BAR S2501 2013

The Topography and the

Landscape of Roman Dacia

FODOREAN
Florin Fodorean

THE TOPOGRAPHY AND THE LANDSCAPE OF ROMAN DACIA

B BAR International Series 2501

A
R 2013
 The Topography and the
Landscape of Roman Dacia

Florin Fodorean

BAR International Series 2501

2013
ISBN 9781407311173 paperback
ISBN 9781407340876 e-format
DOI https://doi.org/10.30861/9781407311173
A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library

BAR
PUBLISHING
This book is dedicated to my son Dan Mihai,
to my wife Angela,
to my parents Viorica and Gheorghe
and to my brother Ioan
 Contents

List of figures ............................................................................................................................................. iii

Preface. Professor Mihai Bărbulescu ........................................................................................................ vi
Preface. Professor Kai Brodersen ............................................................................................................. vii
Introduction ............................................................................................................................................... 1
Acknowledgments...................................................................................................................................... 1

CHAPTER 1. THE GEOGRAPHICAL PERCEPTION AND THE ROADS OF

THE ROMAN EMPIRE AND DACIA. A GENERAL OVERVIEW

1. 1. The study of roads. A short state of research .................................................................................... 2

1. 2. The geographical perception of space during Roman times.............................................................. 5
1. 3. The geographical knowledge about Dacia before the roman conquest ............................................ 8
1. 4. The conquest of Dacia. Benefits. Disadvantages.............................................................................. 13
1. 5. The Roman military campaigns in Dacia and the construction of the first roads ............................ 15

CHAPTER 2. ANCIENT SOURCES CONCERNING THE ROADS OF ROMAN DACIA.

THE MAIN ARTERIES NORTH OF THE DANUBE

2. 1. The Peutinger map. General issues .................................................................................................. 22

2. 2. Defining ‘map’, ‘geography’ and ‘itineraria’. Roman literary sources ............................................. 29
2. 3. Dacia. The study of roads and the ancient sources. State of research ............................................ 30
2. 4. The milestones .................................................................................................................................33
2. 4. 1. Aiton (Cluj County) ......................................................................................................... 34
2. 4. 2. Mera (Cluj County) ......................................................................................................... 34
2. 4. 3. Almaşu (Sălaj County) .................................................................................................... 34
2. 4. 4. Veţel ‐ Micia (Hunedoara County).................................................................................. 35
2. 4. 5. Lăpuşnicel (Caraş‐Severin County) ................................................................................. 35
2. 4. 6. Băbiciu de Sus (Olt County) .................................................................................................. 36
2. 4. 7. Gostavăţu (Olt County)................................................................................................... 36
2. 4. 8. Copăceni ‐ Racoviţa (Vâlcea County).............................................................................. 36
2. 4. 9. Sucidava – Celei, Corabia (Olt County) ........................................................................... 36
2. 5. The Roman road along the right bank of the Danube. Tabula Traiana ........................................... 37
2. 6. The main roads of Dacia ................................................................................................................. 37
2. 6. 1. The road Lederata‐Tibiscum ......................................................................................................... 38
2. 6. 2. The second road: Dierna‐Tibiscum‐Porolissum .............................................................. 39
2. 6. 3. The third road: Drubetis‐Romula‐Apula ......................................................................... 43

CHAPTER 3. ELEMENTS OF THE DACIAN LANDSCAPE. ROADS AND RURAL SETTLEMENTS

3. 1. Potaissa and surroundings ............................................................................................................... 45

3. 1. 1. The legionary fortress and the city................................................................................. 45
3. 1. 2. The aqueducts ................................................................................................................ 45
3. 1. 2. 1. The spring ..................................................................................................... 45
3. 1. 2. 2. The modern historiography.......................................................................... 46
3. 1. 2. 3. The aqueduct for the Roman fortress .......................................................... 46
3. 1. 2. 4. The aqueduct for the city ............................................................................. 46
3. 1. 2. 5. Other discoveries ......................................................................................... 47
3. 1. 3. Rural settlements around Potaissa................................................................................. 47
3. 1. 3. 1. Watchtowers ............................................................................................... 47
3. 1. 3. 2. Potaissa ‐ ‘Valea Sărată’ ............................................................................... 48
3. 1. 3. 3. Potaissa – ‘Poiana Lişca’ ............................................................................... 48
3. 1. 3. 4. Mihai Viteazu ............................................................................................... 48
3. 1. 3. 5. Petreştii De Sus, Petreştii de Jos .................................................................. 49
3. 1. 3. 6. Copăceni ....................................................................................................... 49
3. 1. 3. 7. The settlement from Luncani ....................................................................... 49

i
3. 2. Napoca and surroundings ................................................................................................................ 49
3. 2. 1. Napoca. The Roman city ................................................................................................. 49
3. 2. 2. Rural settlements ........................................................................................................... 50
3. 3. Ilişua (Bistriţa‐Năsăud County) ......................................................................................................... 50
3. 3. 1. The Austrian maps .......................................................................................................... 50
3. 3. 2. Ilişua. The Roman settlement ......................................................................................... 51
3. 4. The Roman road from Geoagiu‐Băi (Hunedoara County)................................................................. 52
3. 5. Other roads in Roman Dacia ............................................................................................................. 54
3. 6. Roads, villae rusticae, economy, strategy. Shaping the landscape of Roman Dacia ........................ 57
3. 7. The Roman roads after the abandonment of Dacia ......................................................................... 59
3. 8. Concluding remarks. The roads of Roman Dacia .............................................................................. 59
3. 9. The bridges of Roman Dacia ............................................................................................................ 60
3. 9. 1. The Peutinger map and the bridges ............................................................................... 60
3. 9. 2. The Trajan’s Column....................................................................................................... 61
3. 9. 3. Austrian maps ................................................................................................................ 61
3. 9. 4. Archaeological researches.............................................................................................. 61

CHAPTER 4. RECREATING THE LANDSCAPE OF ROMAN DACIA USING HISTORICAL

19TH CENTURY CARTOGRAPHY, DIGITAL DATA AND GIS

4. 1. Premises. The topography and the landscape of Roman Dacia ....................................................... 62

4. 2. Modern cartography. Maps used for the identification of the archaeological sites ....................... 63
4. 3. Cartography and archaeological researches in Romania. Unsolved issues ..................................... 63
4. 4. Case study: the defensive system around the Roman fortress from Bologa (Cluj County) .............64
4. 5. The Roman imperial road between Potaissa and Napoca ............................................................... 65
4. 6. The Roman fortress from Gherla (Cluj County). Historical maps and digital data ........................... 65
4. 7. The Roman fortress from Hoghiz (Braşov County). Historical maps and digital data ...................... 66
4. 8. The Roman fortress from Râşnov (Braşov County). Historical maps and digital data ..................... 66
4. 9. The Roman fortress from Breţcu (Covasna County). Historical maps and digital data.................... 66
4. 10. The Roman imperial road from Sarmizegetusa to Sântămărie Orlea (Hunedoara County) ..........66
4. 11. The Roman road between Gelmar and Şibot on Austrian maps.................................................... 67
4. 12. The Roman road from Alba Iulia to Şard and Ighiu ........................................................................ 67
4. 13. The Roman road along the valley of the river Arieş from Potaissa to Alburnus Maior.................. 67
4. 14. ‘Spa’ vignettes in the Peutinger map. Thermal places in Roman Dacia ......................................... 68
4. 14. 1. Germisara ‐ the ‘five stars’ thermal accommodation in Roman Dacia ........................ 68
4. 14. 2. Ad Aquas (Călan) .......................................................................................................... 70
4. 14. 3. Băile Herculane ............................................................................................................ 70
4. 14. 4. Concluding remarks. The thermal settlements and the road system .......................... 71
4. 15. Pierre Lapie, Louis Bonnefont, S. F. W. Hoffmann, the modern cartography
and the roads from the Roman Empire and Dacia .................................................................................. 71
4. 15. 1. Premises ....................................................................................................................... 71
4. 15. 2. Roman Dacia in Lapie’s map......................................................................................... 72
4. 15. 3. The first road: ‘Viminatio (al Viminacio) Tiviscum. De Ram à Lugos’ ........................... 72
4. 15. 4. The second road: Faliatis‐Porolissum........................................................................... 73
4. 15. 5. The third road: Drobeta‐Apulum.................................................................................. 73
4. 15. 6. Sources for Lapie’s maps. “Die Alterthumwissenschaft” of
S. F. W. Hoffmann (1835) ........................................................................................................... 74
4. 15. 7. Pierre lapie, Louis Bonnefort, August Treboniu Laurian and Roman Dacia .................74
4. 15. 8. Concluding remarks...................................................................................................... 76

BIBLIOGRAPHY AND REFERENCES........................................................................................................... 77

FIGURES ................................................................................................................................................... 95

ii
 LIST OF FIGURES

Fig. 1. Map of the Roman Empire (based on M. Bărbulescu et alii, Atlas‐dicţionar al Daciei romane,
Cluj‐Napoca, 2005, 16, map I).
Fig. 2. Dacia and the surrounding provinces, with the main Roman roads (based on M. Bărbulescu et
alii, Atlas‐dicţionar al Daciei romane, Cluj‐Napoca, 2005, 17, map II).
Fig. 3. Roman Dacia under Trajan’s reign (based on E. Nemeth).
Fig. 4. Top (a): the Roman fortress at Vărădia ‐ “Chilii” (no. 1 in fig. 5). Bottom (b): the Roman fortress
at Vărădia ‐ “Pustă” (no. 2 in fig. 5).
Fig. 5. The Roman fortress at Surducu Mare (Caraş‐Severin County).
Fig. 6. Sketch of the Roman legionary fortress at Berzovia (based on A. Flutur, Clădirile
comandamentului din castrul de legiune traianic de la Berzobis, in Analele Banatului S.N., Arheologie‐Istorie,
XIX, 2011, 156, Pl. I).
Fig. 7. The northern side of the Roman fortress at Berzovia.
Fig. 8. The Roman fortress at Fârliug.
Fig. 9. The Roman fortress at Jupa, Roman Tibiscum (Caraş‐Severin County).
Fig. 10. The Roman fortress at Zăvoi (Caraş‐Severin County).
Fig. 11. The roads of Roman Dacia.
Fig. 12. The imperial Roman road from Potaissa to Napoca.
Fig. 13. Left: copy of the lost milestone from Aiton (based on I. Winkler, Date noi despre CIL, III, 1627,
cea dintâi atestare epigrafică a Potaissei, în Potaissa, 3, 1982, 80‐81). Right: traces of the Roman road between
Ceanu Mic and Aiton (photos F. Fodorean, 2001).
Fig. 14. The imperial Roman road close to the village of Ceanu Mic (Cluj County). Photos: F. Fodorean,
2002.
Fig. 15. The imperial Roman road from Aiton to Cluj‐Napoca.
Fig. 16. Top: copy of the milestone from Aiton. Bottom: general view of the village Ceanu Mic with the
traces of the Roman road in background.
Fig. 17. The infrastructure of the Roman road at the entrance in Ceanu Mic. Photos F. Fodorean, 2005.
Fig. 18. The central part of Roman Dacia, depicting the Roman road from Apulum to Potaissa (based on
M. Bărbulescu et alii, Atlas‐dicţionar al Daciei romane, Cluj‐Napoca, 2005, map D6).
Fig. 19. The northern part of Roman Dacia, depicting the Roman road from Napoca to Mera and Şardu
(based on M. Bărbulescu et alii, Atlas‐dicţionar al Daciei romane, Cluj‐Napoca, 2005, map C6).
Fig. 20. Top: the milestone from Mera (Cluj County) (based on C. Daicoviciu, Un nou “miliarium” din
Dacia, în AISC I, 2, 1928‐1932, 48‐53). Bottom: Austrian map indicating the location of Mera.
Fig. 21. The northern part of Roman Dacia, depicting the Roman road from Napoca to Mera and Şardu
(based on M. Bărbulescu et alii, Atlas‐dicţionar al Daciei romane, Cluj‐Napoca, 2005, map C5).
Fig. 22. Map of Roman Dacia, showing the location on Micia (today Vețel, Hunedoara County).
Fig. 23. The south‐western part of Roman Dacia, depicting the road from Lederata to Sasca Montană
(based on M. Bărbulescu et alii, Atlas‐dicţionar al Daciei romane, Cluj‐Napoca, 2005, map F3).
Fig. 24. The south‐western part of Roman Dacia, depicting the road from Iablaniţa to Lăpuşnicel and
Dalboşeţ (based on M. Bărbulescu et alii, Atlas‐dicţionar al Daciei romane, Cluj‐Napoca, 2005, map F4).
Fig. 25. The valley of the river Olt, indicating the location of the villages Băbiciu and Gostavăţu (based
on M. Bărbulescu et alii, Atlas‐dicţionar al Daciei romane, Cluj‐Napoca, 2005, map G7).
Fig. 26. The valley of the river Olt, indicating the location of Racoviţa‐Copăceni (based on M.
Bărbulescu et alii, Atlas‐dicţionar al Daciei romane, Cluj‐Napoca, 2005, map E7).
Fig. 27. The location of Tibiscum, today Jupa (Caraş‐Severin County) (based on M. Bărbulescu et alii,
Atlas‐dicţionar al Daciei romane, Cluj‐Napoca, 2005, map E4).
Fig. 28. Today’s analogy of the former Danubian road close to Ogradena.
Fig. 29. The Peutinger map depicting the territory of Roman Dacia (segm. VI) (based on M. Bărbulescu
et alii, Atlas‐dicţionar al Daciei romane, Cluj‐Napoca, 2005, fig. 10, 27).
Fig. 30. The Peutinger map depicting the territory of Roman Dacia (segm. VII) (based on M. Bărbulescu
et alii, Atlas‐dicţionar al Daciei romane, Cluj‐Napoca, 2005, fig. 10, 27).
Fig. 31. Map of Roman Dacia (based on I. Piso, Fasti provinciae Daciae I, Bonn, 1993, 33).
Fig. 32. Fragment of Austrian map showing the location of the former capital of Dacia, Ulpia Traiana
Sarmizegetusa. The Roman road is depicted as “Trajans Weg”.

iii
 Fig. 33. Ulpia Traiana Sarmizegetusa. Aerial photograph and plan (based on M. Bărbulescu et alii, Atlas‐
dicţionar al Daciei romane, Cluj‐Napoca, 2005, 40 and 95).
Fig. 34. The imperial Roman road close to the village Bărăştii Haţegului (Hunedoara County).
Fig. 35. The imperial road between Bărăștii Hațegului and Sântămăria‐Orlea (Hunedoara County).
Fig. 36. The Hațeg Depression (foto: F. Fodorean, April 2007).
Fig. 37. The imperial road identified in the terrain in several points between Sarmizegetusa and
Sântămăria‐Orlea (foto: F. Fodorean, April 2007).
Fig. 38. The Roman road from Sarmizegetusa to Uroi, indicating the location of Ad Aquas, today Călan
(Hunedoara County) (based on M. Bărbulescu et alii, Atlas‐dicţionar al Daciei romane, Cluj‐Napoca, 2005, map
E5).
Fig. 39. The Roman road from Uroi to Blandiana, indicating the location of Cigmău (Hunedoara County)
(based on M. Bărbulescu et alii, Atlas‐dicţionar al Daciei romane, Cluj‐Napoca, 2005, map D5).
Fig. 40. The legionary fortress at Potaissa (based on M. Bărbulescu).
Fig. 41. The topography of Potaissa.
Fig. 42. The spring of the aqueducts: ‘Izvorul Copăcenilor’ (photo F. Fodorean, 2007).
Fig. 43. General view with the location of the spring (photo F. Fodorean, 2007).
Fig. 44. Traces of the former Roman stone quarry viewed by I. Téglas at the beginning of the XXth
century, close to the spring of the aqueducts (after I. Bajusz, Téglás István jegyzetei. Régészeti feljegyzések. I/1.
Kötet, Kolozsvár, 2005, s.v. Szind – Sânduleşti, 348, 350‐352).
Fig. 45. The discovery point of the aqueduct supplying the Roman military fortress at Potaissa. The
intersection of the current road Turda‐Petreşti with the road to Sănduleşti.
Fig. 46. The discovery of the aqueduct supplying the fortress at Potaissa (winter 2005‐2006). Ceramic
pipe. Depth: ‐ 0,80 m (photos M. Pîslaru, S. Nemeti).
Fig. 47. Ceramic pipes. The aqueduct supplying the Roman military fortress. Length: 55 cm and 43 cm.
External diameter: 16,5 cm. Internal diameter: 12,5 cm (photographs: F. Fodorean).
Fig. 48. The aqueducts of Potaissa. Digital elevation model (F. Fodorean, I. Fodorean).
Fig. 49. Top: the location of caput aquae. Bottom: the location of the old mill in Copăceni
(photographs: F. Fodorean).
Fig. 50. The aqueduct supplying the city of Potaissa. General view from Copăceni to caput aquae
(photograph F. Fodorean).
Fig. 51. Ceramic pipes of different sizes drawn by I. Téglás (after I. Bajusz, Téglás István jegyzetei.
Régészeti feljegyzések. I/1. Kötet, Kolozsvár, 2005, 378, 379). Bottom left: ceramic pipe possible used for the
aqueduct of the city. Right: stone block with orifice.
Fig. 52. The site ‘Valea Sărată (Salt Valley)’ (photographs F. Fodorean, 2012).
Fig. 53. The site Pataklejáró (Mihai Viteazu, Cluj County) (photo F. Fodorean).
Fig. 54. The site ‘Sajkút’ (Mihai Viteazu, Cluj County) (photo F. Fodorean).
Fig. 55. The Roman settlement at Copăceni (Cluj County) (photo F. Fodorean).
Fig. 56. The Roman rural settlement from Luncani (Cluj County).
Fig. 57. The location of the fortress at Ilişua.
Fig. 58. The topography of Ilişua after K. Torma, Az Alsó‐ilosvai romai állótábor és müemlékei, Erdély‐
Muzeum Egylet, III, Kolozsvár 1864–1865, 58.
Fig. 59. The Roman road from Geoagiu‐Băi (Hunedoara County) (sketch and photo: F. Fodorean).
Fig. 60. The Roman road from Turda to Călăraşi. Left: sketch after I. Téglás, în Archaeologiai Értesitö,
33, 1913, 57. Right: fragment of an Austrian map from the 19th century depicting the same road.
Fig. 61. The Roman road from Cluj‐Napoca to Gilău. Sketch and Austrian modern map from the 19th
century.
Fig. 62. The Roman road from Cluj‐Napoca to Gilău (photos F. Fodorean).
Fig. 63. The Roman road from Gherla to Sic (Cluj County).
Fig. 64. Villae rusticae in Roman Dacia.
Fig. 65. The location of the place‐names from the Peutinger map indicating bridges.
Fig. 66. The Trajan’s Column. Scenes depicting Roman bridges (after R. Vulpe, Trajan’s Column,
Bucharest, 2000).
Fig. 67. Trajan’s bridge over the Danube depicted on the Trajan’s Column (based on M. Bărbulescu et
alii, Atlas‐dicţionar al Daciei romane, Cluj‐Napoca, 2005, fig. 9).
Fig. 68. Reconstruction of the Trajan’s bridge at Drobeta (based on M. Bărbulescu et alii, Atlas‐
dicţionar al Daciei romane, Cluj‐Napoca, 2005, fig. 8).
Fig. 69. The location of the Roman bridge at Potaissa.

iv
 Fig. 70. Map from 1956 (scale 1:20.000) indicating: 1. the route of the Roman road from Silivaş‐
Hăşdate‐Gherla‐Băiţa‐Buneşti; 2. the location of the Roman fortress from Gherla (based on
http://earth.unibuc.ro/harti/download‐planuri‐tragere.php, ID 335/3172).
Fig. 71. The Roman road from Gherla to Băiţa andBuneşti (photo F. Fodorean, 2005).
Fig. 72. Map from 1956 (scale 1:20.000) indicating the location of the Roman fortress from Hoghiz,
with the name ‘la Cetate’ (‘to the fortress’). Right, bottom: map from 1955 (scale 1:20.000) indicating the
location of the same fortress with the mention ‘Standort des röm. Lagers Pons Vetus’ (based on
http://earth.unibuc.ro/harti/download‐planuri‐tragere.php, Cuciulata, 1956, ID607/3860, Cuciulata, 1955, ID
1331/3860).
Fig. 73. Map from 1957 (scale 1:20.000) indicating the location of the Roman fortress from Râşnov
(Braşov County) (based on http://earth.unibuc.ro/harti/download‐planuri‐tragere.php, Râşnov, ID 646/3956).
Fig. 74. Map from 1917 (scale 1:20.000) indicating the location of the Roman fortress from Breţcu
(Covasna County) (based on http://earth.unibuc.ro/harti/download‐planuri‐tragere.php, Breţcu, ID 810/4361).
Fig. 75. Map from 1925 (scale 1:20.000) indicating the location of the Roman road from Gialmar to
Binţinţi (Hunedoara County) (based on http://earth.unibuc.ro/harti/download‐planuri‐tragere.php, Geoagiul de
Jos, ID 170/2760).
Fig. 76. The valley of Arieş from Turda to Roşia Montană. Digital elevation model.
Fig. 77. Map from 1957 (scale 1:20.000) indicating the location of the Roman road from Buru (Cluj
County) (based on http://earth.unibuc.ro/harti/download‐planuri‐tragere.php, Rimetea, ID 250/2966).
Fig. 78. The Roman road from Buru (Cluj County) (foto F. Fodorean, July 2003).
Fig. 79. The Roman road from Buru (Cluj County). Detail (foto F. Fodorean, July 2003).
Fig. 80. The location of the Roman tower in Moldoveneşti (Cluj County) (based on
http://earth.unibuc.ro/harti/download‐planuri‐tragere.php, ID 250/2966, 1957, Rimetea and ID 289/3066,
1953, Bădeni).
Fig. 81. General view of the valley of Arieş towards Turda (photo taken from the plateau in
Moldoveneşti, where the Roman tower is located). Photo F. Fodorean, 2006.
Fig. 82. General view of the valley of Arieş towards Turda and Câmpia Turzii (photo taken from the
plateau in Moldoveneşti). Photo F. Fodorean, 2006.
Fig. 83. The Roman road from Geoagiu‐Băi (photo F. Fodorean, 2003).
Fig. 84. The area around Germisara.

v
Preface

The road, as the bridge, or the aqueduct, represents an essential symbol of the Roman civilization.
Even if this civilization was established later in Dacia – the north‐danubian territory became a Roman province
only at the beginning of the second century A.D. – such constructions did not missed from Dacia. It is true that
in Dacia one do not knows spectacular roads, as those today visible in Italy or in Gallia. On the other hand, the
bridge over the Danube river, between Drobeta (in Dacia) and Pontes (in Moesia), built after Apollodorus of
Damascus’ project, remains the most grandiose work of this type in the whole Roman Empire.
The mentioning of the Roman roads from Dacia in the medieval documents, then in the historical
topographical maps from the XVIIIth century, opened the interest towards terrain observations made by
archaeologists in the last third of the XIXth century. In the next century the interest for such researches will
grow. On the other hand, because of the changes in the landscape, the Roman roads became every day less
visible.
Florin Fodorean, lecturer, Ph.D., at Babeş‐Bolyai University in Cluj‐Napoca, focused his researches,
from many years, on the topography of Roman Dacia and, in a wider sense, on the reconstruction of the
ancient landscape, with all its components. He started these researches with a remarkable Ph.D. thesis about
the roads in Roman Dacia, in 2004. Because this subject cannot be treated only for one single province, the
author of the book documented himself and framed his research, in 2004 and now, within the large spectrum
of the specialized literature. He knows very well the similar works for other Roman provinces. In this book, the
author is among the first to introduce, within the current scientific community, researches from the XIXth
century (Pierre Lapie, Louis Bonnefont, S. F. W. Hoffmann).
Unquestionable, Florin Fodorean is nowadays the best Romanian specialist in the topics which form
the object of this book. First, because he uses the entire available documentation, starting with the
cartographic sources, either ancient, either modern, from the XVIIIth and XIXth century (his studies on Tabula
Peutingeriana, the Geography of Ptolemaios or his studies in which he investigates the information from the
modern historical maps are well known). Then, he analyzes the epigraphic data contained in the few Roman
milestones discovered in Dacia. He also presents the available data regarding Tabula Traiana and also other
epigraphic monuments, for example those discovered within the territory of the settlements with thermal
waters. The author used the antique and also the modern toponimy to reconstruct the routes of several roads
and to identify the location of certain Roman bridges. The author made interesting observations regarding the
relation between the Roman and the modern roads, because, due to geomorphologic features, in many cases
the modern roads overlap the Roman roads. He also used for his researches modern methods, such as the
digital cartography (for example when he studied the Roman road between Napoca and Gilău). Finally, the
author grouped all the information: the terrain researches and the archaeological investigations. Some of these
data were collected by other researchers before Florin Fodorean started his activities, but the majority of these
data were discovered by the author, as a consequence of many years during which the author literally walked
by foot large areas within Dacia Porolissensis and Dacia Superior and discovered new Roman roads, such as the
sectors Napoca ‐ Gilău ‐ Bologa, Napoca ‐ Potaissa, the Roman road along the valley of the Mureş river, the
road between Războieni and Brâncoveneşti, the road between Sarmizegetusa and Subcetate, the road Gherla ‐
Sic or the road Geoagiu ‐ Cigmău.
As member of the archaeological staff who excavates the legionary fortress at Potaissa, the author
realized a first, complex investigation regarding the relation between the fortress, the Roman city, the
aqueducts which supplied the fortress and the city, and the access towards the rural settlements within the
territory of Potaissa. This type of investigation was extended and the author also analyzed the territory of
Napoca, the area in the north‐east of the province (Ilişua), and also the areas of south‐eastern Transylvania,
within the Hunedoara County. The reconstruction of the antique landscape, based on old maps, together with
the current results of the applications using digital cartography and GIS, allows the author not just to
reconstruct other roads from Dacia (Cluj, Alba and Hunedoara County), but also to establish the relation
between geomorphology, roads and the military fortifications from the north and the east of Dacia, at Gherla,
Bologa, Hoghiz, Râşnov and Breţcu, and the relation between roads and villae rusticae. The author also
investigates the thermal places of Dacia from Germisara, Băile Herculane and Ad Aquas.
We find ourselves in front of a complex book, useful for the Roman archaeology during the imperial
period. The specialists from everywhere have now at their disposal the up‐to‐date situation concerning the
roads and the landscape of Roman Dacia, a province of the Roman Empire still little known.

