer to new units, Co h. IX Batavorum beir_s the only of the old series 29• The Ilnd Batavian cohort mentioned on the altar, had been formed l::y Vespasian, according to Cichorius' opinion, an opinion shared also by \10' . \X ag, ner 30. ln 84, it was sent to Britain with Agricola ; in 85/86 it left for the Lower Danube to take part in the Dacian war. After the fights, the cohort \vas sent to Pannonia, where we find it attested in the military diploma of 98 31 • UntJ lately, its ulterior fate was unknown ; the recent discovery of a military diploma of 128 -138 disclosed that it was later on used in the Noricum armies 32• Other auxiliary unities recruited on the Rhine are also attested on the Lower Danube towards the end of the first century. Their presence is partly due to measures taken by Vespasian after the 69 -70 events in the Germanic pre, vinces, to change the utilization of Germanic auxiliary unities ; the troops recruite-d in the Germanic provinces, which during the Early Empire were kept on plac:, constituting one third of the Lower Rhine army, were sent partly to Britain, partly in the Danubian provinces. Troop,shifting from the Rhine to the Danube continued during the reign of Domitian, when the Moesian armies were reinforced with unities brought ovu from Britain and Germania 33• Taking into account all these facts, we formed the conviction that the presence of Cohors II Batavorum on the inscription of the Adamclisi altar is to be explained by events on the Danube during Domitian's reign, a conclusion moreover corroborated by elements found in the lists of legionaries. On the other hand, the participation of the Cohors II Batavorum in Trajan's Dacic:.n wars seems most unlikely. lts presence on the altar inscription merely shows that it took part in fightings somewhere in the region. That is why, provided the altar was built during Trajan's reign, one would expect it in that period among Moesian or Dacian troops, rather than in Pannonia or Noricum. Nor is the unity mentioned in military dip�omas or on other inscriptions among the unities of the first occupation army of the new Dacian province 34• Thus, from the point of view of the history of the unity's shifting, it seems more natural :o explain its presence on the Adamclisi altar inscription by the battles on tl:e Lower Danube during Domitian's reign. On the left column of the same plate there is a list showing the origin of 22 soldiers of an auxiliary unity ; the name of the latter was not preserved. The names Df the soldiers, which had been engraved on the adjoined slab were not preserved either.
2" C. Cichorius in RE, VI, col. 249-253 ; 31 CIL, XVI, no. 42. G. L. Cheesman, The auxilia of the Roman im/Jerial '12 CIL, XVI, no. 174. army, Zur Oxford, 1914, p. 72, n. 2; K. Kraft, 33 W. Wagner, of' · cit., pp. 225 -226 ; K. Kraft, Rekrutierung der Alen und Kohorten an Rhein und G. o/J. cit., p. 46 and no. 7; L. CheesnHn, o/J. cit., Donau, Bem, 195 1, pp. 40 -41. p. 73, n. 2. Die Dislolwtion der romischen 30 W. Wagner, 3• Cf. G. Forni, Contributo alia storia cldla D With the exception of a single soldier, native of Africa, the others come from Occidental provinces, 12 of them from the Lower Rhine : five Agrippinenses, three Tungri, two Batavi, one Nervius, one Canninefatius; 2 from Gallia, one Bellovacus (Gallia Belgica), and one Lexovius (Gallia Lugdunensis) ; two from Hispania, one Lusitanus and one Lucensius ; one from Britannia, one from Nori, cum, one from Raetia and one with the unintelligible indication Cas. It would be difficult to attempt the identification of the unity on the basis of these indications, as the recruiting area comprises several provinces. If we take into account that the following column is macle out of soldiers of Coh. II Batavorum, then