ŚWIAToWIT • XI (LII) /A • 201 3 RADoSłAW KARASIEWICz -S zCzyPIoRSKI THE ROMAN ARMy AND THE WALLS Of CHERSONESOS fortifications of Chersonesos In 1999, Antonova maintained that the extension of the from the foundation of the town town’s fortifications should be dated to 230–220 BC, that to the turn of the eras is, to the time of rebuilding and strengthening of defensive walls of Kerkinitis and Kalos Limen in the face of the Defensive walls, analogously to a cemetery, are ex- Scythian threat. 2 Recent papers on the subject propose a date tremely important features accompanying an ancient town. between the mid-3 rd and the end of the 3 rd c. BC ( zUBAR ’, In the case of Chersonesos, the earliest fortifications should ANToNovA 2001: 49–50). have originated not later than the first regular plots and the Regardless of doubts concerning the chronology network of streets in the north-eastern part of the town. of subsequent stages of construction and extension of the A regular spatial organization of the town is dated to the walls of Chersonesos, archaeological investigations confirm 2nd quarter of the 4 th c. BC. A later extension of the town that after the construction of the citadel subsequent defen - to the east must have inevitably been related to a demoli - sive walls were built along the same line for several centuries. tion of at least part of original fortifications, which found The only significant change in the all Roman period themselves within the area which was to be built-up. This was the construction of an external wall ( proteichisma extension, which was the largest one in the history of – προτείχισμα ) at the beginning of our era. A precise Chersonesos, in all probability took place in the 4 th quarter chronology and the original extent of this additional line of of the 4 th c. BC ( BUJSKIh , z oLoTARëv 2001: 113). The fortifications still provoke doubts (see p. 92 –93 and the last significant change of the extent of the town before the Appendix). Roman Period is related to the construction of the citadel. Research on the town’s walls has lasted since the Thanks to it, the south-eastern part of the fortifications was beginning of systematic archaeological excavations, that is, strengthened. The mentioned part of the walls protected since the 1880s. A significant input into the discovery of the so-called “port quarter,” which was situated near the the fortifications was brought by K. Koscûško-valûžinič. mouth of quarantine Ravine (Karantinnaâ Balka) reaching he was the first director of the local “antiquities depot” in the bay of the same name (quarantine Bay – Karantinnaâ Chersonesos and worked upon the order of the Imperial Buhta). The location of this section of Chersonesean de- Archaeological Commission. Results of research and inciden- fences in a natural depression area facilitated access for po- tal discoveries which were made on the town’s walls at the tential aggressors ( BERT ’E-D ELAGARD ” 1907: 124–125). As turn of the 19 th and 20 th c. were systemised by A. Berthier the citadel was built, this problem was solved. Furthermore, de Lagarde, an engineer serving in the Russian army. he a space came into existence which was necessary to accom - proposed a system of numeration of curtains and turrets modate the garrison called into being at that time (IoSPE I² which is still in use in modern research and documentation 418; cf. zUBAR ’, A NToNovA 2001: 50). (BERT ’E-D ELAGARD ” 1907). It is also used for the needs of The chronology of the extension of the town’s ter - this paper ( fig. 1 ). ritory is based on finds of tombstones from the 4 th –3 rd c. BC, It should also be mentioned that among numerous which were secondarily used within the so-called core of archaeologists and architects who contributed to broad- Turret XvII ( STRžELECKIJ 1969: 11–17; ANToNovA ening of our knowledge base on the fortifications of 1994: 31; 1996: 119). 1 A precise date of construction of the Chersonesos, a special attention must be paid to the works citadel is unknown. hitherto proposals of local archaeol- of K. Grinevič. he gathered and put in order results of ogists oscillate between the mid-3 rd c. BC ( ANToNovA some dozen years of research on the town’s walls ( GRINEvIč 1997: 7) and the early 2 nd c. BC ( STRžELECKIJ 1969: 17). 1926; 1927; 1959). 1 In her publication from 1994, Antonova gives information on probability much later. In the latter case, it may perhaps be a type - hellenistic tombstones in other parts of the citadel’s fortifications setting error and it probably concerns Turret XvII’. This turret as well, namely in Turrets XvI and XvIII and in Curtains 19–21. seems to have been constructed together with the earliest phase In my opinion, this isolated piece of information raises numerous of Curtain 20, that is at the time of the construction of the citadel. doubts, especially concerning the mentioned turrets. one of these (XvI) is of earlier origin, while the other (XvIII) is in all 2 I.A. Antonova, personal communication, July 1999. 