Professor Mihai Bărbulescu, corresponding member of the Romanian Academy

vi
Preface

For long decades in the second half of the 20th century, a study of the topography and landscape of
Roman Dacia was difficult, if not impossible, as surveying on the ground, aerial photographs, and maps were
considered to be a security risk for the state. But even when studies became possible, international access to
them was often hindered: The number of classicists, historians and archaeologists internationally who can
easily read publications in Romanian or other eastern European languages is not large, and the book trade not
overly active.

So when, seven years ago, Florin Fodorean’s substantial study of the „Roads in Roman Dacia“ was
published in Cluj‐Napoca, the book, in spite of its English summary, was hardly studied in other parts of Europe.
There is, for instance, only one copy of the book in any scholarly library in the UK!

So it was time to make Florin Fodorean’s studies more widely available. The author has substantially
expanded his research, and presents, in the present volume, a full study of the topography and landscape of
Roman Dacia.

The author first presents the results of his studies on Roman roads, and a discussion of the Roman
geographical perception of Dacia before and after the conquest, which entailed the construction of the first
roads. He then continues to discuss the ancient sources concerning the roads of Roman Dacia, using the Tabula
Peutingeriana, itineraries and other literary sources as well as the mile‐stones, the archaeological remains, and
the Tabula Traiana, to reconstruct the main roads of Roman Dacia. The third chapter widens the topic by
discussing roads and rural settlements, focussing on Potaissa and surroundings, and on Napoca and beyond,
with an excursus on Roman bridges. These detailed studies allow the author finally to attempt and recreate the
landscape of Roman Dacia using historical 19th century cartography, digital data and GIS.

It is a great pleasure to congratulate Florin Fodorean on this achievement, and BAR on the publication
of this important book, and to thank the German Academic Exchange Service (DAAD) in Bonn, the Erasmus
programme, and especially the Fritz Thyssen Foundation in Cologne for supporting his studies in
Erfurt/Germany.

Universität Erfurt Kai Brodersen

vii
 Introduction Acknowledgments

This book is the result of my terrain researches Great thanks are due to my professor, Mihai
made in the last 12 years.1 In 2004 I finished my Ph.D. Bărbulescu, for all his support and advices. In 1999 I
and in 2006 I published, in Romanian, the results of this started my Ph.D. studies under his supervision. I
Ph.D. thesis in a book entitled Drumurile din Dacia became member of the staff who excavates every year
romană (The Roads of Roman Dacia), Napoca Star the legionary fortress at Potaissa (Cluj County). Since
Publishing House, Cluj‐Napoca, 2006, 448 p., XV plates, 1995, he constantly supported my activity.
69 figures in text, 3 tables, 24 x 17 cm format, 16 pages I want to thank professor Kai Brodersen, who
of English summary (433‐448), ISBN 973‐647‐372‐4. One guided my activity in Erfurt, for one year and two
of the reviewers of the book, Dan Matei, observed and months, as a DAAD and Fritz Thyssen scholar. 13 years
wrote in the end of his presentation: ‘The volume also ago I studied for three months in Italy, at Catania, as
has an extensive English summary, which provides, Erasmus/Socrates fellow, MA level, at the University of
however, only partially, to foreign specialists, the Messina, Facoltà di Lettere e Filosofia. My work there
opportunity to have access to its content’ (D. Matei, was supervised with patience by prof. dr. Lucietta Di
review to my book published in Buletinul Cercurilor Paola and prof. dr. Lietta de Salvo. I express my
Ştiinţifice Studenţeşti, Arheologie‐Istorie‐Muzeologie gratitude to several colleagues, who supported me
(The Journal of the Students Scientific Meetings, during these years with bibliography: Lorenzo Quilici
Archaeology‐History‐Museology), 12, 2006, Alba Iulia, p. (Università degli Studi di Bologna, Dipartimento di
113‐117). After 2004 I extended my research areas. I Archeologia, Cattedra di Topografia dell’Italia antica);
studied not only Roman roads, but also the archaeology Stefania Quilici Gigli (Seconda Università di Napoli);
and topography of Potaissa, rural settlements, bridges, Raymond Chevallier; Ingemar König (University of
aqueducts, auxiliary fortresses in Dacia Porolissensis; in Trier); Heinz Herzig; Ekkehard Weber (Institut für Alte
a word I investigated elements of the landscape of Geschichte, Altertumskunde und Epigraphik
Roman Dacia, discovering new sites, new sectors of Universität Wien); David Kennedy (University of
Roman roads, new artifacts. As methods, I used, mainly, Western Australia, Department of Classics and Ancient
the researches in the field, the cartographic material History); Ray Laurence (University of Kent, Head of
from the XVIIIth and XIXth century, the aerial photographs the Classical and Archaeological Studies Section);
and the digital software (GIS). Benet Salway (University of London, Institute of
The present book is structured in four main Classical Studies); Isaac Moreno Gallo – Ingeniero
parts. In the first section I provide information related to Técnico de Obras Públicas (Ministerio de Fomento,
the roads of Roman Dacia, insisting on the new Zaragoza); Pierre Sillières; Frank Vermeulen
discoveries happened since I finished my Ph.D. thesis. (Department of Archaeology, Ghent University,
The second part of my book is focused on the ancient Belgium); Hubert Chanson (professor in hydraulic
sources concerning the roads of Roman Dacia. The third engineering and applied fluid mechanics in the School
part presents several settlements of Roman Dacia, the of Civil Engineering at the University of Queensland);
analysis of their territory, the mapping of these new Giuseppe Ceraudo (Università del Salento.
sites. The fourth part of the book is focused on Dipartimento di Beni Culturali, specialist in aerial
contributions concerning the modern maps, realized by photography applied in archaeology); Richard Talbert
the Austrian surveyors and map makers. These maps (University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill); Jon
contain a lot of data with direct reference to old, Roman Coulston (University of St. Andrews, School of
settlements, which were discovered in the terrain and Classics); Anne Kolb (Historisches Seminar, Universität
mapped as ruins, Roman roads etc. Zürich).
I also want to thank my colleagues from the
Faculty of Geography, Babeș‐Bolyai University Cluj‐
Napoca, for all their help and support: assistant
professor, Ph.D. Ioan Fodorean, assistant professor,
1
Ph. D. candidate, Ciprian Moldovan. I also express my
A section of chapter 1 and another one from chapter 2 are gratitude for Mariana Pîslaru (director, Ph.D., Museum
the results of my participation within the project PODSRU,
of Turda) and Sorin Nemeti (assistant professor, Ph.D.,
89/1.5/S/61104. Title: Echo. Communicating in Antiquity. The
Case of Roman Dacia. Individual theme of research: Dynamics Babeş‐Bolyai University Cluj‐Napoca, Faculty of History
of a Society: Space, Infrastructure, Travel and Mobility in and Philosophy, Department of Ancient History and
Roman Dacia. Other parts of the book were developed during Archaeology).
my stay in Germany, at the University of Erfurt, in 2010 and
2011, with the generous and kind support of the German
Academic Exchange Service (DAAD, 1st November – 25
December 2010) and the Fritz Thyssen Foundation (1st January
– 31 December 2011).

1
 The geographical conception of the Romans,
CHAPTER 1. THE GEOGRAPHICAL PERCEPTION AND THE depicted in various road itineraries, highlights the
ROADS OF THE ROMAN EMPIRE AND DACIA. importance of the communication system in the
A GENERAL OVERVIEW formation of a territorial unit. All the settlements in
the Roman Empire emerged and developed in close
1. 1. The study of roads. A short state of research connection with roads or with other settlements that
were close to roads. Roman farms, cities, economic
When we look to a map of a Roman province, activities related to agriculture have always depended
which includes the locations of the main cities and rural on the transport of persons and goods. From this point
settlements, the distribution of production sites, military of view, the road was a crucial element in developing
fortifications, the Roman farms etc., we ask ourselves a economic activities, agriculture and urban economy.
simple question: which was the overall strategic and The romanization of a province was achieved not only
economic outlook of the Romans and what meant for a by implementing an urban civilization, but also
Roman province the communication network? The throughout roads. Moreover, the presence of the
answer is directly related to the Roman perception of emperor in each province was felt through inscriptions
space and time and the accuracy they applied to achieve on milestones, which mention the construction or
and maintain their road infrastructure. Not only during restoration of roads.
Roman times, but in any period, the fate of many The historians have often emphasized the
settlements and cities was closely linked to the transport strategic and military importance of roads. In the
system and roads. foreword to the work of Raymond Chevallier, Pierre
From the fourth century BC, once the Roman Lévêque noticed that the road density and the study of
conquests exceeded the borders of Italy, the Romans the chronological development of road network
initiated a huge program specifically designed to build confirms that in the affirmation of the Roman Empire,
roads in order to ensure close connections of all roads were used to spread Roman civilization, and they
conquered provinces and to create geographical and represented a useful tool to spread Roman power.3
political cohesion. The program was continued later The bibliography concerning the road system
alongside with new conquests, and the concept applied (articles, studies, monographs, various syntheses) is
by Romans was that each of the territories conquered very large and dispersed. I will mention only several
must be connected to Rome. The Roman emperors saw studies and reference works, although some are
the road system as a key factor of geographical and related directly to the Roman Empire and others are
political unit. They were somehow influenced by the dedicated only to certain provinces.
memory of the Persian Empire, where the royal roads, At the beginning of last century Konrad Miller
carefully constructed and monitored, secured over time published his monumental work on Tabula
the hegemony of the Achaemenid dynasty.2 Peutingeriana. 4 The author presented the roads of the
Roman roads became extremely important in Roman Empire depicted on the Peutinger map,
the history of the Roman Empire when Rome itself transferring the information on 317 maps‐sketches.
became a true source of civilization, because their Miller's contribution was decisive.5 He also published
existence has facilitated the systematic control of each another book, less detailed comparing with the first
province. Beginning with milliarium aureum, placed in one, but based on the same methodology.6
20 BC in capite Romani fori, between Rostra and the Subsequently, until the 1960’s, few general
temple of Saturn, 19 roads started in each of the preoccupations regarding the roads of the Roman
provinces of the Principate. The implementation of Empire were materialized in books. Regional syntheses
roads developed rapidly. During Domitian Rome already were, though, published. In 1960 Hermann Schreiber
administrated 372 roads (53,000 Roman miles), which published a study about the roads from Italy.7 M. P.
belong today to 34 countries. During Trajan’s reign, the Charlesworth wrote an interesting synthesis about the
Roman road network overpassed 75,000 miles. commerce routes of the Roman Empire.8 Aspects
The road assured the unity of settlements, regarding the construction of the roads and the
reducing the distances. It defined clearly the Roman materials used for this can be consulted in the
perception of space, by offering to the cities the contributions of R. J. Forbes.9
possibility to interact between them. In this sense, the Significant contributions to the study of road
road represented a mechanism of Roman power. By network in the Empire are those of Pierre Fustier. His
creating a vast road network, the geographical space
was no longer fragmented. The position of Rome, as the 3
Chevallier 1972.
4
center of the entire road system, assured its cultural and Miller 1916.
5
politic control over all areas and provinces. Cagnat, Chapot 1917, 41‐47; Grenier 1934.
6
Miller,1916.
7
Schreiber 1960.
8
Charlesworth 1961.
2 9
Salama 1951, 97. Forbes 1964; Forbes 1965.

2
monograph is among the few works that analyzes the performed by Helmut Bender.24 Another good
Roman roads and their use in medieval and modern synthesis is the one written by Victor W. von Hagen,25
times.10 Fustier also published three interesting studies published in several editions. I had access to the Italian
on Via Flaminia, Via Aurelia and Via Appia.11 A serious one. The author presents the main roads in Africa,
presentation of public roads in the Roman Empire was Asia, Greece, Dacia, Pannonia, Noricum, Germany,
published by Thomas Pékary.12 He discussed issues Gaul, Britannia and Hispania. At the end of the book
regarding the names of public roads, the road the viae consulares in Italy are described.
construction program, the responsibility for the road Unfortunately there are no references about the
construction, the financing of these activities. Pékary's construction of these roads. The photographs and
book remains valuable because it is based on the idea drawings are very good. In connection with the roads
that Roman roads were a political tool for the unification of the Empire I should mention here Gerhard Radke’s
of the Empire. Another interesting study is the one book published in 1981.26 Although the author focuses
published by Wiseman.13 on the presentation of roads in Italy, in the first
Raymond Chevallier constantly focused his chapter he discusses in detail the definition and the
attention of the road network of different provinces of importance of roads. Another important book is the
the Roman Empire (especially Gaul14), on the literary one published by N. H. H. Sitwell.27 The book has very
sources regarding Roman roads,15 their technical good maps, with all the main roads represented.
characteristics, the methods of application of aerial In a dense article, Antonio Palma28 analyzes
photographs to study of the road network,16 the the classification of Ulpianus regarding the roads,
research methodology of Roman roads,17 or travel in the discussing the difference between via publica and via
Roman world18. The first edition of his book19 on Roman privata. The book of Nicolae Lascu about Roman
roads was followed by a second one in 1997.20 The roads and especially about travel in antiquity29
author discusses in detail all the issues related to Roman represents an interesting material. The author used a
roads: the origin of roads, their names, the role of very large amount of ancient sources for the
toponymy in the research of roads, the ancient roads, documentation of his work. R. W. Bagshawe30
the military posts, the classification of roads, the published a short book about the Roman roads. The
construction, infrastructure, superstructure and main author is an amateur, but with great passion made
technical characteristics of the transport system. researches focused on the Roman roads from Britain
Chevallier also presented the main roads from the most and he discovered circa 500 kilometers of routes.
important provinces of the Empire. This book (especially Bagshawe investigates the construction of Roman
the second, updated edition) represents, still now, in my roads, the cartographic material used in this particular
opinion, a very good synthesis concerning the the roads type of research, the Roman roads during the Middle
of the Roman Empire. Ages and modern times. An interesting chapter is
Gerhard Radke21 and Jaroslav Šašel22 also dedicated to the description, step by step, of the field
published interesting studies regarding the Roman roads. research concerning the roads.
Heinz E. Herzig’s study can also be considered Colin Adams and Ray Laurence31 edited in
today an outstanding one.23 The author discusses about 2001 a book which groups six important contributions
road funding and those who have built and maintained written by Kai Brodersen, Benet Salway, Ray Laurence,
the roads. Very interesting was the debate around the Anne Kolb Jon Coulston and Colin Adams. Kai
concept of via publica. It should be noted that H. Herzig Brodersen32 develops a discussion about the
deals with the roads beginning from Republic and geographical knowledge of the Romans, with solid
continuing with the period Augustus‐Vespasian. A arguments showing that the Romans were not
concise discussion of Roman roads and stations is interested in the concept of ‘scale maps’. For a traveler,
an itinerarium pictum or adnotatum was enough for
orientation an in order to realize long‐distance travels
10
Fustier 1968. under optimal conditions. The author also discusses the
11
Fustier 1958; Fustier 1960; Fustier 1961. See also Fustier problem of dating the Tabula Peutingeriana. Benet
1963.
12
Pékary 1968.
13
Wiseman 1970.
14 24
Chevallier 1975; Chevallier 1975 a. Bender 1975.
15 25
Chevallier 1995. Hagen 1978.
16 26
Chevallier 1971. Radke 1981.
17 27
Chevallier, Arceduc, Soyer 1962. Sitwell 1981.
18 28
Chevallier 1988. Palma 1982, 850‐880.
19 29
Chevallier 1972. Lascu 1986.
20 30
Chevallier 1997. Bagshawe 2000.
21 31
Radke 1973, 1417 sqq. Adams, Laurence 2001; reviewed by Fodorean 2003, 297‐
22
Šašel 1977, 235‐244. 302.
23 32
Herzig 1974, 593‐648. Brodersen 2001, 7‐21.

3
Salway33 tries to clarify the controversial problem of The Peutinger map was recently investigated
dating the same Peutinger Map. Anne Kolb presents by R. Talbert.59 For the first time we have here a
essential data concerning the official transport in the complete presentation of the map from its beginning
Roman Empire, cursus publicus.34 Jon Coulston analized until de last century.60 Bernd Löhberg studied the
in detail the scenes of Trajan’s Column related to Antonine itinerary.61 The first volume presents all the
transport and travel.35 Ray Laurence makes an analysis of data regarding the settlements and distances from
the Roman roads from Britain,36 outlining their role in the Itinerarium Antonini. The second volume presents
development of the settlements. Finally, Colin Adams numerous maps with the information from the ancient
presents a discussion regarding the travel and transport documents, the routes and the distances.
system in Egypt based on ancient sources: papyri and Since 2000, the Barington Atlas of the Greek
private letters.37 and Roman World (edited and coordinated by Richard
Christian Cloppet published a study concerning R.J. Talbert) changed definitively the perceptions
the laws and the construction of public roads in the regarding Roman cartography and Roman roads.62 The
Roman Empire.38 In 1971 Per Colinder published an atlas represents an indispensable instrument for all
article about the measuring of roads in antiquity.39 An the researchers. It contains 99 full‐color maps of the
interesting association between roads and Greek terms is entire Roman world, at a very detailed scale.
the subject of Phyllis Culham’s study.40 Hugh Davies A huge amount of articles, notes, books,
investigates the design of the Roman roads.41 From the references regarding the roads from certain provinces
most recent contributions to this subject I mention here were published over the years. But a paradox exists:
the books published by Arnold Esch,42 Greiser Dietmar,43 the number of these publications is so big, and is
R. A. Staccioli,44 Maria Stella Busana,45 Dieter Mertens,46 increasing with every year, but the roads from some
Cornelis van Tilburg,47 Werner Heinz,48, Michael provinces were not presented until now in a
Rathmann,49 Margot Klee,50 Gertraud und Heinz‐Egon monographic form or in a micro regional volume. In
Rösch.51 the following lines I will mention some of the most
Isaac Moreno Gallo published several books important contributions regarding the roads from
about the roads in Hispania.52 An interesting article is several Roman provinces.
the one written by Pierre Gros.53 Other recent In 1999 Ray Laurence published a synthesis
contributions are the studies of I. Moreno Gallo,54 J. R. regarding the Roman roads from Italy.63 The author
Morales,55 A. L. Palomino Lázaro and G. M. Gonzales.56 analyzes the road system in close interaction with the
On Roman bridges a recent contribution is the book of development of the cities. He also discusses the
Manuel Durán Fuentes.57 Another useful book groups construction of the roads between 312‐44 BC, the
articles presented within a colloquium held in Bonn.58 politics of road building, the technological changes,
and the transport. This book presents rather a cultural
vision about roads than a technical one.
33
Salway 2001, 22‐66. For the study of Roman roads in Italy decisive
34
Kolb 2001, 95‐105; see also Kolb 2002, 67‐77. contributions were published by Lorenzo Quilici.64 He
35
Coulston 2001, 106‐137. is the editor of the well known Atlante Tematico di
36
Laurence 2001, 67‐94. Topografia Antica. This journal groups important
37
Adams 2001, 138‐166. contributions written by historians and researchers
38
Cloppet 1994, 309‐318. mainly from Italy. Five numbers were dedicated to
39
Colinder 1971, 19‐22.
40 Roman roads and bridges.65
Culham 1987, 161‐170.
41
Davies 1998, 1‐16. The Roman roads from Spain were
42
Esch 1997. investigated for several years by Pierre Sillières. The
43
Dietmar 1997. results of this research were published in a book in
44
Staccioli 2003. 1990.66
45
Bussana 1997.
46
Mertens (ed.) 2008.
47
Tilburg 2007.
48
Heinz 2003.
49 59
Rathmann 2003. Talbert 2010.
50 60
Klee 2010. Talbert 2010, 149.
51 61
Rösch, Rösch 2010. Löhberg 2006.
52 62
See http://www.traianvs.net; Moreno Gallo 2004; Moreno Talbert 2000.
63
Gallo 2006. Laurence 1999.
53 64
Gros 2010, 165‐174. See, for example: Quilici 1991 and Quilici, Quilici 2004.
54 65
Moreno Gallo 2010, 1‐22; Moreno Gallo 2010 a, 11‐46. ATTA 1, 1992; ATTA 2, 1993; ATTA 5, 1996; ATTA 11, 2002;
55
Morales 2010, 119‐134. ATTA 13, 2004. I express my gratitude for Lorenzo Quilici,
56
Lázaro, Gonzales 2010, 47‐73. who kindly sent me, over these years, all the important
57
Fuentes 2005. numbers of ATTA.
58 66
Koschik 2004. Sillières 1990.