it may be assumed that the unity under discussion was likewise a cohort, the first or the second 35• Since soldiers from the Lower Rhine were prevailing, it seems likely that this was a unity recruited in this area, possibly Coh. I Bata, vorum, attested on the Danube at the end of the first century 36• It can also be deduced from its composition that the unity was brought a short time before the fights in which it took part and which are commemorated by the altar. The soldiers - Germans, Gauls, Hispans - came with the unity, and not as individual recruits, since the unities shifted to the Danube completed their effective afterwards with local recruits 37• It has been proposed to identify this auxiliary unity with Ala I Tungrorum Frontoniana 38, which was garrisoned on the Lower Rhine up to 70 ; later on, we find it mentioned on diplomas of the years 80, 84, 85 and 114 of Pannonia Inferior, and in 157/8 it is attested in Dacia. K. Kraft, in the above,mentioned work, rejects this identification proposal without a very cogent grounding 39• No matter which cohort or ala this may be, its ethnical composition has a striking resemblance with the other unities mentioned on the altar and ana, lysed above. It comes from Germany as well, and its presence on the Danube must be connected with the events which determined during the Flavian dynasty the great transfer of forces from the Rhine to the Danubian front. In the right column, just above the name of Coh. II Batavorum there is a list of names, of which the cognomen and part of the patronymic are preserved : Barbarus L. .. : usual Roman name. Carantius Tic... : Carantius, derivated from the Gallic name Carantos, cf. A. Holder, Alt,celtischer Sprachschatz, I, 768 ; frequent in Gallia Narbonensis : CIL, XII, index ; also frequent in CIL, XIII, index. Tic[ino ?], old Celtic or Ligurian. Might also be patronymic as an adjective of Ticinum, a place founded by Ligurians in Cisalpine Gaul, cf. A. Holder, Op. cit., II, 1834 -1836. Crisi us V er. . . : Crisius, Roman,Etrurian, cf. Schulze, Zur Qeschichte latei, nischer Eigennamen, 1904, p. 274. Ver ... with many possible completions, Ver[ecundi ?f], Ver[us ?]. o/J . cit„ '15 Gr. Tocilescu, Fouilles ... , p. 72. :17 K. Kraft, p. 45. 36 In Pannonia in 98, CIL, XVI, 42 ; in Dacia 38 Scherling, in RE, VII A, 1357. 0/J. cit„ I Porolissensis in 159 and 164 by the diploma CIL, 39 p. 49, n. and pp. 162-163. XVI, 110 and 185. 11 TIIE �!11.ITAJlY Ft:\E\\AL ,\ l.TAJl OF ADA�ICJ.ISI Vasco Ani. .. Vasco, from Vascones, a population in S\V Gaul. Ani ... , a patronymic, possibly derived from a topo::1ym (Aniacus vicus ; vicus Anicius ; vicus Anisiacus, etc., in Gaul), cf. A. Holder, op. cit., I, 154. Musa : Musa, Celtic, but also Roman name ; cf. Schulze, index : Muss, ; frequent in southern Gaul, CIL, XII, index ; cf. A. Holder, op. cit., II, 661. T. Flavius Ca [rus ? ,stus ?] : Roman names. V eldes Texu... : cf. A. Holder, op. cit., III, 142, where it must be read Veldes Texu [andrius]. Minicius Mino : Minicius, Roman name, frequent in northern Italy, also in CIL, XIII, index. Mino . .. , a patronymic possibly derived from a toponym : Mino [dunum] ; cf. A. Holder, op. cit., II, 597. Donico Vira ...: Donico, Celtic name, cf. A. Holder, op. cit„ I, 1 304 ; cf. CIL, III, 2 746 (Celeia, Noricum) ; CIL, V, 165 (Cisalpine Gaul). Vira . . . , a patronymic, Viro [talus ? ,tus ?] cf. CIL, XIII, 5 99J ; 7 033 ; possibly derived from a toponym, Viro [dunum ?] Crescens Senn... : Crescens, usual Roman name. Senn... , a Celtic patronymic, frequent in Gaul (see ClL, XII and XIII, index), Noricum and Raetia (CIL, III, 5 055 ; 5 44 7; 5 792 ; 5 668 ; 11 597) ; cf. A. Holder, op. cit., II, 1479 -1 481. A great number of these names appear with many examples in Holder' 