179 the Exploitation and Reuse of the Roman Ruins
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Hamat - The Exploitation And Reuse Of The Roman...(179-203) Archaeology and Science 16 (2020) ANA CRISTINA HAMAT Received: August 01st 2020 Museum of the Highland Banat Accepted: December 10th 2020 Reșița, Romania Original research article E-mail: [email protected] 904:725.92”652”(498) COBISS.SR-ID 29141513 https://doi.org/10.18485/arhe_apn.2020.16.11 THE EXPLOITATION AND REUSE OF THE ROMAN RUINS FROM TIBISCUM, STARTING FROM THE MEDIEVAL TO THE MODERN AGE ABSTRACT This article wishes to discuss the reuse of monuments, construction materials and of other objects from the Roman period discovered at Tibiscum, starting with the Medieval Age and until the Modern Age. The locations with such discoveries are located near the Roman site, at Jupa, Căvăran- Ct. Da- icoviciu, Caransebeș, Turnu Ruieni and possibly at Cărbunari- Țigănești and Obreja. In general, the materials that were reused included construction materials, stone, brick and especially fragmentary or complete monuments; small, precious objects such as ancient gems were also reused, being mount- ed in medieval rings. The vast majority of such spoils was reused in building or rebuilding medieval churches, the medieval keep from Turnu Ruieni or the medieval fortress at Caransebeș. The spoliation of Tibiscum begins for certain from the 14th century and continues in the next one, based on the policy of the Hungarian royalty of building new places of worship and repairing the royal fortresses given the danger represented by the Turkish expansion. In the Modern Age, the Roman monuments have been used to embellish the houses of the inhabi- tants from Caransebeș or the manor from Jupa, belonging to the Capra family of nobles. Fortunately, located nowadays in the archaeological reservation from Jupa, Tibiscum is most carefully unearthed and researched. Still, many of the objects unearthed at Tibiscum in the period before the reservation was created remain lost to this day, while many of the monuments plundered from the Roman centre and encased in the walls of modern buildings, no longer exist. KEYWORDS: DACIA, TIBISCUM, ROMAN SPOLIA, MEDIEVAL AGE, MODERN AGE, MONUMENTS, jeWeLLerY. In loving memory of professor Doina Benea near the city of Caransebeș. Our article discusses the plundering of the ruins The Roman centre from Tibiscum represents of Roman Tibiscum and their reuse in the building an important point on the map of Roman Dacia, of several medieval or modern monuments located being comprised of the Roman fort and city, both in its close proximity, especially the building of located at the junction of the imperial roads com- medieval Caransebeș, as well as the reuse of the ing from Dierna and Lederata, passed through objects discovered in the Roman centre, during the Tibiscum and led towards the north of the prov- Medieval and Modern ages. With regards to the ince. The Roman ruins are currently located on plundering and the reuse of the ruins of Tibiscum, the territory of Jupa village – where the Tibiscum we mention that this topic has been only partially archaeological reservation protects them – as well discussed until now, in studies regarding Roman as on the territory of Iaz, both villages are located monuments (Crînguș 2001: 91-95; Balaci Crînguș 179 Archaeology and Science 16 (2020) Hamat - The Exploitation And Reuse Of The Roman...(179-203) 2013: 367-371), ancient gems and cameos discov- (Nemeti and Nemeti 2011: 437), Potaissa- Turda ered in medieval contexts (Hamat: 2016, 69-76; (Nemeti and Nemeti 2011: 437; Matei 2016: 348), Hamat: 2017, 417- 437), medieval monuments Cluj- Napoca (Antal and Pupeză 2012: 92-93), Po- (Bona: 1993; Săcară: 2002, 189-192) and even in rolissum- Zalău (Deac 2018; Deac and Zăgreanu the context of studies dedicated to archaeologic 2011: 167), roman fort from Certinae – Romita historiography (Hamat: 2017a, 2015- 2018). Un- (Nemeti and Nemeti 2011: 437; Piso and Deac fortunately, the presence of information in differ- 2019: 253-256) and Brâncovenești (Protase 2008: ent fields has prevented the creation of a complete 250), roman settlement from Jebucu (Ardevan and picture for the level of plundering endured by the Zăgreanu 2012: 73-84), roman villa from Chinte- Roman city. In general, when discussing the Ro- ni (Deac and Zăgreanu 2011: 165- 167), the the manian historiography, both sides involved, the settlement from Miercurea Sibiului- La Mălăieș- ancient and the medieval one, have tried to eval- ti, Apoldu de Jos, the statio from Miercurea Sib- uate this type of intervention, especially for what iului- Cunța (Urduzia and Pinter 2016: 235- 237) is entitled by the reuse of Roman monuments and and others. From this examples we can observe a building materials or even for the irreversible de- similar situation to what is happening also in the struction of the ancient monuments – detected by rest of Europe (Jacks 2008; Kinney 2013; Špehar analysing the medieval mortar, or in the