4
 The roads from Gallia were studied by G. A special book on the roads of Moesia
Radke,67 L. Fanaud,68 E. Thévenot,69 I. König,70 P. Broise,71 Superior and Moesia Inferior has not been published
M. Thérèse and G. Raepsaet‐Charlier,72 M. Gayraud,73 D. yet. Among the contributions regarding the roads in
Brentchaloff and J. Gascou,74 G. Reverdy,75 M. F. Avril,76 this area we notice those written by D. Tsontchev,91 M.
G. T. Alexandrowicz and R. Bedon,77 J. M. Desbordes,78 G. Mirković,92 T. Tomowski,93 V. Vladimirov,94 L.
Castellvi, J. P. Combs, J. Kotarba and A. Pezin,79 P. Hollenstein,95 T. Gerasimova and L. L. Hollenstein,96 P.
Clement and A. Peyre.80 These articles and books are Petrović.97 Recently Mitko Madzharov published a
focused on particular sectors of roads, Roman book about the Roman roads in Bulgaria.98
milestones, and ancient documents. Recently, new The roads from Asia Minor were studied by D.
contributions were published.81 French.99 The communication system of Cilicia was
The Roman roads of Britain were first studied by analyzed by Terence Bruce Mitford.100 The roads of
Thomas Codrington, at the beginning of the XXth Cappadocia were described by Timothy B. Mitford.101
century.82 The historian gathered all the data available at The roads from Egypt are presented by Colin
that moment. His book remained for the next 52 years Adams102 and Pau Figueras.103 The communication
the only synthesis about the roads in Britain. In 1955 and system from Arabia was investigated by David F.
1957 Ivan M. Margary published two volumes concerning Graf,104 Israel Roll,105 and David Kennedy.106
the same topic.83 An interesting study is also the one The roads of North Africa were studied by P.
published by Ray Laurence.84 A. Salama107 and J. M. Jaubert.108 The communication
The roads of Raetia were studied by Gerold system of Sicily was described by G. P. Verbrugghe,109
Walser. He initiated, in the 1970’s, a research program D. Adameşteanu,110 G. Uggeri111, R. J. A. Wilson112 and
concerning the roads, within the series Itinera Romana. Lucietta di Paola.113 The roads of Sardinia were
The roads from the southern part of Raetia were investigated by P. Meloni.114 The roads of Corsica were
investigated by Denis van Berchem.85 The roads of Alpes analyzed by O. Jehasse and F. Nucci.115
Maritimae, Cottiae, Graiae şi Poeninae are described in
the study of Jean Prieur.86 In 1949 G. Pascher published a 1. 2. The geographical perception of space
book about the Roman roads from Pannonia Superior.87 during Roman times
Until now there is no synthesis published about
the Roman roads of Pannonia Inferior. But data Communication is essential for the
regarding these roads can be found is the book of development of civilizations. In the absence of
András Mócsy 88 and in a study of Tóth Endre.89 Recently elements that provide the opportunity to exchange
a doctoral thesis of András Bödöcs is focused on the information of any kind, a society becomes self‐
Roman road network in Hungary using GIS.90
91
Tsontchev 1959, 154‐170.
92
Mirković 1960, 249‐257.
93
Tomowski 1961, 113‐125.
67 94
Radke 1964, 299‐318. Vladimirov 1963, 33‐34.
68 95
Fanaud 1966. Hollenstein 1975, 23‐44; Hollenstein 1995, 179‐189.
69 96
Thévenot 1969. Gerasimova and Hollenstein 1978, 91‐121; Gerasimova
70
König 1970. and Hollenstein 1989, 45‐58.
71 97
Broise 1974, 89‐110. Petrović 1986, 41‐51.
72 98
Thérèse, Raepsaet‐Charlier 1975, 61‐73. Madzharov 2009.
73 99
Gayraud 1981, 498‐561. French 1980, 698‐727.
74 100
Brentchaloff, Gascou 1995, 245‐254. Mitford 1980, 1230‐1261.
75 101
Reverdy 1995. Mitford 1980a, 1170‐1223.
76 102
Avril 1996. Adams 2001, 138‐166.
77 103
Alexandrowicz, Bedon 1996. Figueras 1999, 121‐124.
78 104
Desbordes 1997. Graf 1999, 227‐229.
79 105
Castellvi, Combs, Kotarba and Pezin 1998. Roll 1999, 109‐113.
80 106
Clement, Peyre 1998. Kennedy 1995, 221‐227; Kennedy 1996, 257‐262;
81
Thiollier‐Alexandrowicz 2000; Gendron 2006; Coulon 2007. Kennedy 1997, 71‐93; Kennedy 1998, 56‐65; Kennedy 1998a,
82
Codrington 1903. 91‐96; Kennedy 1998b, 573‐585.
83 107
Margary 1955, 1957. Salama 1951; Salama 1980, 101‐133; Salama 1985, 219‐
84
Laurence 2001, 67‐94. 231.
85 108
Van Berchem 1982. Jaubert 1980, 161‐184.
86 109
Prieur 1976. Verbrugghe 1976.
87 110
Pascher 1949. Adameşteanu 1962, 199‐209; Adameşteanu 1963, 19‐48.
88 111
Mócsy 1974. Uggeri 1982‐1983, 424‐459.
89 112
Endre 1977, 65‐75. Wilson 1992, 10‐16.
90 113
Bödöcs 2008, Ph. D. manuscript. I express my gratitude to Di Paola 1999; Di Paola 1999a, 459‐469.
114
the author, who kindly put at my disposal the manuscript of Meloni 1988, 451‐490.
115
the Ph.D. Jehasse, Nucci 2000.

5
isolated. The Roman Empire, through its general policy, contributions of Finley119 or Raepsaet120. However,
understood this perfectly. Communication is done numerous contributions have overpassed these ideas.
‘physically’ using the infrastructure, which provides Many historians analyzed the history of Roman roads,
opportunities for goods and people to travel and the routes, the modalities of construction, aspects
organize a territory, but also the access to information, regarding travel, commerce, literary or juridical
the means of total control. Information means power. sources.121 Some of them even wondered why Dacia
This assumption is valid for all periods. To administrate a entered in the attention of the Romans and why they
huge territory, the emperors of Rome understood the conquered this territory.
need to invest human and financial resources into an In the recent years several new contributions
idea and to support it strongly: namely, the creation of have appeared in this field of research.122 We call
communication infrastructure. ‘Road building was a ‘exceptions’ those books or those authors which went
political act’, emphasized Ray Laurence in his book further with their research and tried to explain,
regarding the roads of Roman Italy.116 In another besides providing strictly technical information
chapter he insists on the same idea.117 regarding roads, how Romans travelled, how they saw
The whole unity of the Empire relied on the their geographical space. In 1974, Casson published a
communication system. To construct and maintain such book related to travel in the ancient world.123 He
a huge amount of roads, however, was primarily the points out: ‘This book is the first full‐scale treatment,
work of the state, and the state in turn relied on the in any language, of travel in the ancient world’’.124 And
efforts of legions and soldiers. All the territories he was not exaggerating. His subsequent overview
conquered and administrated by Romans were filled covers a long period of time, from 3000 B.C. to
with exceptional roads. In fact, this represented a crucial pilgrimages to the Holy Lands. Part two of his book
key for the maintenance of the unity of the Roman deals with travel in Roman times, with direct reference
Empire. In order to understand how these mechanisms to all the main topics related to travel. So his book
functioned in such perfect unity, we have to see how presents a world in continuous movement, not a static
Romans view their space, how they understood their one. Another outstanding contribution is that of R.
geography. Roads are technical ‘means’ that assured the Chevallier on travel in the Roman Empire.125
communication within the Roman Empire. This In recent years, researchers have had the
communication involved human resources (travel of courage to raise new simple questions: What did
officials, of individuals, merchants, soldiers, reasons for travel mean in the Roman era? How could one plan it?
travel: personal, business, leisure etc.). How was it realized? What were the benefits, the risks
Travel means time, planning, routes, stop and hazards? How did Romans perceive their own
points, distances, documents (itineraria), inscriptions geographical space? How did they understand time
(milestones). Travel means information or presupposes and distance? How was information spread? How did
getting to information, which, as today, was essential in officials travel? How did ordinary citizens travel?
Roman times. In this way Romans created a unified In terms of method, at first glance, one can
space. If we analyze such things, we can be able to take say that by studying the Roman roads we can
a closer look to the concepts of the Romans, or, in other understand all the mechanisms which are in relation
words, to the historical truth. to this topic. This is a wrong, inadequate and
In the traditional scholarship opinions incomplete vision. The road is a means, a physical
(sometimes insufficiently argued) have emerged and “object” created by man, which reshaped the
spread regarding the following: the perception of space landscape. But the road generated other actions. The
in the Roman Empire, the role of itineraries, the level of most important is the alteration in the perception of
the geographical knowledge, the higher costs related to the geographical space. When you suddenly discover
land transport, and the existence of Roman scale maps. that you can travel easily from point A to point B, that
Certain historians have imagined the Roman Empire as a point B “does not seem” so far as you thought. As if
space of static communities. In a study regarding travel today: in term of travelling by plane, your mind
and geographical knowledge in the Roman Empire switches and one’s perception is that Cluj‐Napoca is
published by Kai Brodersen,118 we discover several only two hours away from Rome, but still New York is
references to the modern historical tradition that a little bit far away from Cluj‐Napoca. Let’s change the
insisted on false and negative aspects related to land
transport. These ideas can be observed in the 119
Finley 1973.
120
Raepsaet 1999, 1097‐1106.
121
Schreiber 1960; Charlesworth 1961; Chevallier et alii
1962, 1‐49.
116 122
Laurence 1999, 39. Adams 2001, 138‐166; Adams 2007; Talbert 2000; Talbert
117
Laurence 1999, 199: ‘What made a province Roman was the 2003; Van Tilburg 2006.
123
road system [...]. The road was a device of power that produced Casson 1974.
124
a distinctly Roman space across Europe and the Mediterranean.‘ Casson 1974, 9.
118 125
Brodersen 2001, 7‐21. Chevallier 1988.

6
“vehicle”: by car Rome is 2000 km away (maybe 3 days), humankind: the roads. These roads were the key
New York… almost unreachable, if we think this way. factor for the development of the Empire.
The same mental mechanism happened during Roman One of the best presentations regarding
times. geographical knowledge and the perception of space is
But this is not enough to understand the whole Claude Nicolet’s book published in 1991.127 In fact, in
impact of road construction within the Roman world. the introduction, the author points out: ’The topic of
The roads were indeed important. The last number of this book is a historical reflection on space’. Nicolet
Dossiers de l’archéologie (No. 343, January‐February tries to solve some essential questions concerning the
2011) analyzes Les voies romaines autour de la perception of space in the Roman world. He started
Méditerranée. Almost 30 years ago, no. 67 of the same with a pertinent observation: How was this huge space
journal published contributions concerning the same organized and managed, and how did the central
topic. Why are roads so important? Because they power succeed in keeping the Empire safe? It is
created a new world, a new geographical space, new obvious, and the author affirms, that the Romans had
possibilities for people to travel, to change ideas, a definite vision of their geographical space. Further
information. The road changed the economy, the on, Nicolet points out that a study of the history of
strategic defense, the landscape. Or, as Sylvie Crogiez‐ geography must begin by examining how Romans
Pétrequin and Jean‐Luc Fiches state: “Le rôle du génie looked at their space. In fact, Nicolet makes an
militaire dans la construction des routes apparaît outstanding observation, which is, clearly, related to
particulièrement forte au Proche‐Orient, mais l’armée the subject of his book.128
était aussi mobilisée, dans certaines circonstances, pour In 2004, Whittaker wonderfully addressed the
la surveillance des routes comme en témoignent les same idea in Chapter 4 of his book concerning the
fortins disposes le long des pistes du desert égyptien ou Roman frontiers.129 He presented in summary all the
dans la traverse du Djurdjura (Algérie). La fundamental sources regarding space in the Roman
représentation du pouvoir impérial à travers les world. He concluded that Romans had a horizontal
milliaires et les tabellaria, le fonctionnement concret de view of their space, so ‘a different visual
l’État et le rôle des habitants des provinces dans comprehension of space from ours’. His argument
l’équipement des route, constitue encore de nouvelles relies on the following: the Peutinger map and other
perspectives de recherche, au‐delà de la construction et itineraria reflect this tradition, beginning in the first
de l’entretien de la route elle‐même, et du repérage de century BC, as the discovery of the Artemidorus
son tracé, qui a lui aussi bénéficie de progrès techniques papyrus proves.130
considérables. L’image de la voie romaine au tracé What was the level of the geographical
réctiligne, que la photographie a largement diffusée, knowledge in Roman times? To answer this question,
suppose de véritables constructions, intègrées souvent we need to know: 1. Which knowledge did the Romans
dans un aménagement plus large du territoire”.126 inherit from the Greeks? Or, more precisely, did they
In the first chapter of the first book of his work use geographic data? 2. What do the Roman literary
Geographike hyphegesis, Ptolemy states: “The essence sources mention regarding geography? 3. How did
of world cartography (geographia) is to show the known Romans apply what knowledge they had?
world as a single and continuous entity, its nature, and First, to set up and develop a research
how it is situated, taking account only of the things that method, one should have in mind some of the
are associated with it in its broader, general outlines following starting concepts: 1. the classical scholarship
(such as gulfs, great cities (poleion megalon), the more related to subject; 2. the concept of “itinerary”, as we
notable people and rivers and the more noteworthy see it today and, more important, as it was understood
things of each kind).” (Ptolemy. Geog. 1.1) by Romans; 3. the analysis and the interpretation of
“…regional cartography (chorographia), as an literary sources regarding travel in the Roman world;
independent discipline, sets out the individual localities, 4. the level of the geographical knowledge; 5.
each one independently and by itself, registering understanding how “maps” were created and which
practically everything down to the least thing therein were the sources used; 6. sources from the category
(for example, harbors, towns, districts, branches of itineraria picta et adnotata, inscriptions and other
principal rivers, and so on)…” (1.1)
The Romans were not happy with these 127
Nicolet 1991.
distinctions. As a consequence, they created, used and 128
Nicolet 1991, 2: ‘In order to set boundaries to their
extended the itineraria. Why? The Roman society was empire and to claim to have reached those that were
an advanced one. Technologically, they invented and marked out, the Romans needed a certain perception of
used a lot of new things. But, economically and geographical space, of its dimensions and of the area they
strategically, they implemented, developed and occupied [...]. The objective is to know how the Romans, at a
maintain what we can today the key element for the turning point in their history, became aware of this and
adapted’.
129
Whittaker 2004, 63‐87.
126 130
Crogiez‐Pétrequin, Fiches 2011, 3‐4. Brodersen 2001, 16‐18.

7
artifacts related to distances and routes (milestones, because he managed to develop a plane projection
tabellaria, the Vicarello goblets, the Amiens skillet or system with meridians and parallels and the
patera, the Dura‐Europos Shield, stadiasmus provinciae conception that the world is a vast island surrounded
Lyciae); 7. comparative study concerning information by Ocean to all its cardinal points. He left these ideas
related to distances, in order to clarify the location of and after him almost all authors mentioned him. The
settlements, the average distance between one point to mechanism is a little odd: mainly, the majority of Latin
another in different sources; 8. distances and authors criticized the work of Eratosthenes but they
communication in the Roman Empire; 9. the relation always cited him (see Cicero, Varro, Vitruvius, Pliny,
between space and time, which reduces a potential and Mela). Another aspect: by the time of
travel through space to a list, as the calendar does the Eratosthenes the ‘horizontal’ vision of the oikumene
same with time; 10. from cursus publicus to private was already established. Nicolet observes this.133
persons: travel in the Roman world; 11. the concept of So, this was the perception of the oikumene
organizing space (the widespread of towns and in the Hellenistic period.134 The known world was
settlements according to the itineraria); 12. between Hercules’s Columns to India from West to
understanding tradition: from Romans to modern times East and between Thule and Meroë from North to
– comparative analysis of itineraries. South. So, a geographical space twice as wide as it is
This reflects what S. M. Graham highlighted in long.
2006:131 ‘Most people have a mental image of how The Romans were not indifferent to this
places interrelate, how they connect [...]. For the knowledge. Often, as Nicolet observed,135 we are
Roman, large‐scale geographical space was sometimes tempted to think that they were, by definition, only
viewed as a list, of what‐comes‐next. Details about the conquerors, explorers, specialists in land
space between places could always be supplied by a measurement, and the Greeks were the people that
knowledgeable local, but the global perception was created the science of cartography. It is not at all like
courtesy of a list, an itinerary. How successful one’s that. Every society had its needs. The Roman world
journey was, depended on the quality of the itinerary’. needed the access to information to control the
A communis opinio has spread among certain territory of Empire. How did they do this? Simply by
historian regarding this subject. This outlines that presenting or representing the geographical
Romans were not proficient at making maps. Of course, knowledge in form of itineraria, either written or
the Greek tradition was very powerful. Nicolet refers to drawn.136 They were interested in how one can get
this and he makes a fine observation: the Greeks gained from one point to another, which was the distance,
geographical knowledge in time more by sea than by the stopping points etc.137
land, because they were in contact with so many
nations, and, practically, they created what we know by 1. 3. The geographical knowledge about
the term periplus.132 In the early period, geographical Dacia before the roman conquest
information was what we might call a description of the
inhabited world, mixing details regarding people, their The regions north of the Danube were
customs, their history and often their myths. So, basically almost unknown until Trajan conquered
geographic information was mixed with ethnography Dacia. In the fourth century B.C. Herodotus knew from
(see for this Hecateus of Miletus or Herodotus). Thracians that the land north of the Ister (Danube) is
However this knowledge developed also on scientific occupied by bees. What is funnier is another fact: he
and theoretical bases. Of course, if we just mention here didn’t believe this, because he further affirms that in
that in the fifth century B.C. the Greeks already
formulated the hypothesis of a spherical terrestrial 133
Nicolet 1991, 61: ‘to Eratosthenes no lands existed
globe, we are faced with two possibilities. In the first farther East than India (except several islands, among them
case, geography means literary description of people Taprobane – that is, Ceylon; and secondly that is his
and places, in the second case geography is astronomy conception of the world with its overestimated length
or mathematics. What better example could we offer (though smaller than it is in reality’.
134
here than to mention the name of Anaximander, who is Dilke 1985; Dilke 1987, 35‐39; Talbert 2008, 9‐27, an
credited with the first map? outstanding presentation of the state of research regarding
Greek and Roman mapping. For Roman cartography: Dilke
After that, other important geographers went
1987a, 201‐211; Dilke 1987b, 212‐233; Dilke 1987c, 234‐257;
further with their ‘research’. Eratosthenes had an Dilke 1987d, 258‐275.
elliptical vision of the oikumene. His calculations were 135
Nicolet 1991, 66.
outstanding. He gave the value of 252,000 stades, which 136
Brodersen 2001, 18‐19.
137
equals 39,690 km the circumference of Earth. He is Aujac 1987, 130‐147; Aujac 1987a, 148‐160; Aujac 1987 b,
extremely important in the history of cartography 161‐176; Brodersen 1995; Brodersen 1996, 29‐43; Brodersen
1997; Brodersen 1999, 2‐4; Brodersen 2001a, 137‐148;
Brodersen 2004, 183‐190; Dilke 1971; Talbert 2004, 21‐37;
131
Graham 2006, 45‐64. Talbert 2008, 9‐27; Talbert, Brodersen 2004; Talbert, Unger
132
Nicolet 1991, 58. 2008.

8
the territories north of the Danube it is so cold that no ‘Solus ad egressus missus septemplicis Istri,
bees or no people can live (V, 10).138 Parrhasiae gelido virginis axe premor’.
Caius Iulius Caesar, in Comentarii de Bello
Gallico (VI, 25), shows that he knows nothing about “I was sent to live close to the seven mouths
Dacia. His only observation regarding these areas is of the Ister, Where I suffer from extremely cold
related to the length of the Hercinyae silvae: weather.”141

‘Huius Hercyniae silvae, quae supra Trogus Pompeius (first century B.C.) wrote
demonstrata est, latitudo novem dierum iter expedito Historiae Philippicae (44 books). Only several passages
patet: non enim aliter finiri potest, neque mensuras survived at Justinus (second century A.D.). He creates
itinerum noverunt. Oritur ab Helvetiorum et Nemetum et the same apocalyptic image regarding the barbarism
Rauracorum finibus rectaque fluminis Danubi regione of the Dacians:
pertinet ad fines Dacorum et Anartium; hinc se flectit
sinistrorsus diversis ab flumine regionibus multarumque ‘Daci quoque soboles Getarum sunt: qui cum
gentium fines propter magnitudinem adtingit; neque Orole rege adversus Bastarnas male pugnassent, ad
quisquam est huius Germaniae, qui se aut adisse ad ultionem segnitiae capture somnum capita ioco pedum
initium eius silvae dicat, cum dierum iter LX processerit, ponere iussu Regis[…]’.
aut, quo ex loco oriatur, acceperit. Multaque in ea
genera ferarum nasci constat, quae reliquis in locis visa “The Dacians are part of the Getae nation.
non sint; ex quibus quae maxime differant ab ceteris et During the reign of Oroles, because they didn’t fight
memoriae prodenda videantur haec sunt’. well against the Bastarnes, they were forced, from the
order of the king, that when they went to sleep, to put
“The breadth of this Hercynian forest, which has their head close to their feet […]”.142
been referred to above, is to a quick traveler, a journey
of nine days. For it can not be otherwise computed, nor Even a very educated and important
are they acquainted with the measures of roads. It geographer as Strabo provides only a general
begins at the frontiers of the Helvetii, Nemetes, and description of Dacia. It is obvious he was never
Rauraci, and extends in a right line along the river interested in regions which were not included in the
Danube to the territories of the Daci and the Anartes; it Roman Empire. And we can add here another fact:
bends thence to the left in a different direction from the Dacia was not even a part of the areas considered by
river, and owing to its extent touches the confines of Strabo “semi‐civilized” – as the Parthian kingdom,
many nations; nor is there any person belonging to this India or Arabia Felix – and to whom it was worth to
part of Germany who says that he either has gone to the accord some attention. Therefore, Strabo limits
extremity of that forest, though he had advanced a himself only to state that north of the Ister one can
journey of sixty days, or has heard in what place it find “the regions beyond Rhine and Celtic region” (VII,
begins. It is certain that many kinds of wild beast are 1, 1): 143
produced in it which have not been seen in other parts;
of which the following are such as differ principally from “Now that I have described Iberia and the
other animals, and appear worthy of being committed to Celtic and Italian tribes, along with the islands near by,
record”.139 it will be next in order to speak of the remaining parts
of Europe, dividing them in the approved manner. The
Basically, most of the ancient authors use the remaining parts are: first, those towards the east,
same topos to describe Dacia. They mention the being those which are across the Rhenus and extend as
‘legendary’ Scythicum frigus,140 the drunkenness of the far as the Tanaïs and the mouth of Lake Maeotis, and
Barbarians, and their awkward, savage way of life. also all those regions lying between the Adrias and the
Publius Ovidius Naso (43 B.C. – 17/18 A.D.), exiled by regions on the left of the Pontic Sea that are shut off
Augustus to Tomis, do not mentions the Dacians. For by the Ister and extend towards the south as far as
him, the name “Dacian” is the same thing as Gaete. His Greece and the Propontis; for this river divides very
main “themes” are related to the coldness of the nearly the whole of the aforesaid land into two parts. It
weather, the savage of the Barbarians and their strange, is the largest of the European rivers, at the outset
wild customs. Of course he exaggerates and he flowing towards the south and then turning straight
complains a lot: from the west towards the east and the Pontus. It rises
in the western limits of Germany, as also near the

138 141
Bărbulescu 1999, 33. Ovidius, Tristium II; Popa‐Lisseanu 2006, 30, 46.
139 142
Popa‐Lisseanu 2006, 15‐16; Caesar, The Gallic War, vol. I, Popa‐Lisseanu 2006, 70.
143
Loeb Classical Library 72, translated by H. J. Edwards. Strabo, VII, 1, 1 apud Loeb Classical Library edition 182,
140
Nemeti 2009, 411‐427. vol. III, 1924, translated by Horace Leonard Jones.