5 index of Celtic names. Their absence, or their rare, casual presence in the Rhine provinces, as well as their high frequency in southern Gaul, in northern Italy, in Raetia and Noricum show that the bearers of these names come from a diffe rent recruiting area, as compared to the soldiers whose origines are Lsted on the adjoining column, and that they consequently belonged to a different au.xi, liary unity. The ten names preserved prove that this unity had a homc·geneou.s western composition in which eastern elements had no share (the ·:ontrary being a feature typical of the Lower Danube armies) ; thus the conclus�on may be drawn that, like the other unities so far discussed, it came in the area shortly before the events commemorated by the altar. Thus, soldiers belonging to three auxiliary unities are listed on this plate, the only one preserved from the northern side. However, there is another northern side fragment discovered in 1901 in the « Marble Basilica » 40 (fi.g. 6) : AQVIL BITHI SEVT AMAND DAS 40 Gr. Tocilescu, mss., v. 5 129, f. 164 and v. 5 130, « Ivlateriale», II, p. 593, no. 67, with some differencu photograph 223 ; the inscription was published in in the reading. E\!ILL\ DOlU-'j'lL' 35G 1:2 It cornprises fi.ve narnes of persan, two of w hich are usual Roman narnes, Aquila and Arnandus, two Thracian narnes, Bithus and Seuto, widely used in Thracian inhabited areas and one Illyrian : Dasius. Judging by the genitival forrnof the narne Bithus, these narnes are either patronyrnics, or the cognomina of soldiers of an auxiliary unity. One can deduce frorn the fi.ve narnes preserved that this unity had been recruited in a Thracian-inhabited area. Which was this unity ? It is well-known that the unities recruited in Thracia were irnrnediately sent to far- off provinces, either in the East, or in the W est, while those later on rnet with on the Lower Danube had no longer the initial Thracian cornposition, since they rneanwhile cornpleted their effectives in the provinces in which they were shifted 41• There was one exception to this rule, narnely the cohorts of Bessi set up during the Flavian dynasty and garrisoned in Moesia : Coh. I. Flavia Bess orum, attested in Moesia Superior 42 and Coh. II Flavia Bessorum in the arrny of Moesia Inferior, recorded in the 105 diploma 43• Bricks with the cohort starnp prove its presence at the beginning of the 2nd century at Rucăr 44, later on at Cincşor, on the Olt, in Dacia 45 as part of the Dacian army 46• Hence, we propose Coh. II Flavia Bessorum for identifi.cation with the unity on the fragment under discussion, a Thrc:aian unity being thus also recorded on the Adamclisi altar. The analysis of the auxiliary unities attested by the altar engraving has there fore shown that these unities were brought to the Lower Danube either owing to the rneasures taken by Vespasian, or due to the re-organizing of Moesia and to Dornitian's Dacian wars, which led to great concentration of arm.ed forces in Moesia. The history of the displacernent of auxiliary unities on the Lower Danube, as well as their cornposition lead to the sarne conclusions. Their presence on the altar can by no rneans be explained by events during Trajan's reign. The troops frorn Moesia Inferior which carne during the Flavian n dynasty could no longer have the sarne cornposition at the beginning of the 2 d century. The wars of Dornitian left important gaps in their ranks, which had to be fi.Uedwith such heterogeneous elernents as those recorded in the second century in the unities garrisoned in Moesia 4i. The elernents so far analysed in the inscription of the altar show that it is connected with events on the Lower Danube during the reign of Dornitian. The Praetorians, Legion V Alaudae and the auxiliary unities on the