archae- 2019). Included in this list, we consider that Tibis- ological marks of the medieval or modern lime cum also deserves its own discussion concerning whorkshops situated in the ancient sites (Rusu the areas with Roman discoveries reused in medi- 2008: 24- 37). The chemical analyses have high- eval and modern contexts. lighted the fact that the medieval mortar contained crushed Roman age tegular materials. Currently, we have bibliographic references for the reuse of INTRODUCTION ancient monuments from Dacia by overlapping or by looting theirs remains from Romula/ Mal- The Roman city Tibiscum, raised to the rank of va- Reșca (Tătulea: 1994, 9), the termal edifice of municipium by Septimius Severus, is an important Legio VII Cl. from Cioroul Nou (Bondoc: 2015, military and especially economic centre, located 29, 33, 45, 59, 75), roman fort from Slăveni (Tu- on the south- western border of Roman Dacia (Be- dor, Popilian, Gudea, and Bondoc 2011: 16-17, 26, nea 2013: 158), at the crossroad of imperial roads 29), Drobeta- Drobeta Turnu Severin (Matei 2016: coming from the southern border of the province, 348), Ad Mediam- Băile Herculane (Steube 2003: towards its north. Although the city’s ruins have 40-44), Berzobis- Berzovia (Țeicu 1996: 38; Me- attracted the attention of people from the Middle deleț and Flutur 2002; Hamat 2018: 26), Ulpia Ages (Hamat 2017a: 206), the systematic archae- Traiana Sarmizegetusa- Sarmizegetusa (Marinoiu ologic research has been conducted in the area 2000; Rusu 2008: 24- 37; Nemeti and Nemeti only from the second decade of the past century 2011: 436; Băeștean and Albulescu 2012: 12-18; and until today, is one of the Roman sites with Mărgineanu Cârstoiu 2013), Micia- Vețel (Tutilă continuity in terms of research and publication 2009; Nemeti and Nemeti 2011: 436- 437; Tutilă of the discoveries (Benea and Bona 1994; Ardeț and Barbu 2019: 65-71), Aquae- Călan, Germis- and Ardeț 2004; Ardeț 2009; Benea 2011; Benea ara- Geoagiu (Nemeti and Nemeti 2011: 436- 2018) and in the last years it has benefitted from 437), Apulum- Alba Iulia (Nemeti and Nemeti research conducted with the help of the newest 2011: 437; Izdrăilă and Florescu 2012; Ota and methods (Pl. I/2). Florescu 2016: 205- 234; Matei 2016: 348), Am- The ruins from Tibiscum are truly known pelum- Zlatna, Alburnus Maior- Roșia Montană however starting from the Modern Age. Numer- 180 Hamat - The Exploitation And Reuse Of The Roman...(179-203) Archaeology and Science 16 (2020) ous scholars or travellers through these lands in Unfortunately, until 1923-1924 when G.G. between the 16th and 19th century, have noticed in Mateescu conducts the first systematic, important, the courtyards of the inhabitants from Jupa and research in the Roman site, the ruins underwent Caransebeș, but also on the fields located between a systematic destruction, a result of search for the borders of Jupa, Ciuta and Iaz villages, Roman valuables or just of the plundering of stone, brick remains. The first written information about Tibis- or architectural elements. Such destructions are cum can be found in a manuscript written by Ioan/ visible for the period of the Middle Ages through Ianos/ Ioannes Mezertius or Mezerzius, canon at the discoveries of architectural spoils or ancient Alba Iulia and afterwards archdeacon at the Cluj- objects in medieval contexts, while for the lat- Mânăștur Chapter. His notes, from the beginning er period we even have documents detailing the of the 16th century, contain also references to sev- plundering of the site from Jupa – this action is eral Roman inscriptions discovered at Caranse- favoured by the fact that until the beginning of the beș, probably originating from Tibiscum (Opriș 20th century the ruins were still visible above the 1994; Benea and Bona 1994: 9; Rusu and Rusu- ground (Hamat 2017a: 208). Bolindeț 2007: 94- 96). The interest for these ru- ins is also present in the work of Luigi Fernando Marsigli, an officer in the Austrian army and also Jupa village and Capra manor eminent scholar (Morărescu and Codrea 2011: 89). He works for the Habsburg Empire and pub- The first area with discoveries plundered from lishes a book about Banat at the beggining of the Tibiscum is the village Jupa, where the archaeo- 18th century, in it mentioning for the first time the logic reservation is located. Jupa is mentioned by location of the ruins of Tibiscum (Marsigli 1726: documents from 1440 (Teicu 1998: 341-342) and 67). In the second half of the 19th century, Tibis- the medieval and modern village is located much cum is visited by F. Milleker who describes the further to the west from the contemporary village, Roman habitation from both sides of Timiș river at least until the 18th century, as proven by the (Milleker 1899: 93-94). Ortvay Tivadar (Marsigli Austrian cadastral maps1. The contemporary vil- 1726: 67; Milleker 1899: 93-97) also located the lage is located at a distance of 6 kilometres, in a Roman city in the area of the Jupa, Iaz and Obreja straight line, from Caransebeș.