9
recess of the Adriatic (at a distance from it of about one Strabo also describes, but very generally the
thousand stadia), and comes to an end at the Pontus not courses of the rivers Marisus (Mureş) and Danubius
very far from the outlets of the Tyras and the (Dunărea):
Borysthenes, bending from its easterly course
approximately towards the north. Now the parts that are ”The Marisus River flows through their
beyond the Rhenus and Celtica are to the north of the country into the Danuvius, on which the Romans used
Ister; these are the territories of the Galatic and the to convey their equipment for war; the ’Danuvius’ I say,
Germanic tribes, extending as far as the Bastarnians and for so they used to call the upper part of the river from
the Tyregetans and the River Borysthenes. And the near its sources on to the cataracts, I mean the part
territories of all the tribes between this river and the which in the main flows through the country, of the
Tanaïs and the mouth of Lake Maeotis extend up into Daci, although they give the name ’Ister’ to the lower
the interior as far as the ocean and are washed by the part, from the cataracts on to the Pontus, the part
Pontic Sea. But both the Illyrian and the Thracian tribes, which flows past the country of the Getae. The
and all tribes of the Celtic or other peoples that are language of the Daci is the same as that of the Getae.
mingled with these, as far as Greece, are to the south of Among the Greeks, however, the Getae are better
the Ister. But let me first describe the parts outside the known because the migrations they make to either side
Ister, for they are much simpler than those on the other of the Ister are continuous, and because they are
side”. intermingled with the Thracians and Mysians” [...] (VII,
3, 13).
In book VII, 3, 1, he writes:
Strabo (ca. 63/64 BC – ca. AD 24) was a
„As for the southern part of Germany beyond respected historian, geographer and philosopher. In
the Albis, the portion which is just contiguous to that his position, he traveled a lot.144 Even so, with all his
river is occupied by the Suevi; then immediately possibilities of traveling, exploring, reading, even if he
adjoining this is the land of the Getae, which, though had access to information, his descriptions regarding
narrow at first, stretching as it does along the Ister on its Dacia are very general.
southern side and on the opposite side along the As Strabo, the famous Pliny the Elder (23 A.D.
mountain‐side of the Hercynian Forest (for the land of ‐ 79 A.D.) has also little knowledge about this territory.
the Getae also embraces a part of the mountains), I agree with Mattern’s opinion that Pliny was incapable
afterwards broadens out towards the north as far as the to imagine Dacia as a territory of certain shape and
Tyregetae; but I cannot tell the precise boundaries. It is extent, limited by geographical features.145
because of men's ignorance of these regions that any Even if he worked so hard, he didn’t succeed
heed has been given to those who created the mythical to offer rich information about all territories. In fact,
„Rhipaean Mountains” and „Hyperboreans”, and also to the name “Dacia” is mentioned only once, at the end
all those false statements made by Pytheas the of book VI, (39) 219:
Massalian regarding the country along the ocean,
wherein he uses as a screen his scientific knowledge of ’Hactenus antiquorum exacta celebravimus.
astronomy and mathematics”. sequentium diligentissimi quod superest terrarum
supra tribus adsignavere segmentis, a Tanai per
Then, he continues: Maeotim lacum et Sarmatas usque Borysthenen atque
ita per Dacos partemque Germaniae, Gallias oceani
“Now the Greeks used to suppose that the litora amplexi, quod esset horarum XVI, alterum per
Getae were Thracians; and the Getae lived on either side Hyperboreos et Britanniam horarum XVII, postremum
the Ister, as did also the Mysi, these also being Thracians Scythicum a Ripaeis iugis in Thylen, in quo dies
and identical with the people who are now called Moesi” continuarentur, ut diximus, noctesque per vices’.
[...] (VII, 3, 2).
“Thus far we have set forth the results of
”But there is also another division of the country observations made by the ancients. The remaining part
which has endured from early times, for some of the of the earth has been divided, through the careful
people are called Daci, whereas others are called Getae ‐ researches of those of more recent times, by three
Getae, those who incline towards the Pontus and the additional parallels. The first runs from the Tanais
east, and Daci, those who incline in the opposite
direction towards Germany and the sources of the Ister.
144
The Daci, I think, were called ’Daï’ in early times; whence He travelled to Egypt and Asia Minor, he sailed up the
the slave names ’Geta’ and ’Daüs’ which prevailed among Nile. Between 44 B.C. and at least 31 B.C. he stayed, studied
the Attic people” [...] (VII, 3, 12). and wrote in Rome. It seems that in 17 A.D. he returned to
Rome and finished his 17‐volume work Geographica (see
Dueck 2000).
145
Mattern 1999, 209.

10
through the Mæotis and the country of the Sarmatæ, as geographic and topographic details, but these are not
far as the Borysthenes, and so through the Daci and part proper “spatial descriptions”, but rather this is a linear
of Germany, and the Gallic provinces, as far as the shores construction of his discourse: “Pliny’s eye for
of the ocean, the longest day being sixteen hours. The description is that of the traveler who pauses to view
second parallel runs through the country of the the landscape stretching horizontally in front of
Hyperborei and the island of Britannia, the longest day him”.148
being seventeen hours in length. The last of all is the Josephus Flavius (37‐100 A.D.), in Bellum
Scythian parallel, which runs from the Riphæan range to Iudaicum, II, 16, offers also general data regarding the
Thule, in which, as we have already stated, the year is land inhabited by the Thracians and Dacians:149
divided into days and nights alternately, of six months’
duration”.146 “The Thracians, who have a land with a width
of five days traveling and a length of seven, a land
The name ‘getae’ is mentioned only twice (IV, much more harsh than your land (referring to the
41, 80): Jewish lands) and much more fortified and where is so
cold, doesn’t they have fear of a Roman garrison of
“Haemi excelsitas VI passuum subitur. aversa 2000 men?”
eius et in Histrum devexa Moesi, Getae, Aedi, Scaugdae
Clariaeque et sub iis Arraei Sarmatae, quos Areatas Dio Chrysostomus150 (ca. 40 A.D. – ca. 120
vocant, Scythaeque et circa Ponti litora Moriseni A.D.) lived the life of a Cynic philosopher, undertaking
Sitonique, Orphei vatis genitores, optinent” (IV, 41). a journey to the countries in the north and east of the
Roman Empire: Thrace, Mysia, Scythia, and the
“To reach the summit of Hæmus you have to country of the Getae. Unfortunately, the supposed
travel six miles. The sides of it that look in the opposite written work concerning the Getae was lost.151
direction and slope towards the Ister are inhabited by The geography of Dacia remained a mystery
the Mœsi, the Getæ, the Aorsi, the Gaudæ, and the until the reign of Domitian. This is, in my opinion, the
Clariæ; below them, are the Arræi Sarmatæ, also called first moment when the Romans, i.e. the military
Arreatæ, the Scythians, and, about the shores of the troops, became aware of the north‐danubian territory.
Euxine, the Moriseni and the Sithonii, the forefathers of During Domitian, the Dacians, reunited again in a
the poet Orpheus, dwell”. powerful centralized state under the rule of
Diurpaneus, the predecessor of Decebalus, threatened
A short presentation regarding the course of again Moesia. The war of Domitian against the Dacians
the Danube is provided in book IV, 79: and its political and military consequences were
subject of many debates.152 The mismatches between
’Ortus hic in Germania iugis montis Abnouae ex different opinions regard some chronological and
adverso Raurici Galliae oppidi, multis ultra Alpes milibus geographical issues. This conflict affected also the
ac per innumeras lapsus gentes Danuvi nomine, inmenso neighbouring provinces of Dacia, especially Moesia.
aquarum auctu et unde primum Illyricum adluit Hister Cassius Dio (LXVII, 6) writes:
appellatus, LX amnibus receptis, medio ferme eorum “At this time the Romans became involved in
numero navigabili, in Pontum vastis sex fluminibus a very serious war with the Dacians, whose king was
evolvitur’. then Decebalus. This man was shrewd in his
understanding of warfare and shrewd also in the
“This river springs in Germany in the heights of waging of war; he judged well when to attack and
Mount Abnoba, opposite to Rauricum, a town of Gaul, chose the right moment to retreat; he was an expert in
and flows for a course of many miles beyond the Alps ambuscades and a master in pitched battles; and he
and through nations innumerable, under the name of the knew not only how to follow up a victory well, but also
Danube. Adding immensely to the volume of its waters, how to manage well a defeat. Hence he showed
at the spot where it first enters Illyricum, it assumes the himself a worthy antagonist of the Romans for a long
name of Ister, and, after receiving sixty rivers, nearly one time. I call the people Dacians, the names used by the
half of which are navigable, rolls into the Euxine by six natives themselves as well as by the Romans, though
vast channels”. I am not ignorant that some Greek writers refer to
It is obvious from these passages that Pliny had them as Getae, whether that is the right form or not;
a vague idea about this lands and that his writing style,
in this case and in others, is certainly linear.147 This
148
proves that he tried to inform the reader using Whittaker 2004, 68.
149
Popa‐Lisseanu 2006, 221.
150
Or Dion of Prusa or Dio Cocceianus.
146 151
Pliny, Natural History, vol. II, books 3‐7, Loeb Classical Bărbulescu 1999, 33.
152
Library 352, 1942, translated by H. Rackham. Strobel 1989; Jones 1992; Stefan 2005; Nemeth 2007,
147
McQuiggan 2006‐2007, 80‐81. 144.

11
for the Getae of whom I myself know are those that live with the Dacians, Domitian focused his attention to
beyond the Haemus range, along the Ister. Domitian, the conflict with the Germans. According to Cassius
then, made an expedition against this people, but did Dio (LVII, 7), the emperor was very angry because the
not take an active part in the conflict. Instead, he Germans refused to offer military aid for the Romans
remained in one of the cities of Moesia, indulging in in the conflict with the Dacians. Domitian wanted to
riotous living, as was his wont. For he was not only arrive rapidly close to the areas inhabited by the
indolent of body and timorous of spirit, but also most Germans. Obviously, the Roman troops took the
profligate and lewd towards women and boys alike. He shortest route from the Dacian theatre of hostilities.156
therefore sent others to conduct the war and for the One inscription shows that some of them had to
most part got the worst of it”.153 march through Dacia157 and then northwards through
the Hungarian plain. But Domitian soon left Pannonia
In Moesia the Dacians unleashed a devastating for the Rhine, and then he returned back because
attack (avaritia Domitiani metuendes154) in the winter Romans were defeated. After that he accepted the
85/86 A.D. or already in the spring of the summer of 85 peace with the Dacians. In Rome he celebrated
A.D. The causes of this attack were discussed several triumph over the Dacians and the Chatti, but not over
times. It seems that the Dacians were dissatisfied by the the Germans. So, some troops marched though Dacia
Roman’s measure of reducing the subsidies. But other and maybe this was the first time when the Romans
strong reason for the Dacians to attack was their desire were really in the position to see some of the areas
to regain the control over the north‐danubian territories which later will form Trajan’s Dacia.
supervised by the Romans. The governor of Moesia in Information regarding the Dacians territories
that time, C. Oppius Sabinus, was not capable to reject could be gathered also by the merchants. It may be
the Dacians’ attack. He was killed in battle. The things possible that in Dacia Italian merchants were present
went so bad, that Domitian himself came in Moesia and often between the first century B.C. and the first
designated Cornelius Fuscus (praefectus praetorio) as century A.D., because products brought here by them
chief commander of the Roman army. He succeeded to were discovered. But we do not have other strong
push the Dacians over the Danube but in 86 A.D. he tried arguments to prove this. Anyway I would agree with
a very bold but reckless action: “Cornelius Fuscus Mattern’s observation, that merchants were
attempted to avenge Sabinus’ death by invading Dacia untrustworthy sources. Her examples are suggestive.
himself. With his well‐attested impetuosity and, Caesar, willing to find more information on Britain,
perhaps, a sense of history, he not only crossed the asked the merchants about this territory (even if they
Danube by means of a bridge of boats (Jordanes, Getica knew only the part facing Gaul) and “therefore
77), but also plunged into Dacia itself ‐ and perished”.155 although he called merchants to him from
He penetrated into the Dacians territories, but he was everywhere, he was unable to discover the magnitude
badly defeated at Tapae (the Transylvanian Iron Gates, of the island, nor which nations inhabited it nor how
close to the capital of the Dacian kingdom). Fuscus died many, nor what style of war they had nor what
here. After that, Domitian came again in Moesia, customs they used, nor which harbors were suitable
bringing also here the legio II Adiutrix from Britannia. for a great number of large ships”.158 Strabo shares the
Another consequence of these episodes was the division same opinion when complains that the merchants who
of Moesia in two provinces in 86 A.D. Then Tettius have been to the Ganges are “private citizens and
Iulianus was designated in 87 A.D. to prepare and useless for the history of the places”.159
execute an expedition in Dacia, which was a success. In Between 89 and 101 A.D. the literary sources
88 A.D. he managed to defeat the Dacians in the same do not offer other information on the Dacians.
place as his predecessor, at Tapae. Pannonia, though, was affected by the attacks of the
Then things went complicated for Domitian. A Iazyges and the Suebi in 92 A.D.
rebellion of a part of the army from Germania Superior As a synthesis to what I presented here, I will
started. On the other hand, the Marcomanni and Quadi use S. Mattern’s description of this strange, wrong
attacked the Roman Empire. In this situation, he decided image which the Romans had about the north
to put end to the conflict with Decebalus. A peace treaty Danubian territories: “Dacia was a land beyond the
was signed and the Dacian king became rex amicus Danube, a mighty river, which divided the Romans
sociusque populi Romani. After he put end to the conflict from the barbarians the way it had divided the king of
Persia from the ferocious Scythians, in a half‐mythical
153
Cassius Dio, LXVII, 6, edition used: Loeb Classical Library
176, vol. VIII (books 61‐70), 1925, Harvard University Press,
156
translation by Earnest Cary and Herbert B. Foster. Mócsy 1974, 84.
154 157
Iordanes, Getica, 76. ILS 9200: […] et bel |lo Marcommannorum Quadorum |
155
Jones 1992, 141; Tacitus, Agricola, 41.2 writes: ‘tot exercitus Sarmatarum adversus quos expedi | tionem fecit per regnum
amissi temeritate...ducum’ (“so many armies lost through the Decibali [...].
158
rashness of their commanders”). This is addressed directed at Mattern 1999, 36.
159
Fuscus. Mattern 1999, 36.

12
tale of conquest centuries ago. It was inhabited by a last and the greatest of the imperial fora, covering an
fierce, savage, warlike, barbarous people. In its icy and area of 185 x 300 m, almost as great as all the others
inhospitable climate it approached the earth’s farthest, put together. It was built, as the inscription from the
uninhabitable regions; it bordered on the frigid, sluggish basilica Ulpia states, ex manubiis.
ocean of the north. It was one of the remote corners of These statements are based on archaeological
the earth ‐ like Arabia, or India ‐ still not subject to and literary evidence. It is difficult to understand why
Roman domination. Such was the image that was most Whittaker’s perceived the annexation of Dacia in
likely in Trajan’s mind when he invaded it, proudly totally different terms: “Or, to take another prominent
subjecting this wild and remote territory to land surveys, example, much has been made of Trajan’s motives for
taxes, roads, and a Roman colony. Trajan, like Darius, war and his supposed strategy in annexing Dacia in the
bridged the Danube. No conquest in the imperial period early second century AD. Trajan’s aims are ascribed by
brought any emperor greater glory; none was depicted Roman authors, some of them contemporaries, to
on monuments so vast; none was commemorated in revenge or desire for gold and glory, but never
language so reverent”.160 elevated to a grand, strategic aim for the defense of
the Balkans. The results, if we are meant to believe
1. 4. The conquest of Dacia. Benefits. Trajan had secretly planned some wider, strategic aim
Disadvantages behind closed doors, are hardly convincing. Trajan had
no time to organize the defense of Dacia before
Almost every historian who wrote about the rushing off to Parthia. While the Dacian army tied
reasons of the conquest of Dacia (Fig. 1) invoked always down some 55–60,000 men by the early third century
three: 1. Dacia was conquered because of its gold (one eighth of the Roman army), it still failed to deter
resources; 2. The second motif was a strategic one: the the Marcommani invasion of Pannonia in the later
separation of the masses of Barbarian people, in this second century or the Gothic incursions of the third
case the Sarmatians Iazyges and Roxolanii; 3. Trajan century, which led to the abandonment of the
wanted to create a province North of the Danube to province. By destroying a stable Dacian kingdom,
avoid further attacks against Moesia Superior. Mihai Trajan created a threat from the now invigorated
Bărbulescu argued that “crearea provinciei Dacia a avut, Sarmatians and Iazyges that continued to plague the
printre altele, rostul “ruperii” maselor de barbari nord‐ Empire for the next two hundred years. If the
dunăreni, separarea celor două grupări de sarmaţi din annexation of Dacia was really strategically
răsăritul şi vestul provinciei”.161 Bennett outlines that determined, why on earth did the province not include
“the distribution of the auxiliary garrisons would seem a frontier across the Hungarian plain, which would
to reflect more obviously a concern with attack from the have shortened the defenses of the middle Danube by
two neighbouring Sarmatian tribes”,162 and, in another some 500 km? In fact, the action does not appear to
paragraph: “It was an immense sphere of responsibility, have been based on any geo‐political assessment of
forming a marked extension north of the Lower Danube the military viability of the annexations. That is what
marches, all of which had to be organized in an Hadrian, Trajan’s successor, realized, although he
acceptable Roman fashion. Scaurianus’ first task, could not reverse the decision, according to Dio. It was
therefore, was to secure the territory from external also what Aurelian must have discovered when he
aggression. The potential threat came from two finally abandoned the province in the next century.
nomadic Sarmatian tribes of Scythian origin, the Iazyges Hadrian did in fact withdraw from Trajan’s other
to the west of the province, and the Roxolani to the conquest in Parthia, much to the anger of the military
east.”163 establishment. That may have been due to an
Dacia was not only profitable for the Romans. intelligent reassessment of ends and means. If so, it
Dacia was the gold mine, literally and figuratively. This was unpopular with the Roman public and reversed by
territory represented the salvation of the Roman Marcus Aurelius and Septimius Severus. Commodus’
Empire. It was the gold and the silver brought from reassessment of Marcus Aurelius’ intentions to annex
Dacia that relaunched the economy of the Empire. This two provinces north of the Danube may, by some
allowed Trajan “to unleash any suppressed pretensions stretch of the imagination, also have been strategic,
he may have had as Augustus’ successor as connoisseur rather than due to his depravity, as the sources say. If
and patron of fine architecture”.164 The most impressive so, the decision was taken against the advice of his
achievement was the forum of Trajan, and the basilica, military council.”165
inaugurated on 1 January 112 A.D. Trajan’s forum is the I explain some of Whittaker’s misunderstood
ideas. Trajan had enough time to prepare the
conquest of Dacia: 1. The road along the right bank of
160
Mattern 1999, 209. the Danube (Fig. 2) was finished in 100 A.D., as Tabula
161
Bărbulescu 2001, 74. Traiana proves; 2. He used a huge number of soldiers
162
Bennett 1997, 170.
163
Bennett 1997, 166.
164 165
Bennett 1997, 150. Whittaker 2004, 34‐35.

13
from Pannonia and Moesia. The Marcommanic invasion supposed to be rich in gold”.169 It is not sure that the
affected not only Dacia, but other important provinces Romans knew about the Dacian gold, located in the
too. The Gothic invasions from the third century, Roman period and exploited from Alburnus Maior. In
strange, mainly avoided Dacia. The abandonment of the fact, I think they found out about it only after the
province, in fact, happened not because Dacia was creation of the new province and the exploration of
attacked, but on contrary, because it was avoided. this new territory. The Dacians had enough gold (as
Troops from Dacia were dislocated in other provinces, the archaeological discoveries proves), but this gold
e.g. vexillationes from legio V Macedonica from Potaissa was mostly obtained from sand. So, maybe after the
and legio XIII Gemina from Apulum are attested, in the first or, more possible, after the second military
third century, at Poetovio. They were moved here in campaign and the annexation of Dacia, that the
order to defend the most important land connection Romans became aware of the huge potential of this
between Italy and the Balkans: the road Aquileia – region.170
Poetovio ‐ Singidunum. The Dacian kingdom may have Conscious or not about the Dacian gold,
been stable inside, but it represented a huge threat for Trajan didn’t hesitate to use an enormous amount of
the Roman Empire, for provinces such as Moesia soldiers in his two military campaigns again Dacia. In
Inferior. One should note that the first military campaign expeditio imperatoris prima Trajan relied on nine
started in March 101 A.D. After one year, the Banat legions (from a total of 30) available at that time and
region was already under Roman control. Longinus was already stationed along the front. Four legions were in
designated commander in chief of the military troops Pannonia (XIII Gemina, XV Apollinaris, I and II Adiutrix),
left by the Romans in Dacia. In two years, the Romans three in Moesia Superior (XIV Gemina Martia Victrix,
built the longest bridge ever known, at Drobeta. The IV Flavia felix and VII Claudia pia fidelis) and two in
second campaign lasted one year (105 A.D. – summer of Moesia Inferior (V Macedonica at Oescus and I Italica).
106 A.D.). Dacia was conquered: 1. quickly; 2. efficiently. As for the auxiliary troops, no less than 90 auxiliary
Of course there were strategic dimensions of regiments were camped along the Ister at this date.171
the Dacian annexation. A frontier across the Hungarian In expeditio imperatoris secunda Trajan used a bigger
plain, as imagined by Whittaker, does not reflect army. He even ordered the creation of two new
strategy, but rather misunderstanding of the landscape’s legions, the II Traiana fortis and XXX Ulpia victrix.172 It
features. Or, the Romans were extremely good in is probable that for the first and the second campaign
strategy. Why conquer, occupy, administrate and the Roman emperor was capable to mobilize around
military control marshy areas, such those in the western 200.000 soldiers, which is about half of the Roman
Banat? army from that period. This is the biggest
From the first moment we look to a map of the concentration of military forces in the imperial period.
Roman Empire, one can immediately notice the strange I wanted to present this information, because
position of Dacia. Luttwak noticed that in fact, on a map, this represents the answer to Whittaker’s question:
the new province presents a classic profile of “Did the Romans follow a strategy of cost–benefit
vulnerability.166 It may be possible that Trajan, among analysis before annexation, as some have
the reasons mentioned above, wanted to reach the maintained?”173 In other words, did Trajan or his staff
Northern Ocean, because “it is likely that he shared the acted like good economists, calculating the ratio cost‐
prevalent view of a flattened northern Europe; Agrippa benefits, or the costs of the war against the Dacians?
had, after all, placed the ocean only 396 miles from the For this question, the answer is negative. Neither
Danube River. The total conquest of eastern Europe Strabo nor Pliny the Elder are aware of the resources
must have seemed an attainable goal”.167 The same idea of Dacia. In other words, this region didn’t have a
was adopted by Marcus Aurelius. He wanted to create
two new provinces: Sarmatia and Marcomannia.168 169
Mattern 1999, 61.
170
As we saw above, the Roman conceptions It can be possible that this happened only after the
about this area were mainly mythological. And it may be annexation of Dacia, and the argument is simple: during the
possible that the emperor was motivated to explore and first campaign the Romans didn’t penetrated so deep the
conquer an “exotic, unknown territory, which was also Dacian territory. Alburnus Maior (today Roșia Montană) is
located in the heart of the Apuseni Mountains. The Romans
occupied only the south‐western region, called today Banat.
166 171
Luttwak 1976, 100. Bennett 1997, 91: “21 alae, or heavy cavalry, 5 of which
167
Mattern 1999, 61. were double strength; 33 cohortes equitatae, the mixed units
168
Historia Augusta, Marcus Aurelius, 27, 10: ‘triennio bellum of light cavalry and infantry, 9 of double strength; 25 infantry
postea cum Marcomannis Hermunduris Sarmatis Quadis etiam cohortes peditatae, 6 double strength; and 10 regiments of
egit et, si anno uno superfuisset, provincias ex his fecisset’ („For archers, the cohortes sagittariae, 3 of which were part‐
three years thereafter he waged war with the Marcomanni, mounted, 1 of double strength; together, they perhaps
the Hermunduri, the Sarmatians, and the Quadi, and had he numbered in all no fewer than 55,000 men”; see also
lived a year longer he would have made these regions Popescu, Ţentea 2006, 75‐120.
172
provinces”). After Loeb Classical Library 139, 1921. Historia Bennett 1997, 101.
173
Augusta, vol. I, translated by David Magie. Whittaker 2004, 35.