northern side plate fought against the Dacians in the ranks of the arm.ies led by Cornelius Fuscus in 86 -87, fi.rst in Moesia, then, pursuing thern, north of the Danube. The problem of whether the Prefect heading the list of Praetorians and legionaries is or is not Cornelius Fuscus has puzzled all the scientists which studied the altar and was considered the « key» problem of its dating. Along with teritoriul Cercetări arheologice fă cute /J e Limes 41 P. Nicorescu, Monumente nouă din 4' O. Tudor, oraşului Torni, in BCMI, XXXIV, 1920, pp. 11-28; Transalutanus, in. SCIV, VI, 1-2, 1955, pp. 92 -93 ; cf. W. Wagner, op. cit„ pp. 69-75 and 187-195 ; Idem, Oltenia Romană 2, 1958, p. 88 an.d SE, n.o. 275. in p. 188 : « . . . sind thrakische Kohorten in der 45 C. Daicoviciu, în AISC, II, 1936, p. 253. niedermoesischen Provînz nîcht bekannt ». 46 CIL, XVI, no. 75. 42 W. Wagner, op. cit„ p. 96. 47 The composîtion. of auxîliary unîties în. Moesia 43 CIL, XVI, no. 50 ; cf. C. Cichorîus, în. RE, în. the Flavio-Trajan.ic epoch in. K. Kraft, o/>. cit„ IV, col. 254 ; W. Wagner, op. cit„ p. 97. the tables on pages 64 an.d 66. Tlll·: "11.IT.\HY lT :\EHAL ALTAH OF _\ IL\:\ICLI SI 3.'iî 13 a few other exceptions, this has been the only issue thoroughly studied, debated and disputed from the discovery to our days 48• Since his name was written immediately below the name of the Emperor and the dedication, the officer was reckoned to be the general commandant of the troops mentioned on the altar. Only a part of his domus, the place of residence and part of the title have been preserved (Fig. 1/4, 5, 6 and Fig. 2) : C]OL. [PO]MP. DOMICIL. NEAPOL. ITALIAE. PRA 49. In Die rămischen Denkmăler in der Dobrudscha, which is the standard, work in the field, C. Cichorius stresses the peculiar fact - seldom met with by the epigraphists - of the residence being mentioned along with the domus in the name of a military man ; from this circumstance, C. Cichorius assumed the offi, cer to be a citizen of Pompeii, who after the 79 catastrophy was attributed tem, porarily to another town, in our case to neighbouring Neapolis. The mention, ing of Pompeii as the domus of its natives is limited to some 20 -30 years after 79, this being further evidence in favour of the Flavio,Trajanic epoch as date of the events connected with the erection of the Adamclisi altar. The fact that the name of the officer followed immediately after the dedication, as well as the great number of troops which took part in the battles, led Cichorius to the assumption that the Prefect in the general command was not simply Praefectus Alae or Praefectus Castrorum, but a Prefect of the Praetorian Guard. The only Prefect of the Praetorium fallen during the Dacian wars of the period is Cornelius Fuscus, the Prefect of Domitian's Guard. C. Cichorius also tried to prove that Cornelius Fuscus' disaster occurred in southern Dobrudja. The · Cichorius hypothesis grounded on a thorough analysis of the altar and of the inscription was the starting,point for many discussions and contro, versies during several decades. In spite of the objections set forth, - some of them purely formal, others, on the contrary, concerning the core of the problem - his hypothesis as to the essence of the issue (the dating of the altar), had to be accepted by a great part of the research,workers, and even by some of its opponents. One of the objections regards the discrepancy between the Pompeian origin of the Prefect on the altar and evidence available from literary sources on Cornelim Fuscus' career. There are two reasons why Pompeii could not have been Corne, lius Fuscus' domus : '8 C. Cichorius, Die rămischen Denkmiiler in cler Histoire ancienne de la Dobroudja, Bucharest, 1938. Dobrudscha, p. 19- 199; A. v. Domaszewski, Die