87 RADoSłAW KARASIEWICz -S zCzyPIoRSKI The Romans in the town and the a list of stamps on roofing tiles and physicochemical ana- construction of the defensive walls lyses of building pottery from places of deployment of Roman garrisons in Crimea ( SARNoWSKI , S AvELJA 2000; It is not known for sure which events initiated the SARNoWSKI 2005). process of changes and became the actual beginning of the We know that at least at a few sites, such as: Roman Period in Chersonesos. It does not seem probable Balaklava-Kadykovka, Charax in Cape Ay-Todor, Kazatskaya that the introduction of the new count of time by the town hill, Kavkaz Bair and perhaps at Tschatyrdag near Alushta, in 24 BC could be considered as such a caesura. We do not Roman detachments constructed fortifications on the places know to what event this change of the local era was related. which were previously completely not inhabited or which The appearance of the Roman troops in the region were perhaps populated but had no fortifications (Balaklava?) was no question a turning point in contacts with imperium (KARASIEWICz -S zCzyPIoRSKI 2011; 2012; KARASIEWICz - romanum . For Chesonesos, it was perhaps the Roman -S zCzyPIoRSKI , S AvELâ 2012; 2013; NovIčENKov , military intervention on the Bosporus in AD 45–49 ( TAC . NovIčENKovA 2002; SARNoWSKI , S AvELJA , K ARASIEWICz - ann . 12. 17–21; cf. zUBAR ’ 1998: 32–33). The actual be- -S zCzyPIoRSKI 2002; 2009). Forts and watch towers were ginning of changes may have also been marked by a short- used for a short period of time, and after they had been -term presence of the Moesian army corps in Chersonesos abandoned, the local population did not settle there at all, and its vicinity. The corps is thought to be related to the or settled there much later. Such a peculiarity of the Roman person of Tiberius Plautius Silvanus (CIL XIv 3608 = ILS presence and building activity facilitates investigations 986). A military intervention may have taken place in AD and makes it easier to relate discovered fortifications to the 62 or slightly thereafter. Not only the chronology, but even Romans. the very fact of the presence of the Roman troops in that It is much more difficult to prove a direct partici - period is a matter of debate among scientists ( zUBAR ’ 1988: pation of the Roman army in the construction and mod- 22; 1994: 26–29; 1998: 43; 2003: 14; contra SARNoWSKI ernisation of the fortifications of Chersonesos in the first 2006a; 2006b; 2006c). It seems that significant arguments centuries of our era. Building inscriptions should be a use - for the appearance of the first Roman detachments in ful source in clarifying such doubts. however, we know Chersonesos at that time are provided by a new assessment only one Latin inscription belonging to this category from of a number of finds – parts of military gear and horse Chersonesos. It mentions the construction of a schola prin - harness. It points out that a considerable part of the as- cipalium from means of the centurion who commanded the semblage forms a chronologically compact horizon. It is garrison ( vINoGRADov , z UBAR ’, A NToNovA 1999). This perhaps a trace of a short-term presence (just about the inscription is dated to AD 250 and it was found in the ter - mid-1 st c. AD) of a Roman corps, which was mainly com- ritory of the citadel. We know two fragments of Greek posed of cavalry ( GAWRońSKI , K ARASIEWICz -S zCzyPIoRSKI , inscriptions from other part of Chersonesos. These refer MoDzELEWSKI 2014). to construction or repair of defensive walls. one fragment Later presence of the Roman garrison in Chersonesos informs us about a turret, although we do not know who does not raise so many doubts. In all probability, it was also and from what financial means had it erected or repaired short-term in its nature. During the rule of Trajan (or (IoSPE I 2 439). Another fragment of an inscription says Antoninus Pius), a vexillatio of the 5 th Macedonian Legion perhaps about a construction of a wall. It was found some - appeared in the citadel and possibly in the rural territory where near the southern part of the fortifications and it near the town ( ANToNovA , K oSTRoMIčëv 2000: 217; may have come from one of the neighbouring curtains, e.g., SARNoWSKI 2005). The presence of Roman soldiers around Curtain 13 ( SoLoMoNIK 1973: no. 134). on the other hand, the town in this time isn’t sure ( SARNovSKIJ , K ovALEvSKAâ three different fragments of epigraphical texts inform us that 2004).