14
reputation for wealth. We saw about its reputation: a Having the lesson with Domitian learn, Trajan
cold region, with drunken, savage barbarians, with no prepared carefully for the invasion of Dacia. On
fertile lands. Mattern reminds us that in his Panegyric, preparing the conquest of Dacia, Optimus Princeps
Pliny the Younger noticed that Trajan should expect realized three crucial things: 1. he assured that he
himself to bring to Rome only barbarian kings in could rely on a huge army; 2. he took with him the
chains.174 He never referred to the richness of Dacia. In best military commanders he had at that time,
the case of Britain, the situation was differently together with other important specialists in logistics
perceived. Strabo believed that Britain is very rich in and measurement of the land (the mensor Balbus, the
gold and silver: architect Apollodorus); 3. he ordered the
improvement of the road infrastructure, to easily
“Most of the island is flat and overgrown with reach close to the Dacian lands.
forests, although many of its districts are hilly. It bears
grain, cattle, gold, silver, and iron. These things, 1. 5. The Roman military campaigns in Dacia
accordingly, are exported from the island, as also hides, and the construction of the first roads (Fig. 3)
and slaves, and dogs that are by nature suited to the
purposes of the chase”.175 On 25 March 101 A.D. Trajan left Rome,
travelling overland along the Via Flaminia by way of
In all, no matter the period, or the region, war is Ariminum (Rimini) to Viminacium (Kostolac). After one
not rentable, unless that territory offered plunder. But month of travel, the emperor and his staff arrived
too many reasons determined Trajan to put end to perhaps in late April to Viminacium, the traditional
Decebalus’ kingdom. I mentioned them above. So, the base for campaigns beyond the Ister. The staff he took
position of Dacia on a modern map of the Roman Empire with him is impressive.177 Titus Claudius Livianus,
is awkward, but the benefits were immense. praefectus praetorio, accompanied Trajan, together
Besides these, other natural resources were with the Praetorian Guard. Recently returned from the
exploited by the Romans in Dacia: the iron, copper and administration of Germania Inferior, Lucius Licinius
silver from Banat, the marble from Bucova (close to Sura participated too. Other generals in Trajan’s
Sarmizegetusa) and Ampoiţa (close to Apulum), the salt entourage were Quintus Sosius Senecio, son‐in‐law of
extracted from numerous places in Dacia (Ocna Dejului, Frontinus. Another important persons were: Caius
Jelna, Domneşti, Sic, Cojocna, Pata, Potaissa, Salinae, Julius Quadratus Bassus, Cneius Pinarius Pompeius
Mărtiniș, Sânpaul, Ocna Sibiului, Ocnele Mari), the Longinus, governor of Moesia Superior between 93
thermal waters from Germisara (today Geoagiu‐Băi) and and 96 A.D., Lucius Julius Ursus Severianus, governor
a great number of stone quarries.176 of Pannonia in 99‐100 A.D., Lusius Quietus,
Another important motive could be the pride, commander of the irregular Moorish cavalry, which
the glory. Trajan wanted to show that Dacia is no longer played a very important role in the surrounding of the
a tabu subject after the shameless military campaigns of Dacian capital. The quartermaster for the campaign
Domitian. That is way he raised against the Dacians a was the equestrian Caius Manlius Felix. Together with
huge army, to be sure that Dacia will became “a solved Trajan was also Publius Aelius Hadrianus, made in that
issue”. Did he gain glory? Yes, he was the opposite of time comes expeditionis Dacicae. We must not forget
Domitian. Trajan’s victories restored Rome to its the mensor Balbus, who was in charge of the
superior international status. He defeated the Dacians. measurement of the land and the military operations
But glory came after the gold. Dacia, at that moment, which required the finding of the right places for the
represented the aerarium of the Roman Empire. emplacement of the future fortresses.
So, Trajan started the campaign possible
174
Mattern 1999, 155. immediately after his arrival at Viminacium, and
175
Strabo, Geographia, 4, 5, 2 apud Loeb Classical Library because of the weather, the historians think that in
edition 182, vol. III, 1924, translated by Horace Leonard Jones. May or June he penetrated the Dacian territory.
The same Strabo offers reasons not to conquer more of Britain Unfortunately, only fragmentary details survived of
(Scotland). Breeze 1988, 10: “For although they could have the war that followed. In is not my intention here to
held even Britain, the Romans scorned to do so, because they present in detail this war, of the second one, but to
saw that there was nothing at all to fear from the Britons (for
outline the relationship between the lines of advance
they are not strong enough to cross over and attack us), and
that no corresponding advantage was to be gained by taking and the construction of the future roads in Roman
and holding their country. For it seems that at present more Dacia and the creation of the first itineraria.
revenue is derived from the duty on their commerce than the During this first campaign the Roman troops
tribute could bring in, if we deduct the expense involved in the penetrated the territory of Banat using two routes,
maintenance of an army for the purpose of guarding the island which became rapidly parts of the Roman imperial
and collecting the tribute; and the unprofitableness of an road. The first is the road between Lederata (Today
occupation would be still greater in the case of the other
islands about Britain”.
176 177
Bărbulescu et alii 2005, map XVII (mineral resources). Bennett 1997, 90.

15
Ram, in Serbia) and Tibiscum (today, Jupa, Caraș‐Severin ‘At postquam primum hosticam terram
county). The second one is the road between Dierna intravimus, statim, Celse, Caesaris nostri opera
(today Orșova, Mehedinți County) and the same mensurarum rationem exigere coeperunt. Erant dandi
Tibiscum. interveniente certo itineris spatio duo rigores ordinati,
Today we do not have too many sources for the quibus in tutelam commeandi ingens vallorum
reconstruction of the Dacian wars. Almost all of them adsurgeret molis: hos invento tuo operis decisa ad
are lost. Criton of Heraclea (Titus Statilius Crito), the aciem parte ferramenti usus explicuit. Nam quod ad
famous Greek doctor of Trajan, wrote a book entitled synopsim pontium pertinet, fluminum latitudines
Getica, now lost.178 Dio Chrysostmomus also wrote dicere, etiam si hostis infestare voluisset, ex proxima
about the Trajan’s period, but his contributions are lost ripa poteramus. Expugnandorum deinde montium
too. The Histories of Tacitus end with Domitian’s reign. altitudines ut sciremus, venerabilis diis ratio
Suetonius’s work on the life of the twelve emperors monstrabat. Quam ego quasi in omnibus templis
ends also with Domitian’s reign. Historia Augusta starts adoratam post magnarum rerum experimenta, quibus
with Hadrian’s reign. In these conditions the only interveni, religiosius colere coepi, et ad
sources which remained are the Trajan’s Column and consummandum hunc librum velut ad vota reddenda
the book written by Trajan about the Dacian wars, De properavi. Postquam ergo maximus imperator victoria
Bello Dacico. Trajan’s Column has a big importance, but Daciam proxime reseravit, statim ut e septentrionali
it is a propagandistic monument, so attempts to locate plaga annua vice transire permisit, ego ad studium
in the field the scenes from it remained, unfortunately, meum tamquam ad otium sum reversus, et multa velut
only pure speculations in the Romanian literature.179 scripta foliis et sparsa artis ordini inlaturus recollegi.’
Trajan wrote, as his predecessor Caesar did, a
‘book’ concerning the military campaigns in Dacia: De “But as soon as we stepped into the enemy’s
Bello Dacico. Only one sentence survived: ‘inde land, Celsus, the operations of our emperor started to
Berzobim, deinde Aizi processimus’ (‘from there we request the help of measurement sciences. It
advanced to Berzobis, and then to Aizis’). This sentence happened that along a certain sector of the road we
describes the advancement of the Roman army leaded needed to draw two straight regular lines, with the
by Trajan himself on a road constructed during the first help of which we built the huge defense constructions
military campaign in the Western part of Banat. The necessary for the defense of routes. Thanks to your
most important aspect here is the sentence in itself. It invention (the measurement instrument), this allowed
matters that Trajan presented ad modum simpliciter et the drawing of these (lines) in a big part of Dacia. For
militariter all the settlements, and maybe the distances example, regarding the design of the bridges, even if
between them, in the form of a written itinerarium.180 the enemy wanted to attack us, we could calculate
This knowledge could be easily transformed in an from our bank, which are the widths of the rivers. All
itinerarium pictum. this venerable science, gifted by gods, has showed me
The Roman surveyor Balbus wrote a book on how to find out the heights of the mountains which
topography and geometry. His text, entitled Expositio et needed to be conquered. After the experience of these
ratio omnium formarum, was dedicated to Celsus, the great facts, at which we participated, I started to
famous mathematician from Alexandria, Egypt. worship it (this science) even more, as it could be
Unfortunately only a part of his text survived. But the worshiped in all the temples, hurrying myself to finish
information is essential for one to understand the role this book, as if I should fulfill certain promises made to
played by surveyors in clara expeditionis against the the gods. So, after the great emperor soon opened for
Dacians181: us Dacia, with his victory, after one year he allowed me
to leave this northern region, and I returned to my
basic occupation as to a moment of peace, and I
gathered together many things, as if they were written
and spread on different papers, and I wanted to
178
Russu 1972, 111‐127; Petolescu 2007, 144. arrange them in a proper order which is useful for any
179
The apogee of these attempts was the book of Antonescu science”.
1910. See also: Daicoviciu 1959, 317‐319; Daicoviciu,
Daicoviciu 1966; Daicoviciu 1972, 278‐335; Miclea, Florescu
Balbus established, using geometric methods,
1980; Vulpe 1988; Coulston 2001, 106‐137 (he observes: “With
regard to the routes taken into Dacia by Trajan’s armies, the width of the rivers, even if one bank was
scholars have advocated every possible line of advance that controlled by enemies. He also mentions that he
the unchanging geography of mountains and passes will allow. managed to establish the position of the future
It is not evident how the sculptors could have been more military fortresses in Dacia. And the most important
‘helpful’ using essentially two‐dimensional conventions and it thing is his presence in Dacia for a year. Trajan also
is doubtful that this was even their intention” (120). spent one year in Dacia, after the Roman conquest in
180
Bărbulescu 1999, 34. 106 A.D. It seems possible that Balbus was in Dacia
181
Text and translation after Crișan, Timoc 2004‐2005, 157‐ together with the emperor. This signifies an important
170.

16
aspect. Trajan was really very concerned about the rapid Ranissto/ ro missus voluntarius ho/ nesta missione a
administrative and military organization of his newly Terent[io Scau]/ riano consulare [exerci]/ tus
conquered territory. Two things were always realized by provinciae nov[ae Mes]/[opotamiae.
the Romans when they penetrated a foreign territory:
they built roads necessary for the advance of the troops “Tiberius Claudius Maximus, veteran, took
and fortresses to accommodate the soldiers from care of setting this up while he was alive. He served as
legions and auxiliary troops. So, Balbus and other trooper in Legio VII Claudia Pia Fidelis, was made
surveyors (mensores from legions) participated at this quaestor equitum, then singularis of the legatus
huge effort. The soldiers from legions worked hard to legionis of the same legion, then vexillarius of the of
accomplish that, as the relief of Trajan’s column show. troopers of that unit, received awards from Emperor
They cut the forests, built bridges and roads. They Domitian for bravery in the Dacian War, was made
penetrated constantly the enemy’s territory, showing duplicarius in the Ala II Pannoniorum by the Emperor
the two qualities of the Roman soldiers: labor et Trajan and was made explorator in the Dacian War and
disciplina. twice received awards for bravery in the Dacian and
After 106 A.D. two legions remained in Dacia: the Parthian War and was made decurio in the same
legio XIII Gemina at Apulum (today Alba Iulia) and legio ala by him because he had captured Decebalus and
IV Flavia Felix at Berzobis (today Berzovia, in Banat). bore his head to him in Ranisstorum. He got his
Both of them were strategically placed on the main honorary discharge as a voluntarius from the consular
Roman road of Dacia, and exactly 72 Roman miles south commander Terentius Scaurianus, of the army of the
and north of the Dacian capital, Ulpia Traiana Provincia Mesopotiamia Nova”.
Sarmizegetusa. This shows again that such precise,
accurate measurements along roads were made from He began his military career as a cavalryman
the beginning of the Roman presence in Dacia. Then in the legio VII Claudia, where he attained the rank of
these data were grouped into written or painted vexillarius and was decorated for bravery during
itineraria, first used by the army. Domitian’s Dacian campaigns. He then transferred to
It is logic to assume that Balbus was not the the auxiliary. This was quite unusually for a Roman
only mensor in Dacia. He was, obviously, the ‘chief‐ citizen. In ala II Pannoniorum he took the rank of
engineer’, and from this position he supervised all the duplicarius, and fought in both of Trajan’s Dacian wars
works related to the establishment of the routes of the in this auxiliary. He became an explorator in the same
roads and the location of the military fortresses. In their unit. Bennett supposes that if he joined the auxiliary
advancement in Dacia, the Romans used, for the after a regular term of service in the legion, he must
recognition of the terrain, cavalry units, the so‐called have been not much less than forty‐five years of age at
exploratores. The most famous in this context was the time he caught up with Decebalus. Ala II
Tiberius Claudius Maximus (ca. 65 A.D. – 117 A.D.), the Pannoniorum was founded in the first half of the first
decurion who followed Decebalus sometime after 2 century A. D., in Pannonia. In the second half of the
September 106 A.D., after his withdrawal from the century we find it in Syria and then in Upper Moesia.
Dacian capital. We know his entire career because by Radu Ardevan argues that the transfer of the ala II
chance his tombstone was found at Grammeni, in Pannoniorum in Upper Moesia must have taken place
Macedonia:182 sometime after 88 and before 93 A.D.183 Near Lederata
a stamp tile was found with the initials of this ala. This
Ti(berius) Claudius / Maximus vet(eranus) / suggests that its fortress should have been located in
[s(e)] v(ivo) f(aciendum) c(uravit) militavit eque(s) in the proximity. It played a crucial role in the conquest
leg(ione) VII C(laudia) P(ia) F(ideli) fac/ tus qu(a)estor of Dacia. Immediately after the conquest, he was
equit(um) / singularis legati le/ gionis eiusdem vexil/ garrisoned at Gherla, in Northern Dacia, where it built
larius equitum item / bello Dacico ob virtu/ te(m) onis a timber‐earth camp. From this stronghold, the troop
donatus ab Im/ p(eratore) Domitiano factus dupli(carius) had to ensure the communications in the region, and
/ a divo Troiano(!) in ala secu(n)d(a) / Pannoniorum a the connection between the legion XIII Gemina –
quo et fa(c)/ tus explorator in bello Da/ cico et ob located in Apulum ‐ and the Northern frontier.
virtute(m) is donis / donatus bello Dacico et / Parthico et Exploratores were usually cavalrymen forming
ab eode(m) factus / decurio in ala eade(m) quod / troops which had as main tasks the recognition of the
cepisset Decebalu(m) et caput / eius pertulisset ei terrain, the position of the enemy, the establishment
of the future routes. They acted almost always as
182
Speidel 1984, 173‐187 (originally in JRS, 60, 1970, 142‐153); troops, together, unlike the speculatores. The literary
Rankov 1990, 165‐175; Campbell 1994, 32‐33 (English sources attest various kinds of auxiliaries in the Roman
translation of the text of the inscription) and plate 1; Popescu, Empire: exploratores Batavi, Divitienses, Germanici,
Ţentea 2006, 75‐120 (with English summary: Auxiliary units Nemaningenses, Sciopenses (in Germania),
from Moesia Superior and Moesia Inferior at the conquest of
Dacia). References: AE 1969/70, 583 = AE 1974, 589 = AE 1985,
183
721; Petolescu 2000, no. 363. Ardevan 2007, 139‐155.

17
Bremenienses (in Britannia), and Pomarienses (in Africa). and Northern parts of it are somehow visible, so one
They are also attested in the armies of the Danubian can not specify its dimensions.188 But for my
provinces.184 Numerous inscriptions were found in demonstration it doesn’t really matter the state of the
Germania. We might think that Trajan was help in his camp. What matters, though, is the position of this
military campaigns also by his bodyguards, the equites fortress: circa 55 km North‐East from Sarmizegetusa,
singulares Augusti. They are depicted in many scenes 55 km South‐West from Apulum and circa 20 km North
from the Column, advancing on horses, lighted of Sarmizegetusa Regia, the former Decebalus’
equipped, so with a huge capacity of mobility. residence and capital. 55 km means 37 Roman miles.
A numerus Germanorum (Germanicianorum) This means three days of marching, considering as
Exploratorum is attested in Dacia185 at Orăştioara de Sus, unity a iustum iter, which is 12 miles. So, from this
on stamps tiles186 and in a funerary stela dedicated for point the exploratores controlled everything: the
Iulius Secundus by his heirs.187 The stamps tiles are very Roman imperial road and Sarmizegetusa. They also
simple. They are usually written from right to left. From could easily reach to Apulum or to Ulpia Traiana. In
this amount of material (numerous stamps were found fact, the last one was the most important, since it had
here), we can read for sure NGE. The funerary no military troops.
inscription is very interesting. The text is: An important branch was that formed by
military surveyors. They are usually named mensores,
D(is) M(anibus) / Iulio Secundo / expl(oratori) though this category includes all kind of specialists in
stip(endiorum) XXXII / domo Agrip(pinensi) / vix[i]t measurement. In Dacia three mensores are attested in
an(nos) LV / h(eres) f(aciendum) c(uravit) inscriptions. The first one is mentioned on an
inscription found in the amphitheatre from Ulpia
The translation is: Traiana Sarmizegetusa.189 A mensor is attested at
Potaissa, in the legio V Macedonica. His name is
“To the gods Manes (for the chthonic Gods) / to Aurelius Castor. He calls himself mens(or) leg(ionis) V
Iulius Secundus / explorator (scouter), who served for 32 Mac(edonicae) p(iae). The third inscription, discovered
years (in the army) / born in Agrippina (Colonia Claudia in Apulum, attests another mensor, Aurel(ius)
Ara Agrippinensium) / he lived for 52 years / the heir Maximilia(nus). He was a soldier of the legion XIII
(heirs?) took care to dedicate (the funerary Gemina.
monument)”. Basically, mensores served in many branches
of the Roman army, holding prominent posts in them.
So, Iulius Secundus, explorator in Dacia, served So, they were used in geographical expeditions and in
for 32 years in the Roman army and lived 52. This was a military campaigns. Balbus, a civilian mensor, was
very long military service. Born in Cologne, he invited by Trajan to take part at the organization of
participated to the conquest of Dacia, with his auxiliary Dacia doubtlessly because he had been the best in his
troop. During the Dacian wars, they build a wood‐timber field at that time. Robert K. Sherk wrote in 1974 on
fortress (rebuilt later in stone) at Orăştioara de Sus. this topic. According to his opinion, and to other data,
Nowadays, the fortress is destroyed. Only the Western it seems that every legion had mensores.190 Most of
the inscriptions which mention them are sepulchral.
184
An interesting case is CIL III, 8312, from Viminacium,
The database Epigraphik‐Datenbank Claus / Slaby EDCS, where 11 mensores are mentioned. Another particular
(http://oracle‐vm.ku‐eichstaett.de:8888/epigr/epiergebnis_en)
monument is AE 1904, 72, from Lambaesis, which
provides, searching the term ’explorator’, 42 examples of
inscriptions. In Pannonia Inferior, for example: CIL 03, 03254 mention 9 mensores in legio III Augusta, one for each
(Acumincum / Novi Slankamen: I(ovi) O(ptimo) M(aximo) /
Tib(erius) Dexter / |(centurio) explora/torum / v(otum) s(olvit)
188
l(ibens) m(erito); CIL 03, AE 1966, 00303 (Lugio / Dunaszekcso): Matei 2006, 67, note 123.
189
D(is) M(anibus) / C(aiae) Val(eriae) Alpin(a)e / a(n)norum / VIII Alicu, Paki 1985‐1986, 469‐479. On a grid stone placed at
hic sit/a est pat(e)r et / mater fili(a)e / ben(e) mer(e)nti / the entrance of a room with the acces from the arena the
posuerunt / et sibi vivis / Ael(ius) Ressatus / explorat(or) et / archaeologists could read the inscription LOC(us)
Val(eria) Aelias / mater; CIL 03, 03648 (Aquincum): I(ovi) MENSO[RIS]. The editors advanced two possible
O(ptimo) M(aximo) / M(arcus) Ulpius / Pusinnio |(centurio) explanations regarding this inscription. The first one outlines
ex/ploratorum / v(otum) s(olvit) l(ibens) m(erito). Pannonia that it could be a member of the technical stuff of the arena.
Superior: CIL 03, 04276 = RIU‐03, 00689 (Brigetio / Kornye): The second one, more plausible, is that the inscription
Bato Dasentis / filius an(norum) XXV exp/lorator Dases / pater reffers to a mensor frumentarius. The inscription discovered
p(osuit) h(ic) s(itus) e(st); RIU‐02, 00424 = AE 1944, 00122 = AE at Ulpia Traiana is related, probably, to activities regarding
1960, 00118 (Brigetio / Komarom: ] / et Iunoni reg(inae) / the distribution of alimenta.
190
[g]enio explo/[rator]um co(hortis) VII / [Breucorum. In the auxiliary units only few mensores are recorded. See
185
For the history of the unit: Speidel 1983, 63‐78. also Baatz 1984, 315‐325. Mensores among the auxilia (CIL
186
AE 1972, 487 (Apulum / Alba Iulia); AE 1974, 548 III 6358), as Michael Spiedel observed, are recorded as
(Orăştioara de Sus). mensores frumenti, i.e. supply officers rather than surveyors
187
AE 1974, 546; IDR III/3, 263. Also Austin, Rankov 1995, 191. (Speidel 1987, 143‐144).

18
cohors. As for the mensores in auxiliae, it seems that Romans founded in 109 A.D. the first colonia deducta,
they were few. Sherk highlighted that in 1908 only one Ulpia Traiana Sarmizegetusa, a Roman fortress was
was known. CIL XIII, 6538 from Mainhardt in Upper built.195 Legio IV Flavia Felix was camped here until the
Germany mentions a Maximus Dasantis mensor coh. [I?] end of the second military campaign, or maybe until
Asturum. Papyri mention some mensores on duty in the the foundation of the new capital in 108‐109 A.D.
cohors XX Palmyrenorum in the middle of the third After that it was moved at Berzobis (today Berzovia,
century A.D.191 Mensores had a huge importance in the Caraș‐Severin County). The military fortress from Ulpia
organization of a province. They were designated to has big dimensions (540 x 415 m) and a total surface of
choose the lay‐out and measurement of the military 22,410 ha. Other marching camps were built along the
fortresses, and the surveys for the construction of roads two main roads from Banat: on the Western road the
and frontier limites. Further on, when I will analyze the fortifications from Vărădia (Fig. 4), Surducu Mare (Fig.
route of the imperial road in Dacia, I will try to highlight 5), Berzovia (Fig. 6, Fig. 7), Fârliug (Fig. 8) and
the importance of their decisions in the making‐of of the Cornuțel; on the Eastern road the fortifications from
new conquered province’s landscape. Because, beside Dierna (today Orșova, Mehedinți County), Mehadia
the classical approach which emphasizes their role in the and Teregova. From the crossing point Tibiscum (Fig.
planning of the cities, fortresses and so on, these men 9) (today Jupa) a sigle road continued along the tight
were absolutely indispensable. They managed to choose valley of the river Bistra, through the Iron Gates of
the position of the military fortresses or the routes of Transylvania, until it reached Ulpia Traiana
the new roads. All these actions required careful Sarmizegetusa. Between Tibiscum and Ulpia another
planning and technical expertise. And, as Sherk marching fortress was built at Zăvoi (Fig. 10).196
observes, they were used not only to give advice about At the end of the first military campaign, the
the position of a future fortress, but also for the proper entire South‐Western part of the future Dacia was
allotment of space. under Roman control. Numerous troops from Moesia
So, if first, before the conquest, information Superior and Pannonia are attested in this area. The
about Dacia were extremely general, now we assist to Roman army in Dacia, before the foundation of the
the first really geographical exploration of the regions province, was under the command of Longinus, who
situated north of the Danube. This confirms again that was former governor of Moesia Superior and
Pliny the Elder made an outstanding observation when Pannonia, and, without any doubts, comes Traiani
he wrote that one can not expect to know something during the first military campaign. The Roman army
about a region where the Roman army was never was in this period, from the juridical and
before. The main role in expanding geographical administrative point of view, under the field of
knowledge was played by the army. If we investigate the competence of the legate of Moesia Superior.197
explorations and expeditions of the Roman Empire,192 Between 103 A.D. and 105 A.D. the Romans
we can see that the Romans did not know anything started to build what it will became the most famous
about the vast area of what is now Russia, or Northern and longest bridge in the whole Empire.198 Trajan’s
Asia. Susan Mattern has highlighted these aspects: bridge, built by Apollodorus over the Danube was
“Huge tracts of Europe and Asia did not exist for them; situated east from the Iron Gates, nearby the present‐
others were considered wild and barely habitable. The day cities of Drobeta‐Turnu Severin (Romania) and
same tendencies are evident in the Roman perception of Kladovo (Serbia). The structure had 1,135 meters in
Africa”. 193 Asia was also perceived in this way, as a vast, length (the Danube is 800 meters‐wide in that area),
endless land, even if the Romans knew a part of India, 15 meters in width, and reached 19 meters in height
but they did not know anything about the size and (measured from the river’s surface). At each end a
extent of China. Roman castrum was built too. The Romans used
At the end of the first military campaign the wooden arches set on twenty masonry pillars that
region of Banat entered under Roman control. The spanned 38‐meters each. The impact of the building of
occupation troops were partly from Moesia Superior. this bridge was immense. Cassius Dio describes it like
The first ‘governor’ was Pompeius Longinus (his full it was the eight wonder of the world:
name was Cnaeus Pinarius Aemilius Cicatricula
Pompeius Longinus).194 A peace treaty was established
between the combatants, but none of them respected
it. It seems possible, even if this topic generated 195
Supporting the idea of a fortress: Diaconescu 2010; Alicu
powerful, contrary opinions, that in the place where the 1980, 23‐28.
196
Nemeth 2005; Nemeth, Fodorean, Matei, Blaga 2011, 56,
anf fig. 18, 120, 19, 121, fig. 41, 142.
191 197
Sherk 1974, 546‐551. See also for more general aspects More in Popescu, Țentea 2006, 75‐120.
198
Nicolet 1991, 151‐157. Tudor 1974, 47‐134; O’Connor 1993, 142‐145 (no. T13);
192
Nicolet 1991, 85‐94; Sherk 1974, 534‐562. Galliazzo 1994, 320‐324 (no. 646); Gušić 1996, 259‐261;
193
Mattern 1999, 24‐80. Bancilă, Teodorescu 1998, 401‐409; Vučković, Mihajlović,
194
Piso 1993, 1. Karović 2007, 119‐130.