pp. 150-151; ]. Colin, Le prefet du pretoire Corneliu; Heimat des Cornelius Fuscus, în « Rheinisches Museum Fuscus: un enfa nt de Pompei, in « Latomus », XV fur Philologie » LX, 1905, pp. 158-159; R. Paribeni, 1956, p. 57-82. Optimus PrincejJS, Saggio sulla storia e sui tempi '0 Thus the stone. Gr. Tocilescu firstread [NICO J de!!' imperatore Traiano, pp. 325 -329; B. W. Hender POL. PONT. DOMICIL. NEAPOL. ITALIAE. PRA„ son, Pive Roman emperors, Cambridge, 192 7, pp. l 60 cf. Fouilles . . . , p. 70 and CIL, III, 14 214; latec sqq. and 306-307 ; Weynand, in RE, VI, col. 2 563 ; on with C. Cichorius, he proposed the reading C. Patsch, op. cit„ p. l l sqq. ; R. Syme, The colony CjOL. [PO] MP. cf. C. Cichorius, Die romischen. of Cornelius Fuscus : an episode in the Bellum N eronis, Denkmiiler ..., p. 25. I verified this reading with in AJPH, LVIII, I, 1937, pp. 7-18; R. Vulpe, R. Vulpe and I. I. Russu. l>OHliTIU E\111.L\ 1) According to Tacitus (Hist„ II, 86), Cornelius Fuscus took part in the fights against Nero, as «dux coloniae suae», together with Galba. His intervention is recorded as a decisive moment, which was rewarded by the procuratura in Illyricum, after Galba was acclaimed as emperor. However, Pompeii could not have played such an important role in the politics of that time. That is why Fuscus' «colony» was looked for in southern Gaul 50, in Spain and in northern Italy 51• -BL S · CF CARBAR Bl\R'� TRAî A NTIVS Tl C FTVN CR151 V 5 ·VER L·NOR VAS C OANI C'AN.Af · :111\Tff SSILNI C VI·S GA LfXOV JvVS AGR1 VELDES· TEXV N-CAS M!N!CIVS · M1�J AGRlLVSIT DONJC O VlRO NERV CRESCENS ·SENN C0 IT·TI BAT TTVNG NA50 · CRE/ TWC SNR NVS A L�:iCC1'l . FACR MANi A RTI FAGR R;·:)i:'.i/ BATN VI f;.···;�·;IJ- Fig. 3 a and b. - lnscription on the north side of the altar (photograph and drawing). 2) Cornelius Fuscus was the son of a Senator, whereas Pompeii is known to have given Rome no Senator 52• H. Dessau considers the domus as rarely mentioned with Cavaliers a:J.d does not accept the possibility of its indication in the case of a Prefect of the Guard53. However, there are some results of recent investigations in Pompeii, as well as new interpretations of inscriptions known ever since the end of the last century, which seem to overcome the difficulties raised by the adoption of Corne� lius Fuscus' Pompeian origin. Starting from the premise that in electoral wall inscriptions, the person recommending the election is the owner of the house on which the inscription 5 2 0 A. v. Dornaszewski, Die Heimat des Cornelius 5 R. Syrne, The colony of Fuscus. Fuscus, p. 159. 53 H. Dessau, Die Herkunft der Offizie re, in 6 1 R. Syrne, The colony of Fuscus, pp. 7-18; « Hermes », XL V, p. 5 n. 7 and notes on LS, cf. A. Passerini, op. cit., p. 289. no. 9 107. Fig. 4 a and b. - Fragment of the inscription of the altar'ş front side. 1 li was macle, J. Colin pointed out that Fuscus in CIL, IV, 746 and 747 was the owner of the house, which, according to other findings, belonged to a family Cornelia, and proposed the identification of this Cornelius Fuscus with the Prefect of Domi, tian's Guard, fallen in Dacia in 87 and mentioned on the Adamclisi altar 54• Even if the identification of the Pompeii Cornelius Fuscus, with Cornelius, the Prefect of the Praetorian Guard, as proposed by J. Colin, cannot as yet be accepted unreservedly, the recording of a Cornelius Fuscus at Pompeii would be the first information up to now as to the origin of Domitian's Guard Prefect - an evidence disturbing by its coincidence with the Adamclisi altar inscription and with Cichorius' assumption. The localization of the fights and of the disaster of Cornelius Fuscus' army has given rise to many disputes. Literary sources point to Fuscus and his armies as having perished in