19
 ‘Trajan constructed over the Ister a stone bridge The exploration of the north‐danubian
for which I cannot sufficiently admire him. Brilliant, provinces in the period 102‐106 A.D is also attested by
indeed, as are his other achievements, yet this surpasses a document known as ‘Hunt’s papyrus’,201 dated in
them. For it has twenty piers of squared stone one September 105 A.D. This is a pridianum202 of the
hundred and fifty feet in height above the foundations cohors I Hispanorum veterana. A vexillatio of this
and sixty in width, and these, standing at a distance of troop is attested intra provinciam (meaning in Moesia
one hundred and seventy feet from one another, are Inferior), at Piroboridava (along the valley of Siret, at
connected by arches. How, then, could one fail to be Poiana, Galați County) and Buridava (Stolniceni, Vâlcea
astonished at the expenditure made upon them, or at County). The vexillatio, formed by a centurion, a
the way in which each of them was placed in a river so decurion, twenty‐two horsemen and two pedestrians,
deep, in water so full of eddies, and on a bottom so was sent in expeditionem: ‘Pirob[o]ridavae in
muddy? For it was impossible, of course, to divert the praesidio, Buridavae in vexillatione, trans Danuvium in
stream anywhere. I have spoken of the width of the expeditionem’. In the same text there is a paragraph
river; but the stream is not uniformly so narrow, since it which informs us about a ‘recognition’ in the terrain
covers in some places twice, and in others thrice as made by a group leaded by a centurion: ‘iter
much ground, but the narrowest point and the one in exploratum cum Pauliano centurione’. Such military
that region best suited to building a bridge has the width expeditions were sometimes quite dangerous. The
named. Yet the very fact that river in its descent is here same papyrus mentions the murder of a horseman by
contracted from a great flood to such a narrow channel, a robber (‘occisus a latronibus’).203 We have here
after which it again expands into a greater flood, makes important information regarding the Roman military
it all the more violent and deep, and this feature must be explorations. First, the very existence of this document
considered in estimating the difficulty of constructing allows us to observe that, in this particular case, a
the bridge. This, too, then, is one of the achievements vexillatio from cohors I Hispanorum veterana is
that show the magnitude of Trajan's designs, though the attested North of the Danube, but intra provinciam.
bridge is of no use to us; for merely the piers are This clearly proves that in that moment, so before the
standing, affording no means of crossing, as if they had end of the second war, this region (Oltenia and the
been erected for the sole purpose of demonstrating that South‐East Muntenia) were under Roman control. At
there is nothing which human ingenuity cannot the same time, the South‐Western part of Dacia was
accomplish. Trajan built the bridge because he feared already controlled by the Romans beginning with 102
that some time when the Ister was frozen over war A.D.
might be made upon the Romans on the further side, In 106 A.D. Dacia officially became a Roman
and he wished to facilitate access to them by this means. province. It included Transylvania (without its south‐
Hadrian, on the contrary, was afraid that it might also western corner), Banat and Western Oltenia. The
make it easy for the barbarians, once they had other territories north of the Danube conquered in
overpowered the guard at the bridge, to cross into 102 A.D. (Eastern Oltenia, Muntenia, South‐Eastern
Moesia, and so he removed the superstructure’.199 Transylvania and Southern Moldavia) were
incorporated to Moesia Inferior. Dacia Augusti
The bridge is important not only as an amazing provincia was constituted based on an imperial decree
architectural achievement. It proves something else, (lex provinciae), promulgated by Trajan before his
related to perception and mentality: the power of the return to Rome.204 This law contained the status, the
Roman Empire, its immense possibility to conquer organization and managerial principles of the province
everything, the capacity to overlap any physical and it established the taxes needed to be paid for the
obstacle. This image was strong and it weighted a lot in imperial fiscal authorities. It also established the
the ‘mental’ conflict between the Romans and the frontiers and the military troops designated to defend
Dacians. the new province. At the beginning, Dacia was an
Building this bridge meant that a natural barrier imperial province, led by a legatus Augusti pro
was conquered. Caesar did the same. He built as wood praetore, belonging to the senatorial class. In order to
bridge in 10 days. He could easily cross the Rhine but the be governor of this province, one needed to be a vir
impact of his action was huge. The Barbarians consularis, meaning that before this task he held the
understood that the river was not the enemy, but the position of consul in Rome. Two legions remained in
ally of the Romans. In fact, to quote Braund again, Dacia: XIII Gemina at Apulum (today Alba Iulia, Alba
“rivers were a standard feature of writing the military
success”.200 201
Vulpe 1960, 337‐357; Fink 1971; Rădulescu, Bărbulescu
1981, 353‐358.
202
Campbell 1994, 110: ‘Pridianum ‐ a yearly record of a unit
199
Cassius Dio, 68, 13, 1‐6 (Loeb Classical Library 176, 1925, on 31 December, stating accessions, losses, and those
Roman History, volume VIII, Books 61‐70, translated by E. Cary absent on duty’.
203
and H. B. Foster). Bărbulescu 1999, 34.
200 204
Braund 1996, 47. Husar 2002, 24; Protase 2001, 44‐45.

20
County), and IV Flavia Felix, at Berzobis (today Berzovia,
Caraș‐Severin County). Balbus, the head of surveyors
during the Dacian conquest, remained in Dacia together
with Trajan an year after 106 A.D. So, he had enough
time, together with the mensores and the other
surveyor specialists, to measure, explore, and position in
the field, with great care, all the elements of the
infrastructure: roads, fortresses, surveillance towers
etc.205 In the same time, Trajan took care to bring in
Dacia colonists from all over the Empire.206 Illyrians from
Dalmatia were brought in Alburnus Maior. The
economical, social, politic and religious structures were
rapidly implemented in Dacia. The main instrument used
to do this was a massive colonization. This also explains
another aspect: the rapid Romanization process in
Dacia. This is proved by epigraphy: around 3000 Latin
inscriptions were found in Dacia. It is obvious that in the
first years of the province all the necessary things to
assure a good integration of Dacia into the Empire
structures were made.

205
Contra, with no solid arguments, Whittaker 2004, 34: “Or,
to take another prominent example, much has been made of
Trajan’s motives for war and his supposed strategy in annexing
Dacia in the early second century AD. Trajan’s aims are
ascribed by Roman authors, some of them contemporaries, to
revenge or desire for gold and glory, but never elevated to a
grand, strategic aim for the defence of the Balkans. The
results, if we are meant to believe Trajan had secretly planned
some wider, strategic aim behind closed doors, are hardly
convincing. Trajan had no time to organize the defence of
Dacia before rushing off to Parthia.”
206
Eutropius (VIII, 6, 2): ‘Traian, victa Dacia, ex toto orbe
Romano infinitas eo copias hominum transtulerat ad agros et
urbes colendas’.

21
 CHAPTER 2. ANCIENT SOURCES CONCERNING THE tardive’,217 was dated in the late third, fourth, fifth
ROADS OF ROMAN DACIA. THE MAIN ARTERIES NORTH century A.D., created in the third century and then
OF THE DANUBE completed with other data in the fourth and fifth
centuries A.D.,218, around 250 A.D.,219 after 260 A.D.,220
2. 1. The Peutinger map. General issues during Diocletian’s Tetrarchy (circa 300 A.D.)221, in
365‐366 A.D.,222 in between 402 A.D. and 452 A.D.,223
I will start with some general works concerning in 435 A.D.,224 ‘the fourth to fifth centuries’225 or,
the Roman itineraries. The bibliography regarding according to an attempting / speculative, but,
Tabula Peutingeriana is so vast, that I will mention only unfortunately, not sufficient argued hypothesis, in the
the books and articles I used in this study. The most early nine century A.D.226 These attempts were based
important contributions on the Peutinger map remain on the content of the map, the presence of certain
the books of Miller,207 Levi and Levi,208 Weber,209 cities and settlements (Rome, Constantinople,
Bosio,210 and recently Talbert’s monograph published in Antiochia227 ‐ personified vignettes; Ravenna, Aquileia,
2010.211 To these, a large amount of articles or chapters Nicaea, Nicomedia, Tessalonicae, Ancyra? – vignettes
in books212 discussing various aspects about the history type ‘cities surrounded by walls’), the mentioning of
of the map, the dating, its design and character, are landscape details (silva Vosagus: 2A2 ‐ 3, silva
useful in understanding the complexity of this Marciana: 2a4 ‐ 3a1), the mentioning / non‐
document.213 Comparisons with other maps were also mentioning of certain roads, the representation / non‐
made, for example between the Peutinger map and the representation of vignettes type ‘double‐tower’, the
Madaba Map.214 signification of special vignettes/draws (Ad Sanctum
The map kept today in the National Library of Petrum, temple of Apollo in Antiochia). Suppositions
Wien is a copy of another map created during late about the author, place of production, method of
Roman era. Even this early medieval document was creation, dimensions, purpose, role, sources used
subject of debates regarding its date. Finally, after 123 were also emitted. The document kept today is a roll
years passing from Miller’s first publication of the parchment composed of 11 segments. Miller stated
document, Richard Talbert succeeded to solve this the idea that one left segment is missing, so,
debate. He cooperated for that with a specialist in accordingly, all the other researchers accepted this
paleography, Martin Steinmann, who concluded: ‘On the hypothesis, with one exception, Talbert, who argued
basis of the scripts used, there is no cause to dispute the that the original had 14 segments.228 Even the
general consensus that our copy of the map was numbering of these segments is uneven. According to
produced in the last quarter of the twelfth century or in Miller’s reconstruction, segment no. 1 is the lost one
the first quarter of the thirteenth. The likeliest match for (representing, according to his opinion, Britain,
the map is script of the first quarter of the thirteenth Western Spain and North‐Western Africa).229 Weber
century […]’.215 This is what the researchers name numbers the segments starting with the first
‘copy/medieval copy’. Dating the original map still conserved.230 Currently, the more accurate division
remains, in my opinion, an unsolved issue.216 Dozens of developed by Talbert in his online databases can be
attempts were made. The original is a ‘compilation used.231 The map was thought to serve as road map,232

207 217
Miller 1887; Miller 1888. Chevallier 1997, 53‐56.
208 218
A. and M. Levi 1967. Levi and Levi 1967.
209 219
Weber 1976. Von Hagen 1978, 14.
210 220
Bosio 1983. Manni 1949, 30‐31.
211 221
Talbert 2010. Talbert 2010, 136, 153.
212 222
See especially Whittaker 2004, chapter 4 (Mental maps and Miller 1916, XXX. Bosio 1983, agree with this date.
223
frontiers. Seeing like a Roman), 63‐87; or Talbert 2008, 9‐28. Weber 1999.
213 224
Arnaud 1988, 302‐321; Weber 1989, 113‐117; Brodersen Weber 1989, 113‐117.
225
2001, 7‐21; Salway 2001, 22‐66; Allen 2003, 403‐415; Salway 2005, 131.
226
Brodersen 2003, 289‐297; Gautier Dalché 2003, 43‐52; Albu 2005, 136‐148; Albu 2008, 111‐119.
227
Prontera 2003; Gautier Dalché 2004, 71‐84; Talbert 2004, 113‐ Leylek 1993, 203‐206.
228
141; Albu 2005, 136‐148; Salway 2005, 119‐135; Talbert 2005, Talbert 2010, 89.
229
627‐634; Pazarli, Livieratos, Boutoura 2007, 245‐260; Talbert Miller 1916, L‐LI.
230
2007, 353‐366; Talbert 2007a, 221‐230; Albu 2008, 111‐119; Weber 1976, the maps (1:1 scale).
231
Elliot 2008, 99‐110; Talbert 2008, 149‐156; Talbert 2008a, 9‐ Very useful: http://www.cambridge.org/us/talbert;
27; Talbert, Elliott 2008, 199‐218; Pazarli 2009, 101‐116; http://peutinger.atlantides.org/map‐a. Even sometimes the
Fodorean 2011, 9‐19. name of the settlements or some distances are not perfectly
214
Weber 1999, 41‐46. correct, this site is also useful http://omnesviae.org. This site
215
Talbert 2010, 83 (ch. 2 ‐ coauthored with Martin links the reader to Talbert’s database from Cambridge
Steinmann, entitled The Surviving Copy: The Material Object University Press page. Talbert’s database is complete: all the
and Its Paleography). settlements, rivers, networked symbols, islands, mountains,
216
Fodorean 2004, 51‐58. people, regions etc., are separately catalogued, and listed as

22
reflecting the official transport system (cursus of the map”.240 He offers two explanations: 1. the
publicus),233 or propaganda map, presenting during copyist began his work from the left and gradually
Tetrarchy the former glory, power and geographical devoted less effort to it as he proceeded toward the
extent of the Roman Empire.234 The distances written right; 2. the map was simplified in the Eastern part.
between settlements are correct or sometimes not, the The explanation regarding lack of data on the map in
vignettes represent important cities, or mansiones, its Eastern part seems, in my opinion, a reflection not
accommodations along routes.235 The map was ordered of the copyist’s way of work, but rather of the
by a private, or by an emperor (Septimius Severus,236 geographical knowledge of these regions; similarly,
Theodosius II)237, stood as a parchment roll in a library, Talbert correctly refers to ‘the unfamiliarity of Persia
or was displayed on a wall in Diocletian’s palace in Split and India as landmasses’.241 The second explanation is,
(Spalatum).238 The author of the original was Castorius, in Talbert’s opinion, the existence of a deadline, which
or an anonymous, or a team. The Peutinger map could force the mapmaker to work rapidly in the end,
mentions Pompeii, Roman Dacia, Constantinople, and i.e. in the Eastern part of the document. This remains a
Antiochia, old St. Peter’s church in Rome, regional supposition, which cannot be proved. I believe that
names such as Francia, Suevia and Allamania. lack of information on the original maps used as
R. Talbert cooperated with Martin Steinmann sources by the mapmaker has led to this situation. The
and demonstrated how Tabula was drawn.239 I agree main role in expanding geographical knowledge was
with the order proposed by him: 1. First, the support played by the army. If one investigates the
was prepared, i.e. the full extent of the parchment base. explorations and expeditions of the Roman Empire,242
Then, the map was copied layer by layer; 2. In this stage, one observes that the Romans did not know anything
river courses were drawn; 3. Next, as Steinmann says, about the vast area of what is now Russia, or Northern
mountains or larger cities were drawn. Special attention Asia. Susan Mattern has highlighted these aspects:
was given to the pictorial symbols of the figurative “Huge tracts of Europe and Asia did not exist for them;
representations of Rome, Constantinople and Antioch others were considered wild and barely habitable. The
and to other six cities, represented with vignettes of the same tendencies are evident in the Roman perception
type ‘enclosure walls’: Aquileia, Ravenna, Thessalonica, of Africa”.243 Asia was also perceived as a vast, endless
Nicomedia, Nicaea and Ancyra. 4. At this stage, roads land, even if the Romans knew a part of India, but they
were drawn in red ink. It seems the only logical way to did not anything about the size and extent of China.
realize the map. Evidently, one first needed a support. Talbert also analyzes the design and character
Then, as today, the mapmaker needed a ‘skeleton’ to his of the map.244 All the main aspects relating to the map
map. This was made by drawing the forms of relief and are classified, presented and described: 1.
the hydrographic network. After that, it would be much Fundamentals of the Map’s Design ‐ a. Shape and
easier to draw the roads, the vignettes and to add the Scope; b. Landscape Base. 2. Mapmaking Practice ‐ a.
final information: distances and name of settlements. Orientation; b. Scale; c. Color; d. Line Work; e.
We can compare this with the method used by Ptolemy, Lettering and Its Placement; f. Numerals. 3.
even if there is a huge difference between Tabula and Components of the Map ‐ a. Coastlines; b. Rivers; c.
the maps envisaged by the Greek geographer. First, he Open Water (including Lakes); d. Islands; e.
drew a grid, representing the parallels and meridians. Mountains; f. Peoples and Regions. 4. Route Network ‐
Then he added the settlements, according to their a. Content and Planning; b. Presentation; c. Pictorial
coordinates. For the mapmaker of Tabula coastlines, Symbols. 5. The Integration of Cartography and Art.
rivers, open water, islands and mountains, together with Talbert discusses all the important features of the
the larger cities, represented ‘the grid’. He did not use Tabula in a concise manner. He is the first person who
any scale for the itinerarium. Therefore, in order to put forward strong arguments for the assumption that
accomplish his task, he needed some guide marks / the Peutinger map left‐hand end has not only one
reference elements. segment, but more, maybe three. To accept his theory
Steinmann writes: “The symbols become more and arguments, we must start from a clear premise:
uniform in design, and less elaborate, toward the right the mapmaker wanted Rome in the centre of his work,
i.e. the map had at least partly a propagandistic
purpose. Talbert argues that the mapmaker would
have put in these three segments a dedication, if the
clikable items with provide exactly the part of map in which
appear. map was produced at the request of an official, and a
232
Most researchers agreed with this. list of total distances between principal settlements.
233
Levi and Levi 1967.
234
Talbert 2010, ch. 5: The Original Map, 133‐157.
235 240
See recent information at Klee 2010. Talbert 2010, 77.
236 241
Levi and levi 1967. Talbert 2010, 112.
237 242
Weber 1989, 113‐117. Nicolet 1991, 85‐94; Sherk 1974, 534‐562.
238 243
Talbert 2010, 149. Mattern 1999, 55.
239 244
Talbert 2010, 73‐85. Talbert 2010, 86‐122.

23
This would have required at least one segment. Roman province (106‐271 A.D). I analyzed the
Beginning with the second segment, the mapmaker information regarding Dacia included in Tabula and I
could have started with the representations of Hispania, reached the conclusion that it refers to a very early
Western Britannia and North‐West Africa. period, maybe right after the Roman conquest in 106
Miller reconstructed the Western part but A.D. There are several clues that can sustain this
without including several elements. First, he did not assumption. First, three roads are marked in Dacia: 1.
mention the distances. This would also require more the imperial road that started from the Danube and
space. He drew only the vignettes the type ‘double reached the Northern part of Dacia. This was the
tower’. Bath symbols are large draws, but he ‘highway’ of Dacia, build rapidly from 102 A.D. to 110
represented only two, in Africa. He did not entirely A.D. A Roman milestone was found in Aiton (between
respect the mapmaker’s principle that roads segments Potaissa (today Turda) and Napoca (today Cluj‐
are represented using chicanes that signifies the start of Napoca). It was dated in 108 A.D. It shows that this
the next stretch. In the first surviving part of the Tabula, road was built until here in a short period; 2. the road
the distance between the letters from the word which connected, in the South, Drobeta (Drobeta
[AQV]ITANIA is 5 cm minimum. The letters AQV are too Turnu‐Severin) with Romula (Reşca, Olt County); 3. the
close in Miller’s reconstruction. The same is available for road along the valley of the river Olt, between Romula
the word BRITANNIA, inserted by Miller in the missing and Apulum (Alba Iulia). The last road and the first one
part. More, he omitted to mark open‐water names, were the routes taken by the Roman army during the
other rivers in Britain beyond the Thames and names for two military campaigns against the Dacians.
regions and peoples in the Iberian Peninsula. Altogether, Nevertheless, the more important clue to sustain my
these have required more space that only one segment. theory is related to Ptolemy and Tabula Peutingeriana.
So, finally, the ‘map’ could have 14 segments with Rome In the list of the settlements from Dacia, Ptolemy
in the center, for propagandistic purposes, but according mentions twice Tibiscum, with different coordinates.
to me, this propaganda is related to the importance of In Tabula, the same settlement appears also twice,
Rome as ombilicus mundi, the meeting point of all the once on the road Lederata – Sarmizegetusa and the
roads, because this is an itinerarium, and the main second time on the Eastern road Dierna‐
elements were here the roads. Sarmizegetusa. Therefore, I think Ptolemy used as
Talbert also tried to answer the difficult source an early itinerarium regarding Dacia, in which
question of what happened with the map from the this particular settlement appeared twice.
moment it was produced until ca. 1200, when the Talbert also analyzes the issues related to the
surviving copy was made. 245 First, the author prepares original map.247 Three important aspects are
the writer for what will be stated in chapter five: “Suffice presented here: authorship and date, sources and
is to state here my view that the lost original is most purpose. Talbert starts by saying that guessing a name
likely to have been produced for display in a ruler’s for the author of the map is impossible. Miller’s
public space during the Tetrarchic period around AD opinion that Castorius created the map relies only on
300”.246 So, in a period of 900 years probably several the fact the Cosmographia of the so‐called
copies were realized. Then Talbert emphasizes the Anonymous of Ravenna mentions this name several
existence of chronological differences of the map, i.e. times. This affirmation should, of course, left aside.
the mention of Pompeii (segment 5) and of Dacia Talbert’s opinion that a skilful person, or a team,
(segments 6 and 7). Further, Talbert discusses the route worked for the accomplishment of this huge task, is
line work, which was a huge task for the mapmaker, hard to sustain. We don not have clear evidence that a
because of the numerous settlements and distances team worked for the map.
included in the map. Dating the original remains an open matter.
It seems today clear the work procedure used Talbert writes: “While fully acknowledging the absence
by the mapmaker. His first task was to gather of sufficient unequivocal indicators, I prefer to regard
documentation. However, in this particular action he the production of the original map as a Roman
was not prepared to up‐to‐date it (this required a great initiative that postdates the organization of Dacia as a
level of historical and geographical knowledge), or, province in the early second century and predates
maybe, he was not interested in doing this. It was Constantine’s sole rule, his confident promotion of
impossible for one person to know, in the fourth or fifth Christianity, and his foundation of Constantinople in
century AD, all these details. Pompeii is included in the 324. Within this span of two centuries, the map could
map, so the mapmaker used a regional itinerarium from be associated with, say, the Emperor Philip’s
the first century AD. As for Dacia, the mapmaker could millennium celebrations at Rome in AD 247 or with
use a regional map from the period in which Dacia was a Severan rule; but such linkages seem hardly
compelling. Rather, in my estimation, the map’s design
245
and presentation match best the preoccupations of
Talbert 2010, ch. 4: Recovery of the Original Map from the
Surviving Copy, 123‐132.
246 247
Talbert 2010, 123. Talbert 2010, ch. 5: The Original Map, 133‐157.

24
Diocletian’s Tetrarchy (c. 300); these are treated in the Weber that the original map was ordered by
discussion of the map’s context and purpose. Granted, Theodosius, so he dated it in AD 435.252 Talbert refers
the connections identified can be no more than to the mapmaker’s work of documentation: “If his
subjective, and hence this dating of the original map incorporation of the complex network of land routes in
deserves to be treated with as much caution as any particular was original work, as seems credible, he
other”.248 Indeed, it is very difficult to date this map. must have needed extensive data that was unlikely to
Talbert’s version may be a solution, but in my opinion, be already available in the required form”.253 The
dating the document remains an open issue. mapmaker used for this written and painted regional
Regarding the sources, Talbert notices that the itineraries.
map “does seem to be a highly original creation”,249 and Talbert also tries to answer to several
to “derive from the adaptation and mosaicing of an questions: Subchapter 3 is entitled Context and
indeterminate number of detailed maps”.250 Normally, Purpose (142‐157). Is the Tabula only a map of route
the mapmaker would also have used written network, an itinerarium pictum? How was it displayed?
documents, i.e. itineraria adnotata. Then Talbert Where and in what form? Had it a practically use, i.e.
continues the argumentation by describing some of the did anyone use it in a travel? The map was not created
main maps that could be used more or less as sources to be used in journeys. Nobody needed to visualize the
for the mapmaker’s huge project. Many scholars entire Roman world, from Spain to India, because no
considered the map of Agrippa, only completed after his one travelled on such a huge distance (ca. 8000
death in 12 B.C., and lost, as the main source for Tabula. kilometers in straight line). On the other hand, as
The earliest uncontroversial evidence for a large scale Talbert observed, some of the names displayed in
map existence is a Latin panegyric from 290s, displayed capital letters for regions, people or waters stretch on
at the rhetorical school named Maeniana at more than one segment (ca. 60 cm) of the map. Here
Augustodunum (modern Autun) in Gaul. Talbert are some examples: AQVUITANIA (segm. I/at Miller
presents the Latin text and a good translation. The text segm. II (the first preserved) and the left part of segm.
refers to a map, but it remains unclear whether it III); PROVINCIA AFRICA (which spans three and a halt
reflected the realities of the Late Empire, and whether it segments).
was meant to be shown to the students or to act as a Regarding the moment when this map was
propagandistic document, showing the vast conquers of produced, and the place where it was exposed, Talbert
the Roman emperors. Even the text emphasizes this: thinks that the map was created during the Tetrarchy
‘Videat praeterea in illis porticibus iuventus et cotidie and was set down in Diocletian’s palace from Split
spectet omnes terras et cuncta maria et quidquid (Croatia). The main argument for this theory is that the
invictissimi pricipes urbium gentium nationum aut Tetrarchs wanted to reinforce, to demonstrate “the
pietate restituunt aut virtute devincunt aut terrore special importance that they attached to the city of
devinciunt’.251 It remains open whether this map also Rome itself”.254 Further, Talbert affirms: “The central
showed roads, and whether it continued a Greek or placement of Rome on the map asserts the city’s
Hellenistic cartographic tradition. This opens an symbolic value in the eyes of the Tetrarchs. So, too, by
important question: did Romans have a tradition of extension, the symbolic importance of Italy, Rome’s
maps? If so, which are these maps? Does the Papyrus of heartland, is promoted by the generous amount of
Artemidorus present roads from Spain? In fact, how space it occupies on the map, while in reality under
many examples of Roman maps we know? A key factor the Tetrarchy it, in turn, lost its privileged status and
is the material on which these maps were drawn. The was divided into ‘regions’ (regiones)”.255 The same
papyrus or the parchment can suffer hard damage or idea is argued again later (p. 153): “Rome’s
can be easily lost in time. Big maps, drawn on stone, as importance is upheld, and the unity of the empire’s
the marble plan of Rome or the Orange cadastre, rule reinforced, by the map’s giving no special
survived easier. The Tabula Peutingeriana might be one proeminence to the new Tetrarchic capitals. Equally,
itinerarium from many more others from the same the bewildering proliferation of names for the new
category, created and used by the Romans. Because it array of smaller provincial units is ignored in favor of
seems plausible that such provincial / regional itineraria retaining the fewer, more familiar and more
were among the first tasks realized during the conquest reassuring old names for provinces”.256
of a province and immediately after this moment. Several aspects must be discussed here. If the
Talbert continues with the presentation of the map was created to fulfill a propagandistic purpose,
map commissioned by emperor Theodosius II in 435 at with Rome at its center, I am not sure that this served
Constantinople and now lost. These verses convinced
252
Weber 1976, 40.
248 253
Talbert 2010, 135‐136. Talbert 2010, 139.
249 254
Talbert 2010, 136. Talbert 2010, 149.
250 255
Talbert 2010, 136. Talbert 2010, 150.
251 256
Talbert 2010, 137. Talbert 2010, 153.

25
to reinforce the unity of the empire. After all, the new Regarding the Peutiunger map, Emily Albu is
reorganization of the empire was a success. Diocletian convinced that the original document was created in
created the Tetrarchy and Constantine continued the the ninth century A.D. She specifies: “The Peutinger
reforms initiated by him. During Constantine, 117 map is a map of the inhabited world from Britain to Sri
provinces existed in the Roman Empire. The monetary Lanka, drawn c. 1200 C.E. onto a parchment roll nearly
reform (the creation of the gold solidus) was also a seven meters long and 32 to 34 centimeters high.
success. The Empire was full of soldiers: 500.000 Because it was created from Roman itinerary lists and
grouped in 60 legions and other auxiliary troops. New features some 70,000 Roman miles of Roman roads ‐
cities were founded, the commerce, the circulation of with hundreds of Roman sites identified by their
products and people were stimulated, the cursus Roman names and with mileage between sites
publicus continued to function. So, after all these marked, mostly in Roman miles ‐ historians of
achievements, why creating a map which presents cartography have long assumed it to be a copy of a
realities from a former, though glorious, but still former Roman map. Recently I have suggested, however, that
period? Moreover, why was necessary to include former our medieval map had a Carolingian prototype, clearly
provinces, as Dacia? Only for propagandistic purposes? meant for display and not intended as a road map for
Dacia was no longer an ‘issue’ for the Roman emperors. ancient travelers. Carolingian rulers had ample
Aurelian solved this problem in AD 271. When he motivation for commissioning a map to display their
abandoned Dacia, Aurelian took care to create two new Roman imperial ambitions, while ninth‐century scribes
provinces with the same name south of the Danube: had the expertise and resources necessary for creating
Dacia Ripensis and Dacia Mediterannea. The reason was an antiquarian work based on Roman itinerary lists.”258
simple: he did not want to be perceived by his Unfortunately, Albu constructs and sustains her
contemporaries as an emperor who abandoned such an argumentation using an incomplete analyzing method.
important territory as Dacia. She notices, for example: “Let us begin with a few
Dating the map remains a problem. If Tabula words about Roman and early medieval world maps.
was created during Tetrarchy, in circa 300 A.D., how we Specifically, why do we see an explosion of world
explain the presence of the name Constantinople on it, maps in the early Middle Ages after what appears to
when we all know that nobody could use this toponym be a long dry spell?”259 To argue that the Romans did
before 330 A.D.? Old St. Peter's Basilica was the fourth‐ not create maps, Albu uses the skepticism of Kai
century church whose construction was initiated by Brodersen regarding the existence of a map of
Constantine between 326 A.D. and 333 A.D. Another Agrippa. But the same Kai Brodersen, discussing the
question: if the map focused on showing Rome’s tradition of itineraria in the Roman world, specifically
importance, why to expose it in Split (Roman Spalatum) explained the principle according to which the Romans
and not in Rome? Or in Constantinople? I think further created and used itineraries, not scale maps, using as
questions appear, but this itinerarium pictum was sources: 1. Ionians coins from the fourth century B.C.
designated to present, as a main element, the roads of with ‘geographical representations’; 2. the so‐called
the Roman Empire, and a better date for it seems 435 ‘Map of Gaul’, in fact, as Brodersen demonstrated, a
A.D., as Weber suggested. possible fake; 3. a mosaic discovered in a third to
The problem of context, purpose and date of fourth century A.D. villa in Ammaedara, modern
this map remains an open issue, however, as Talbert Haidra, in North Africa; 4. the representations of
states: “Ultimately there can be no proof of the regions in Notitia Dignitatum; 5. the Madaba Map.260
Peutinger map’s context or its purpose; for lack of He observes: “To sum up, all five artifacts, which have
evidence, both must remain matters of conjecture. Even
so, in my estimation the long established view that Database and Commentary (196‐200); Appendix 8: User’s
regards the map as little more than a route diagram for Guide to the Map (A) and Overlaid Layers (201‐202);
use in making or planning journeys unduly reflects Appendix 9: User’s Guide to the Outlining of Rivers and
modern preoccupations rather than Roman ones”.257 Routes on Barrington Atlas Bases (C‐F), with Associated
Texts: (a) Antonine Itinerary: Text with Journeys Numbered
as on Map E, and (b) Bordeaux Itinerary: Text with Journeys
257
Talbert 2010, 155‐157. Talbert presents eight appendices, Lettered as on Map F (203‐286). At the end of the book
all of them very useful in understanding some issued discussed there are notes, bibliography and an index and gazetteer.
in the book: Appendix 1. Latin Text Appended to the 1598 At http://cambridge.org/us/talbert/index.html a big part of
Engraving of the Map (173‐174); Appendix 2. English the information from the book: the maps, the plates, and the
Translation of J. Kastelic, ‘Vodnikova kopija Tabule entire database can be accessed. This database succeeds in
Peutingeriane’ (trans. Gerald Stone) (175‐178); Appendix 3. reducing once more the distance between archaeology,
Reflections on Vodnik’s Copy of von Scheyb’s Engraving (179‐ history and cartography. It is very useful and easy to consult,
180); Appendix 4. Vodnik’s Latin Summary Heyrenbach’s Essay with all the distances, settlements, physical elements from
(National Library of Slovenia, Ljubljana, MS 1443) (181‐188); ancient sources overlaid on current maps
258
Appendix 5. Miller’s Reconstruction of the Map‘s Western End Albu 2008, 111.
259
(189‐192); Appendix 6. Wyttenbach’s Claim: A Lost Piece of the Albu 2008, 111.
260
Map Discovered (193‐195); Appendix 7: User’s Guide to the Brodersen 2001, 7‐21.

26
been adduced by scholars so far as material evidence for but rather the differences in the dates of the sources
a ‘Roman tradition of scale maps’, fail to prove the used by the cartographer for each region”.265
existence of this tradition, and resorting to the ‘must O. A. W. Dilke also discussed several times
have been’ variety of logic does not solve the problem of aspects regarding the Roman cartography and about
how geographical knowledge was presented”.261 the Peutinger map. Dilke’s contributions are
Further, he observes: “There is ample evidence for the important, but in some points, he exaggerated things,
use of itineraries, not least in military action”.262 Of trying hard to prove the mastery of Romans in map
these, he mentions: 1. a literary text from Severus making. Even the term ’map’ was not in use in Greek
Alexander’s period, which specifically states that the and Roman times. Dilke made another mistake. In his
dates of itinera were publicly displayed; 2. Itineraries article regarding itineraries and geographical maps in
Antonioni; 3. epigraphic lists of settlements and the early and late Roman Empire,266 he notes that in
distances, discovered in Allichamps, Autun, Junglinster, the late Roman Empire the function of a Comes of
and Fedj‐Souioud (Africa); 4. the ‘stadiasmus’ from Formae was as a sort of ‘director’ to a civil map
Patara (Lycia); 5. the text of Vegetius (fourth century department. Unfortunately, he was wrong, because
A.D.), with direct reference to itineraria picta et Comes Formarum is the person in charge of the city of
adnotata; 6. the fourth century A.D. Vicarello goblets; 7. Rome’s aqueducts. Talbert also criticizes some of
the vessel from Rudge Coppice, near Froxlield in these ideas.267
Wiltshire; 8. the vessel from Amiens – both list stations Susan Mattern succeeded to offer some
from Hadrian’s wall; 9. the third‐century A.D. shield interesting ideas related to geographical knowledge in
from Dura‐Europos. To these, I would add (and, Roman times. In chapter 2, The image of the world,
interesting, Emily Albu did too): 10. the lost ‘map’ from Mattern discussed the role of the army in the creation
Augustodunum (Autun), dated ‘in the waning days of the of itineraries. She develops an interesting theory
third century’,263 mentioned by the orator Eumenius; 11. related to the conquest of Dacia. Romans thought that
the collection of maps commissioned in 435 A.D. by the by doing this, they would get exit to the big Ocean.268
emperor Theodosius II. Obviously, these documents She also analyzes the contribution of the army to the
seem not enough for Emily Albu to convince her on the development of cartography. Before that, she refers to
tradition of itineraria in the Roman world. one simple aspect: that for Romans geography was ‘a
The same Kai Brodersen, at the end of his minor subject’. This does not mean that they did not
article from 2001, concludes: “…geographical knowledge know geography. Caesar or Pliny, Strabo or Varro, all
was organized, and presented, in itineraries. The risks of of them have consulted and read the classical Greek
this method are small (you might admittedly fail to works on this subject. Nevertheless, this science was
realize that there is more then one city on an island), the connected, in the most accurate sense, with military
gains, however, great: an itinerary allows you to plan campaigns. Strabo hopes that his work will help
travel and transport from A to B successfully, and it is generals to avoid problems like those in Parthia of
this method, which was adopted throughout antiquity. Germania. Four centuries later, Vegetius says that a
Simply itineraria adnotata are enough if there is only good commander should have with him every time
one route, but if there is a choice of routes to be taken, both itineraria picta and adnotata.269 How important
the ideal is – from the first century BC Artemidorus was the army in the development of geographical
papyrus to the London Tube diagram – an itinerarium knowledge? Well, Pliny the Elder has the answer. He
pictum”.264 writes that one cannot know information regarding
Salway stated in a study from 2001, and before places were the army has never been. Therefore,
him Arnaud: “…the cities destroyed by Vesuvius in AD 79 itineraries were the documents that resulted from
manage to coexist with the Constantinian St Peter’s. […]
Also in discord with the fourth‐century features are the
265
inclusion of routes for trans‐Danubian Dacia (VII 3 – VIII Salway 2001, 44.
266
3) and the eastern half of the Agri Decumates (III 5 – IV Dilke 1987c, 234‐257.
267
1). This variegated nature attempts to date the whole on Talbert 2008, 9‐27.
268
the basis of the omission, inclusion or highlighting of any Mattern 1999, 61: ’But the most likely frontier imagined
particular location a fruitless exercise. Moreover, as by Trajan when he invaded this territory was the ocean
itself. It is likely that he shared the prevalent view of a
Arnaud observed, the chronological variety of the data
flattened northern Europe; Agrippa had, after all, placed the
reflects not the work of layers of subsequent redactors ocean only 396 miles from the Danube River. The total
conquest of Eastern Europe must have seemed an attainable
goal. […] because of the mainly mythological nature of
Roman conceptions about the area, it seems probable that
the emperor was motivated by notions of reaching the
261
Brodersen 2001, 12. northern ocean and the exciting prospect of exploring and
262
Brodersen 2001, 12. conquering exotic, unknown territory, which was also
263
Albu 2008, 113. supposed to be rich in gold’. See also Whittaker 2004, 63‐87.
264 269
Brodersen 2001, 19. Vegetius, De re militari, 3, 6.

27
military campaigns. This vision is, obviously, horizontal. official records and everyday realities. ‘Tangible’ areas;
Some aspects regarding this topic and with direct 10. Models of regional development based on the
reference to Tabula Peutingeriana and Itinerarium transport infrastructure in Dacia; 11. Tabula
Antonini are discussed in other numerous Peutingeriana and the roads from Dacia; 12. Dacia in
contributions.270 the strategic road system of the Roman Empire.
A study regarding travel or space in the Roman So, the biggest challenge is how to date such
Empire normally deals with aspects related to the document, with so many different chronological
communication infrastructure. The type of investigation information? It is as today one should attempt to date
we proposed aimed and succeeded to deal with subjects a map containing cities (random example) spread
regarding space, travel, infrastructure, mobility. I between XVIIIth century and nowadays, or regions such
approached new subjects with new methods. The road as the Austro‐Hungarian Empire and current countries.
infrastructure as a ‘physical,’ ‘technical’ means provided Can we explain the variegated data contained in the
everything for communication. Road building activities document?
are known in the provinces through milestones. In this In 1988, Arnaud noticed this situation.273
way, the message of the ‘centre’ (the political imperial To sum up, as Brodersen stated: quot
message) spread in provinces. As we know, Roman homines docti, tot sententiae.274
milestones are important not only because their Itinerarium Antonini had the same fate and
inscriptions helped in planning a trip or the traffic generated, during time, almost the same amount of
management, but rather because they quickly became a literature. Arnaud notices: ‘L’Itinéraire d’Antonin ne
means of imperial propaganda, with great impact. fait pas exception à la règle: dérivé de la carte
Numerous contributions tried to discuss these d’Agrippa pour les uns, recueil d’itinéraires suivis par
aspects.271 As Adams outlined, this kind of research les empereurs pour d’autres, instrumente de l’Annone
started to be in the attention of scholars.272 militaire pour d’autres encore, lorsqu’il n’est pas
From what I presented above, one can considéré comme une émanation assez direct du
understand that the research of roads and pouvoir central’.275 The last contribution on this
communications must be focused on numerous aspects: document belongs to Bernd Löhberg.276 For method, a
1. Planning travel ‐ resources in Roman times: itineraria, good study is the book of Hans Bauer about the main
milliaria, ‘official’ roads and routes; 2. Organizing roads between Iller and Salsach investigation in close
communication in the Roman Empire and Dacia ‐ the connection with the data provided by Itinerarium
public transport system (cursus publicus). Routes. Stops. Antonini and Tabula Peutingeriana.277 Ray Laurence
Funding. Staff involved. Travelling under imperial published an important study in 2001.278 He provided
‘protection’; 3. Soldiers and moving troops. Identities an interesting insight of roads from Roman Britain,
‘transformed’ or maintained. The concept of “unified comparing data from Ptolemy’s geography and the
space’; 4. Trade and travel. Business travel. Dacian Antonine Itinerary.
exports to the Empire. Imports. Trade routes. Rome as a
model of organization: the grain supply; 5. Types of
travel and travel motivations. From “embassies” to
private persons; 6. Circulation of products in Roman
Empire and Dacia. Internal transport by land and by
water. Trade routes. Logistic organization and
maintenance of road sections; 7. Dacia and the Roman 273
Arnaud 1988, 309.
Empire. Strategic position and integration in the general 274
Brodersen 2003, 270. I want to remind a similar state of
communication system. Geography, topography and research concerning Agrippa’s map, well described by
organization of the road network; 8. Economy, Brodersen 2003, 269‐270, and Brodersen 2004, 185: ‘[…]
settlements and communications. A complementary scholarship, it is true, has variously describe it: depending on
system; 9. Distances and time. Speed between the which opinion one follows, it was a globe or a ‘large scale
map’, executed as a mosaic, painted in colour, engraved in
bronze, or hewn into marble; it was circular, oval, or
270
Calzolari 1996, 369‐520; Campbell 2000; Edson 2008, 219‐ rectangular, and it measured 6‐10 m in height (on a
236; Lozovsky 2008, 169‐188; Kramer 2001, 115‐120; Salway pediment of 5 m), or 75 m wide, but only 4.5 m high. At the
2004, 43‐96; Syme 1988, 227‐251; Sechi 1990; Susini 1992, top was east, south, or north, and it resembled the Tabula
119‐121; Talbert 2007b, 256‐270. Peutingeriana, a schematic medieval mappamundi, or an
271
Andreau, Virlouvet 2002; André, M.‐Francoise 1993; early modern portolan chart – quot homines tot sententiae. ’
275
Camassa, Silvana 1991; Duchêne 2003; Gozbales 2003; Kolb Arnaud 1993, 33, with the essential bibliography. The first
2000; Mackay 1999, 229‐239; Moatti 2006, 109‐140. edition is Cuntz 1929, reproduced with updated
272
Adams 2001, 1: “It is a growing field, built upon much bubliography by Gerhard Wirth (Stuttgart, B. G. Teubner,
existing scholarship, and new evidence is coming to light which 1990).
276
might revolutionize our understanding of how the Romans Löhberg 2006.
277
viewed the world in which they lived and how they traveled in Bauer 2007.
278
it”. Laurence 2001, 67‐94.

28
2. 2. Defining ‘map’, ‘geography’ and ‘itineraria’. chorography more close to what Romans understood
Roman literary sources about description of particular people, regions,
settlements, customs etc. In fact, this helped them to
In 61‐63 A.D., during Nero’s reign, a praetorian present information about new conquered provinces.
detachment surveyed the route between Syene and The Roman literary sources do not mention
Meroë.279 In book 12.19 Pliny states that after the anywhere that the Romans used maps in the sense we
expedition, a forma Aethiopiae was drawn and it was used them today. From Historia Augusta, Alexander
given (allata) to Nero. In this document (we hardly can Severus 45, 2‐3, we find out:
name this a map, we should imagine it more as a
sketch), showed finally (docuit) to Nero himself, the „Expeditiones bellicas habuit, de quibus ordine
main information was the distance between Syene to suo edisseram. Primum tamen eius consuetudinem
Meroë (996 miles) and the observation that few trees dicam de rebus vel tacendis vel prodendis. Tacebantur
were saw along this route. The same Pliny, in fact a very secreta bellorum, itinerum autem dies publice
educated, influent man, a very close amicus of emperor proponebantur, ita ut edictum penderet ante menses
Vespasian, states in his exhaustively researched duos, in quo scriptum esset, „Illa die, illa hora ab urbe
geographical books from Naturalis Historia that the sum exiturus et, si di voluerint, in prima mansione
distance between the Danube and the big ocean (S‐N) is mansurus,” deinde per ordinem mansiones, deinde
396 miles (book IV, 80‐81). He affirms that he has this stativae, deinde ubi annona esset accipienda, et id
information from the work of Agrippa. And, to continue, quidem eo usque quamdiu ad fines barbaricos
the same Pliny implies that one cannot expect to know veniretur. Iam enim inde tacebatur, et omnes operam
much about places where the Roman army has never dabant ne dispositionem Romanam barbari scirent.
been. Strabo writes that tribes beyond the Elbe River in Certum est autem eum numquam id quod proposuerat
Germany are unknown because the Romans never fefellisse, cum diceret nolle ab aulicis suas vendi
advanced that far (7.2.4). dispositiones, quod factum fuerat sub Heliogabalo,
To remain with Pliny, and to come closer to cum ab eunuchis omnia venderentur”.281
what we are interested for this study, he is incapable
imagining Dacia as a territory of certain shape and ”The dates of the itinera were publicly
extent, limited by geographical features.280 displayed; two months before the event he published
When we visit Rome, many of us admire those an edictum, in which was written: „on that day, at that
maps hanging on the wall, on the right side of the Via hour, I shall go forth from the city and, if the gods
dei Fori Imperiali. These are modern maps, showing the allow it, I will stay in the first station”, detailing then
glory of the Roman Empire in different periods of time. the stations one after another, then the camps, and
Every time I asked myself if the Romans were aware (at then where provisions are to be bad, and all that for as
least in their minds, as we are today as tourists or long as one arrived at the barbarians’ borders. From
people living in the digital mapping era) of their there everything was silenced, and all went without
geographical space. Today we admire the power of certainty, lest the barbarians would know the plans.”
Rome, its capacity to conquer all the regions around
Mare Nostrum, but these are our maps, this is our way In the panegyric of Eumenius (third century
of thinking and imagining the geography, not the Roman A.D.), we cannot found, anywhere, specifically, the use
way of understanding the landscape. of the word itinerarium:
For the term ‘map’ in the modern sense we
have today hundreds of definitions. Maps are, basically, „Videat praetera in illis porticibus iuventus et
the result of geographical knowledge. What was the cotidie spectet omnes terras et cuncta maria et
level of the geographical knowledge during Roman quidquid invictissimi principes urbium, gentium,
times? Did they use the term ‘map’? nationum aut pietate restituunt aut uirtute devincunt
The Romans considered geography a minor aut terrore devinciunt. Siquidem illic, ut ipse vidisti,
subject. This does not mean that they didn’t know credo, instruendae pueritiae causa, quo manifestius
geography. Caesar or Pliny, Strabo or Varro, all of them oculis discerentur quae difficilius percipiuntur auditu,
have consulted and read the classical Greek works on omnium cum nominibus suis locorum situs, spatia
this subject. But this science was connected, in the most intervalla descripta sunt, quidquid ubique fluminum
accurate sense, with military campaigns. Strabo hopes oritur et conditur, quaecumque se litorum sinus
that his work will help generals to avoid problems like flectunt, qua vel ambitu cingit orbem vel impetu
those in Parthia of Germania. Four centuries later, inrumpit oceanus. Ibbi fortisimorum imperatorum
Vegetius says that a good commander should have with pulcherrimae res gestae per diversa regionum
him every time both itineraria picta and adnotata. It was argumenta recolantur, dum calentibus semperque
venientibus victoriarum nuntiis revisuntur gemina
279
Nicolet 1991, 86, and note 5, 89; Austin, Rankov 1995, 151.
280 281
Mattern 1999, 209. Brodersen 2001, 12.