Dacia, not in southern Dobrudja where the altar was built 55• Accordingly, some modern historians starting from the above, mentioned formal objections and grounded upon partly out,dated information on the general historic conditions on the Lower Danube at the end of the first and at the beginning of the 2nd century, rejected Cichorius' assumption, linking the altar to the Tropaeum and to the town erected by Trajan after the victory over the Dacians 56• Other scientists sought for a link between the altar and the defeat of Oppius Sabinus in 85 -86 57• The others, forming a majority, regarded the battles fought by Cornelius Fuscus against the Dacians as an action carried on along the Lower Danube frontier, in order to re,establish law and order in the severely ravaged Moesian province and to pursue the Dacians in their own country, where the disaster occurred. During these actions both north and south of the Danube, battles took place in the Dobrudja also, the memory of which was preserved in Dobrudja toponymies - e.g. Vallis Domitiana 58• The Adamclisi altar therefore appears to be a cenotaph dedicated to the soldiers fallen in the battles led by Cornelius Fuscus during Domitian's Dacian wars. * Thus the Adamclisi altar and the Tropaeum appear to have been built at different epochs. All the evidence available pleads in favour of this : the materials used in building the altar and the trophy are dissimilar. A conglomerate of very coarse,grained sea,shell limestone, which to the author seemed homogeneous, was used in building the altar ; this material was not at all used by the architect of the triumphal monument 59• Moreover, Furtwangler remarked a fundamental Le />re.fee d LPretoire Corneli11s Fitsclls ... , 5 1 J. Colin, 1 56 For the bibliography in this question see also E 1956, 195 ; p. 57 -87; cf. Ann p. p. cf. FA, XI, B. W. Henderson, oj>. cit„ p. 306 ; also the recent 1956, p. 277, no. 4 464. study of Ch. Picard, Les trophees romains, Paris, 55 Juvenal, Sat„ IV, 111 sqq. : Et 60 A. Furtwangler, op. cit., pp. 4 72 -47 3. pilastcr is preservcd now at the MNA. 61 Of the architectonic fragments mentioned by 62 Cf. C. Patsch, ojJ. cit„ pp. 19-20. « Gr. Tocilescu in his studies of the Mausoleum » •a Gr. Tocilescu in al! his studies regarding thc and in his reports of the diggings only the corner problem of the Tropaeum Traiani, especially Fouilles . . „ E �I I L L\ l>U ll l "Tlli 18 Younger about the capture of Callidromus, a slave to Moesia Inferior's governor, by a Roxolan chieftain, Susagus 64, as well as by reports in Ammianus Marcellinus and Jordanes about Trajan's foundation of the town Nicopolis ad Istrum in memory of the victory over the Dacians 65• The discovery of the altar and of the cenotaph with the impressive list of fallen soldiers was regarded as a momentuous corroboration of the assumption that a decisive phase of Trajan's Dacian wars took place in the Dobrudja. However, in this paper we endeavoured to establish that the altar is not a cenotaph for the 101 -106 Dacian wars heroes. Besides the analysed elements, there is a very correct remark of Cichorius', that the number of fallen warriors mentioned on the altar is much too srnall for all the losses in the Dacian wars and much too great for a local battle 66• No battle of such proportions took place on the right bank of the Danube during Trajan's Dacian wars - as pointed out by Fig. 7. - Fragm�nt C. Cichorius, E. Ritterling, C. Patsch and other specialists of thc dcdie<\tion on thc front side in the field. of the altar. There is no source which could permit of such an in, ference, on the contrary, all sources agree in that the main objective of Trajan's armies was Transylvania. Decisive cornbats during Trajan's reign for the domination of the Lower Danube seern unlikely, either. Ever since Augustus, much had been clone for the security on the left bank of the Lower Danube ; this is confirmed by the sudden disappearence of Getian settlements in the Danubian plain at the beginning of the first century 67• Roman domination north of the Danube was secured by the inclusion of Oltenia, \V allachia and southern Moldavia in the province of Moesia Inferior, as a result of Dornitian'swars. The dating of the Hunt papyrus 68 with the year 99 (a dating which according to Radu Vulpe agrees with archaeologic investigation results in Getian settlements and Roman camps of the hill area in \V allachia and southern Moldavia 69) , throws new light on the historic relations on the Lower Danube about the end of the first century and permits a better understanding of Domitian's policy in that part of the Empire's frontier : Corne, lius Fuscus' campaign in Moesia in 86, followed by the re,organizing of Moesia through the institution of Moesia Superior and of Moesia Inferior and by the expedition across the Danube of 87, then the second Dacian campaign, under p. 73 sqq. ; V. Pârvan, Getica, O /notoistorie a Daciei, imJ>erator »; Jordanes, Qet., XVIII, 101 : « . ..Nic opo Bucharest, 1926, p. 122 sqq ; R. Vulpe, op. cit., p. 138 lim ... , quam devictis Sarmatis Traianus et fabricavit ap/1ellavit Victoriae civitatem and fo llowing ; D. Tudor, Istoria sclavajului în Dacia et J). Romanâ, Bucharest, 1957, pp. 39-41 ; htoria Rominiei, 66 C. Cichorius, Die rămischen Denkmăler ... , voi. I, Bucharest, 1960, p. 306. p. 28. " 1 Plinius Caccilius Sccundus, Epistolae, 74 ; cf. 67 R. Vulpe, Muntenia şi Moldova de jos în D. Tudor, Studii şi articol e de istorie, Bucharest, timpul lui Traian, in Studii clasice, II, 1960, p. 351. 68 1956, p. 19-· 30 ; Idem, Istoria sclavajului în Dacia, R. O. Fink, Hunt's pridianum: British Museum p. 61 sqq. Pap-yrus, 2 851, in JRS, XLVIII, 1958, pp. 102-116. 65 Ammianus Marcellinus, XXXI 5, 16: « Nico/>olis, Gn Ibidem, pp. 351-353. the command of Tettius Julianus in 88, resulted in the annexation to Moesia Inferior of Oltenia, Wallachia and southern Moldavia. This interpretation is also in agreement with such sources as tv1artial's epigrams, where the northern bank of the Danube is described as Roman i o . The defence of these regions was assigned to the armies of Moesia Inferior up to 119, while the army of the new Dacian province had to protect only an area west of the line Drobeta, Sarmisegetuza, and north of the Carpathians and of the upper Olt 71, i.e. the area which according to present information was · going to form Dacia Superior. This might be roughly construed as a maintaining by Trajan of the areas south of the Carpathians in the situation inherited from Domitian. All this shows once more that the outcome of Trajan's Dacian wars was decided in Transylvania, not south of the Danube, and the Adamclisi trophy erection cannot be explained solely by Trajan's corn, bats on the Lower Danube. In chosing a southern Dobrudja site for the erection of the triumphal monu, ment, Trajan was influenced by older traditions and realities, which are linked with Domitian's wars on the Lower Danube. The funerary military altar dedicated by Domi, tian to the soldiers fallen during Cornelius Fuscus' campaigns both north and south of the Danube, was Fig. 8. - Fragment of the front raised on the site of important battles, which are not side inscription, containing a lisr to be taken unconditionally as a « disaster » in an of officers of a legion. « unhappy place», as suggested by C. Patsch 72 ; certain religious and political practices were linked to it - and this led Trajan to choose Adamclisi as the most suitable place for the erection of the trophy dedicated to Mars Ultor. EMILIA DORUŢIU