29
persidos flumina et Libyae arva sitientia et convexa Rheni world: but this your wisdom, emperor, has taught us to
cornua et Nili ora multifida; dumque sibi ad haec singula do.”283
intuentium animus adfingit aut sub tua, Diocletiane
Auguste, clementia Aegyptum furore posito quiescentem Instead, Flavius Vegetius Renatus (ca. 400
aut te, Maximiane invicte, perculsa Maurorum agmina A.D.) recommends in his work De re militari the use of
fulminantem aut sub dextera tua, domine Constanti, painted and written itineraries.
Bataviam Britanniamque squalidum capus silvis et
fluctibus exserentem aut te, Maximiane Caesar, Persicos “Primum itineraria omnium regionum, in
arcus pharetrasque calcantem. Nunc enim, nunc demum quibus bellum geritur, plenissime debet habere
iuvat orbem spectare depictum, cum in illo videmus perscripta, ita ut locorum intervalla non solum
alienum”. passuum numero sed etiam viarum qualitate perdiscat,
conpendie, deverticula montes flumina ad finem
”Furthermore, in those porticoes let the young descripta consideret, usque eo, ut sollertiores duces
people see and contemplate daily every land and all the itineraria provinciarum, in quibus necessitas gerebatur,
seas and whatever cities, people, nations that the non tantum adnotata sed etiam picta habuisse
unconquered rulers either restore by affection, conquer firmentur, ut non solum consilio mentes verum aspectu
by valour or restrain by fear. Since there are pictured in oculorum viam profecturus eligeret”.
that place, as I believe you have yourself seen, in order to
instruct the youth (so that they might learn more clearly ”A commander must have itineraria written
with their eyes what they comprehend less readily by out, so that he might learn not only the usual
their ears), the sites of all locations with their names, information on distances but also about the condition
their extent, and the intervening spaces, the sources and of the road, and also so that, having had them
terminations of all the rivers, the curves of all the shores, accurately described, he might take into account
and the Ocean, both where its circuit girds the earth and shortcuts, branch‐roads, hills, and rivers. So much so,
where its pressure breaks into it. … For now, now at last that more ingenious commanders are claimed to have
it is a delight to see a picture of the world, since we see had itineraries of the areas in which their attention
nothing in it that is not ours.”282 was required not so much annotated but even
illustrated, so that the road for setting out on might be
The poem composed by Aemilius Probus as a chosen not only by a mental consideration but truly at
preface to the ‘atlas’ commissioned by Theodosius II in a glance of the eyes.”284
435 A.D. makes no reference to the word itinerarium: Therefore, itineraria is a term used for
describing the need of soldiers, generals to have with
“Hoc opus egregium, quo mundi summa tenetur, them this particular type of document. When the
aequora quo, montes, fluuii, portus, freta et urbes sources describe ‘maps’ used for propagandistic
signantur, cunctis ut sit cognoscere promptum quidquid purposes, they do not mention the word itinerarium,
ubique latet, clemens genus, inclita proles, ac per saecla but, as we saw, opus or orbem spectare depictum.
pius, totus quem uix capit orbis, Theodosius princeps Why should we consider Tabula a map when, in fact, it
uenerando iussit ab ore confici, ter quinis aperit cum is an itinerarium pictum?
fascibus annum. Supplices hoc famuli, dum scribit pinget
et alter, mensibus exiguis ueterum monimenta secuti in 2. 3. Dacia. The study of roads and the
melius reparamus opus culpamque priorum tollimus ac ancient sources. State of research
totum breuiter comprehendimus orbem. Sed tamen hoc
tua nos docuit sapientia, princeps.” The Romanian historiography with direct
reference to the Roman itineraries, i.e. Tabula
“This outstanding work ‐ in which the whole Peutingeriana and the Antonine itinerary, remained
world is included, in which seas, mountains, rivers, during time tributary to some methodological
harbours, straits and towns, are indicated, so that all misconceptions, which lead to unsatisfactory results.
might know where any feature lies‐the kind natured, In 1938, Emil Panaitescu contributed to the
nobly born, and forever pious, emperor Theodosius series Quaderni dell’Impero. Le grandi strade del
(whom the whole world scarcely contains) from his mondo romano, initiated by the Institute of Roman
reverend mouth ordered to be made, when he opened Studies in Rome. In 23 pages about the Roman roads,
the year with his fifteenth consulship. We humble he didn’t had the space and knowledge to write more
servants (as one wrote, the other painted), having that some very general data concerning the route of
followed the work of the ancients, have in a few months some roads, the main roads mentioned in Tabula
prepared an improved work, and have removed the
faults of predecessors, to encompass briefly the whole
283
Salway 2005, 128.
282 284
Text and translation after Salway 2005, 128. Text and translation after Salway 2001, 31.

30
Putingeriana and the presentation of the few milestones of Tabula during the fourth century A.D. The
which were found in Dacia. Romanian scholars advanced an opinion concerning
The first who attempted to date the Peutinger the data of the two documents: they were created in
map by discussing different particularities from the the Severian era, like A. and M. Levi thought. After
province of Dacia reflected on Tabula is Constantin that, it is possible that Itinerarium Antonini was
Daicoviciu.285 Starting from the wrong idea that the updated in the time of Emperor Diocletian (284 A.D. –
Eastern part of Roman Dacia is not represented in the 305 A.D.) and Tabula suffered the same process in the
Peutinger map, the Romanian scholar dated the time of Theodosius II (408 A.D. – 450 A.D).
document from 251 A.D. to 271 A.D., when this part of Peter Hügel is another Romanian scholar who
Dacia has already been abandoned. The archaeological discussed some aspects related to the Peutinger map
researches made during the last six decades proved that in his book dedicated to the history of Dacia in the
Dacia was not abandoned nor entirely, nor in certain period Traianus Decius ‐ Aurelian.293 The author makes
parts, in the time of Gallienus, but during the time of a short review of the opinions concerning the date of
Aurelian. Therefore, Daicoviciu’s opinion is no longer the original TP in the Romanian literature. Personally,
valuable. Hügel does not advance any hypothesis concerning
Dumitru Tudor issued the hypothesis that this aspect.
Tabula should be dated in 250 A.D.286 Mihail Macrea Doina Benea seems convinced to accept the
dated the map in the mid third‐century A.D.287 The general opinion according to which Tabula should be
scholar thought that the prototype was compiled dated, as a whole document, in the fourth or the fifth
between 260 A.D. – 270 A.D., using the same totally century A.D., but she tries to prove that for Dacia
wrong argument that Eastern Dacia is not represented in Tabula reflects a reality from the same period (late
Tabula. Andrei Aricescu agreed with Macrea’s opinion Roman period).294 Her arguments are: 1. Dacia was not
and dated the original of the Tabula in same way.288 totally abandoned after the withdrawal of Aurelian, in
Investigating the Roman roads in Banat,289 O. 271 A.D. The Romans kept a certain military and
Răuţ, O. Bozu and R. Petrovszky agreed with Chevallier’s juridical control in the trans‐Danubian territories; 2.
opinion concerning the period when the Peutinger map The cities represented with vignettes (Tivisco,
was created: in a first phase at the beginning of the third Sarmategte, Apula, Napoca and Porolisso) suggest that
century AD, then some revisions were made in the the main road of Dacia was maintained in use because
second phase, during the time of Theodosius II, in the Vth of economic motifs: to assure the access to the gold
century. mines from the Apuseni Mountains, the salt from
Marin Popescu‐Spineni argued that the Potaissa and the iron resources from Banat; 3. The
prototype of Tabula was created in during the imperial archaeological discoveries from the South‐Western
era, because of the presence of Dacia and its official Dacia attest that some fortifications continued to
roads.290 function in the fourth century A.D., along with rural
A short article published by Radu Florescu in settlements; 4. The toponyms mentioned in Dacia
1985 analyzes the Roman roads represented on the have a corrupt form, specific for the late Roman
Trajan’s Column.291 The study leads, in my opinion, to no period; 5. The reuse of several epigraphic monuments
conclusions, since the monument is a propagandistic proves that Dacia remained after 275 A.D. under
one and any attempt to find correspondents of the Roman military control. In her book published in 1999,
scenes in the terrain is useless. she advances the possibility that the five vignettes
Alexandru Suceveanu and Iuliana Barnea corresponding to the mentioned cities attest that
discussed the information from Tabula for Dobroudja these settlements were Christian centers of much
and they compare it with the information contained in bigger importance than the others, not represented
Itinerarium Antonini.292 They concluded that in 10 cases with graphical signs. As a conclusion, Doina Benea
the coincidence regarding the distances between certain thinks that the representation of Dacia in the
settlements in Dobrudja is perfect. In four cases, it Peutinger map is normal. According to her opinion, the
seems that Tabula was more close to the reality. In their Roman imperial roads remained in function in the
opinion, these semblances and differences between the fourth century A.D. and for this reason they were
two antique sources elude the hypothesis of a revision represented on Tabula. Does TP reflect, for Dacia, a
reality from the fourth century AD or we have to deal
285
Daicoviciu 1941, 253‐254; Daicoviciu 1945; Daicoviciu 1964, with an error of the copyist? Doinea Benea thinks that
737. the answer to this question is related to the absence
286
Tudor 1968, 50. of the eastern part of the province. This absence
287
Macrea 1969, 52. reflects, in Benea’s opinion, a de facto situation
288
Aricescu 1977, 134.
289
Răuţ, Bozu, Petrovszky 1977, 138.
290 293
Popescu‐Spineni 1978, 80. Hügel 2003, 78‐84.
291 294
Florescu 1985, 51‐58. Benea 1999, 138‐154; Benea 2000, 117‐123; Benea 2001,
292
Suceveanu, Barnea 1993, 171. 135‐149; Benea 2001a, 285‐300.

31
meaning Eastern Dacia was no longer under Roman Mithras were found in a mithraeum.296 In these
control, because the population belonging to the inscriptions is mentioned Flavius Aper, v(ir) e(gregius)
cultural area Sântana de Mureş‐Cerneahov occupied this and praepositus of the legions V Macedonica and XIII
territory. Gemina. The epithet of these legions is Galliena, so it
These arguments are unfortunately is not a problem to date this headquarter during
unsustainable in all their aspects. Dacia was no longer an Gallienus’ reign. In addition, officiales are mentioned.
issue for the Roman Empire in the fourth century A.D. They designate the principales of the officium of the
We know today even when, de iure, Dacia was still part military comandant. A canaliclarius is also mentioned
of the empire, emperor Gallienus masively used Roman in one of the inscriptions (IDRE II, 269). In the text, the
military troops to defend the Balkan and the Eastern word is in genitive singular (canaliclari), so only one
part of the Empire. The military and strategic context person is designated with this position. The term
forced him to act like this. In 253 A.D. the reign of P. seems to be derived from canalicula, which designates
Licinius Valerianus and P. Licinius Egnatius Gallienus the object in with the written tools are kept.
starts. The Roman crisis reaches the apogee. In 254 A.D., In all, the movement of these legionary
the Goths dispel and unleash devastating attacks in the vexillationes from Dacia to Poetovio obviously
Balkans. They reached Thracia up to Thessalonic. Panic weakened the central defensive system of Roman
installed in the Balkans, and military fortifications were Dacia. According to an interesting argument
rapidly restored. However, it was just not enough. In 256 developed by Hügel, within this time (Gallienus),
A.D., Dacia stops to issue its own coins. In 257 A.D., the basically in the period 260‐268 A.D., the defense of
free Dacians attack the province. Galienus received the Dacia was withdrawn along the main road (Porolissum
title Dacicus Maximus. Then, in 257‐258 A.D. the Goths, ‐ Napoca ‐ Potaissa ‐ Apulum ‐ Ulpia Traiana
the Carps and other Barbarians start the attacks using Sarmizegetusa) for two reasons: 1. the need of soldiers
the sea. They destroy cities from the west coast of the in other regions (war areas); 2. the lack of attacks
Black Sea and head towards Minor Asia. In the same against Dacia. Poetovio was the key point along the
time, military rebellions start in Pannonia in 258‐260 route connecting Italy with the Balkans. Therefore, it
A.D. The soldiers have as leader Ingennus and needed troops to defend it.297
Regalianus. Emperor Valerianus must deal with the crisis To sum up again, Dacia was de iure still a
from Orient.295 Nevertheless, in 260 A.D., the Persians Roman province, but de facto was no longer an issue
defeated him and he was captured. Gallienus remains for Gallienus. That is why Aurelian logically abandoned
alone. The so‐called ‚king of Palmyra’ gains power. The it, establishing the line of defense along the Moesian
Germanic invasions to Rhine and the Danube are Danube as withdrawing the military forces and the
catastrophic. Agri Decumates is lost. To sum up: in 260 Roman administration from Dacia in 271 A.D.
A.D. the Roman Empire is threatened by three critical This leads to the argument and the conclusion
situation: 1. the Occident is ‘detached’ from the Empire regarding Dacia and Tabula Peutingeriana. It is not
by the Germanic attack and the usurpations; 2. military recommended, methodologically, to analyze
rebellions start in Pannonia, leaded by Ingenuus and information from Tabula trying to explain some late
Regalianus; 3. the Orient seem lost, in the moment Roman period military actions. Neither D. Benea, nor
when Valerianus was captured. In this situation, the others, did not understood that the Peutinger
Gallienus evaluated perfectly the strategic situation and map, or, to be more precise, its compiler in the firth
the consequences of his future actions will leave Dacia century A.D., used selective data to fulfill his task.
outside this strategic measurement. The reason was Today, in cartography, this criterion is entitled
obvious: put simply, Dacia was all this time ‚detoured’ by
Barbarians. They attacked in Moesia, Thracia using 296
IDRE II, no. 266‐270. No. 266 (AnnÉp 1936, 53): D(eo)
Dobroudja as connection. Gallienus, understanding this, S(oli) I(nvicto) M(ithrae) | pro sal(ute) d(omini) n(ostri)
decided to move soldiers from Dacia in strategic points. Gallieni P(ii) F(elicis) | Invicti Aug(usti), Fl(avius) Aper, v(ir)
One of these was the road connecting Italy to the Balkan e(gregius), l(ibens) m(erito). No. 267 (AnnÉp 1936, 54): D(eo)
Peninsula. Along it, Poetovio was crucial. Therefore, to S(oli) I(nvicto) M(ithrae) | pro sal(ute) officialium Apri prae |
avoid further attack along this route, he moved here positi legg(iorum) V M(acedonicae) et XIII Gem(inae) |
parts of the two Dacian legions. Galli(enarum). No. 268 (AnnÉp 1936, 57): _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
_ | [legg(ionim) V] M(acedonicae) et XII [I G(eminae)] |
At Poetovio, in Pannonia Superior, vexillationes
[G]allienarum | [Fl(avius)] Aper v(ir) e(gregius) | [pra]
from the two legions of Dacia (legio V Macedonica from epositus. No. 269 (AnnÉp 1936, 56): D(eo) S(oli) I(nvicto)
Potaissa and legio XIII Gemina from Apulum) are M(ithrae) | pro sa<sa>lute | canaliclari | et actariorum | et
attested after the mid‐third century A.D. This fact is codicarior(um) | et librariorum | legg(ionum) V
epigraphically attested. Five inscriptions dedicated to M(acedonicae) et XIII G(eminae) | Gallienarum. No. 270
(AnnÉp 1936, 53): D(eo) S(oli) I(nvicto) M(ithrae) | pro
salutei | tesserarior(um) | et custod(um) ar | mor(um)
legg(ionum) V M(acedonicae) | et XIII Gemin(a)e |
Gallienarum.
295 297
Nemeti, Dana 2001, 239‐257. See, for maps, Gudea 1997.

32
cartographic generalization. The mapmaker was forced knowledge about the urban development of the
by its map support (a parchment roll of 7 m long and 34 province.
cm width) to reduce the quantity of data to include in In 2004, I published a short analysis
the map (if he had so many data). Therefore, the concerning the data from Tabula regarding Dacia and I
absence of Eastern Dacia has absolutely no connection reached the conclusion that the source for the
with some kind of action mentioned above (Goths mapmaker was a military map from the early period
occupation of this territory etc.). Tabula, in fact, do not (Trajan ‐ Hadrian).300
represents other important roads from Dacia, such as An article published in 2006 by Dumitru
the one connecting Dacia and Pannonia along the Mureş Hortopan analysis the roads from Dacia Inferior,301 but
river, which, obviously, was extremely important, both the author does not offer new data. He only discusses
military and economically. some issues already known. The map placed at the
Further, Benea’s arguments are wrong. The end of the article is too old to be used.
settlements represented with vignettes are, obviously, In another article recently published, C. C.
as recent historiography proved, accommodations along Petolescu analyzes the image of Dacia in the antique
the main roads. They have nothing to do with Christian geographical space. Once again, he advance the same
centers in the late Roman period. The toponyms have a version of dating the document for Dacia, during the
corrupt form. Yes, this is the truth, but corrupt reign of Hadrian, based on the fact that this emperor
comparing to what? This is not a criterion. One cannot travelled a lot within the Roman Empire, and such
argue that corrupt forms are specific only for the late maps, like the Peutinger map, were created within this
Roman period. Ptolemy used also corrupt form, and he period.302 The same idea is discussed in another
compiled his Geographia in the IInd century A.D. to prove study.303
that a toponym has a corrupt form you need epigraphic To sup up, beside the article of Diaconescu,
evidence. Since so many settlements from Tabula / or all the other articles, books and studies on the
Ptolemy / or the Antonine Itinerary / or the Geographer Peutinger map failed to produce a reasonable
from Ravenna, do not posses, until now, evidence from argument to explain the data from the map.
epigraphy, further discussion on this issue is, in my
opinion, superfluous. 2. 4. The milestones
A. Diaconescu published an interesting point of
view in a consistent article about Dacia under Trajan.298 Nine Roman milestones were discovered
The method applied by Diaconescu to analyze the data within the territory of the former Roman Dacia (Fig.
from Tabula is fundamentally correct. He proves, 11). These are: 1. the milestone from Aiton (Cluj
without question, with solid arguments, that the County), along the main imperial road between
distances mentioned along the Dacian roads reflect a Potaissa and Napoca, dated in 108 A.D.; 2. the
measurement unit used while military advance: iustus milestone from Mera (Cluj County), along the main
iter. This is 12 miles. Going further with his imperial road between Napoca and Optatiana, dated
demonstration, Deaconess concludes that the data from in 165 A.D., during Marcus Aurelius’ reign; 3. the
Tabula reflects what Romans used to do when they milestone from Almaşu (Sălaj County), along the road
conquered a province: they created itineraries. which connected Bologa with Sutor, discovered in
Moreover, these documents were the sources for the 1851, now lost, dated in 236 A.D., during Maximinus
mapmaker of Tabula in the fifth century AD. Thrax; 4. the milestone from Micia (today Veţel,
C. C. Petolescu has a different opinion.299 He Hunedoara County), along the road parallel with the
thinks that the cities represented with vignettes in Dacia course of the river Mureş, dated in 251‐253 A.D.,
are the most important settlements of the province: 1. during the emperors Trebonianus Gallus and
Tibiscum ‐ important crossroad in Banat; 2. Volusianus; 5. the milestone from Lăpuşnicel, in Banat
Sarmizegetusa ‐ the capital of Dacia; 3. Apulum ‐ the (Caraş‐Severin County), along a secondary road
headquarter of legio XIII Gemina; 4. Napoca ‐municipium connecting the following settlements: Slatina Nera,
Hadrianum, then Colonia Aurelia and the residence of Sasca Montană, Dalboşeţ, Bozovici, Prilipăţ and Prigor,
the procurator Daciae Porolissensis; 5. Porolissum ‐ the dated during Trebonianus Gallus (June 251 – August
key of the Roman defensive system on the Northern 253 A.D.) and his associate Volusianus or during the
frontier, and municipium Septimium. He also uses wrong emperors Gallienus (September/October 253 ‐
criteria. As it is already proved, the mapmaker of Tabula September 268 A.D.) and his associate, his son
used regional itineraria picta as sources to compile the Valerianus Junior (255 ‐ end of 257/beginning of 258
map. It is difficult to imagine that one / or several ‘maps’ A.D.); 6. the milestone from Băbiciu de Sus (Olt
of Dacia were created/drawn by persons with such
300
Fodorean 2004, 51‐58.
301
Hortopan 2006, 47‐54.
298 302
Diaconescu 1997, 13‐52. Petolescu 2007a, 274.
299 303
Petolescu 2000a, 19‐21. Petolescu 2007b, 276‐279.

33
County), along the road parallel with the valley of the 2. 4. 2. Mera (Cluj County)
river Olt, dated in 205 A.D., during Septimius Severus’
reign; 7. the milestone from Gostavăţu (Olt County), along A Roman milestone found in 1932308 south of
the same road, dated during Septimius Severus; 8. the the village of Mera (Fig. 20, Fig. 21) (Cluj County)
milestone from Praetorium (today Copăceni‐Racoviţa, marks from Napoca until this point 10 miles.
Vâlcea County), along the same road, dated in 236 A.D.,
during Maximinus Thrax; 9. the milestone from Sucidava The text is:
(today Celei, Olt County), discovered in 1913, dated in
328 A.D., during the emperor Constantine the Great. IMP(erator) CAES(ar) [M(arcus) Aurelius] /
ANTONI[nus Aug(ustus) Armen(iacus)] / P(ontifex)
2. 4. 1. Aiton (Cluj County) M(aximus) TR(ibunicia) P[ot(estate) XIX Imp(erator) III
Co(n)s(ul) III et] / IMP(erator) CAE[s(ar) L(ucius)
Along the main imperial road (Fig. 12), at Aiton Aurelius] / VERVS AV[g(ustus) Armen(iacus)
(Cluj County), exactly 10 miles (14,785 km) North of Tr(ibunicia) Pot(estate) V Imp(erator) III] / CO(n)S(ul) II
Potaissa, a Roman milestone was erected in 108 A.D., FECE[runt a Napoca] / MP [X] / IMP(erator) [Caes(ar)
during Trajan (Fig. 13). The monument was found in M(arco) / AUR(elio) A[nto] / NINO [Aug(usto)].
1758. Now, unfortunately, is lost. The text is:304
This road was probably repaired during
IMP(erator) / CAESAR NERVA / TRAIANVS Marcus Aurelius and Caracalla’s reign. Fecerunt
AVG(ustus) / GERM(anicus) DACICVS / PONTIF(ex) indicate the construction of the road. When he first
MAXIM(us) / (tribunicia) POT(estate) XII CO(n)S(ul) V published the monument, Daicoviciu noted an
(sic) / IMP(erator) VI P(ater) P(atriae) FECIT / PER interesting detail: he found in that point several
COH(ortem) I FL(avia) VLP(ia) / HISP(anorum) MIL(liaria) anepigraphic stone monuments. This is a solid prove,
C(ivium) R(omanorum) EQ(uitata) / A POTAISSA in my opinion, that this was a point chosen when the
NAPOCAE / M(illia) P(assuum) X. Romans made survey measurements. From Napoca to
Mera there were exactly 10 Roman miles up to this
This piece of evidence has a triple importance: point. The presence of these unwritten milestones
1. In the formula a Potaissa Napocae we find the first indicates the intention of positioning them along the
epigraphic evidence of Potaissa and Napoca; 2. This road route of the same road, after other measurements
sector (Fig. 14, Fig. 15, Fig. 16, Fig. 17, Fig. 18, Fig. 19) were ready.
was built by cohors I Flavia Ulpia Hispanorum milliaria
civium Romanorum equitata. This troop is mentioned 2. 4. 3. Almaşu (Sălaj County)
among the military forces used by Trajan in the war
against the Dacians. After fulfilling its mission, it was The third milestone from Dacia Porolissensis
garrisoned at Orheiul Bistriţei, along the northeastern was discovered in 1851 at Almaşu Mare (Sălaj County),
frontier.305 Because it was equitata, I suspect the use of along a sector of road between Bologa and Sutoru
this cavalry unit for the recognition of the landscape of (Optatiana).
northern Dacia; 3. This particular case can be added to
the list of the military units, which built roads, even if The text is:
Michael Rathmann proved that little evidence could be
found to demonstrate the individual existence of the IM[p(erator)] CAESARI (sic) CAIVS IVL(ius) V[erus]
term via militaris in Roman times.306 At Aiton, a sector of [Ma / x]I[mi]NVS P(ius) F(elix) AVG(ustus) PONTIF[ex] /
road was excavated. Nowadays it is preserved in the [Maximus] TRIB(unicia) POTESTAT[is] / II IMP(erator) III
courtyard of the village school, together with a copy of CO(n)S(ul) PATER PATRIA[e] / ET GAIVS [Iul](ius) V[eru]S
the milestone. In 2005, a sector of this road was found M[aximinus] / NOBISSIM[us] (sic) CAES(ar) FIL(io)
close to the village of Ceanu Mic. Within the territory of AVGV[sti] / M(illia Passuum) XVI A R(esc)VL(o) VICO
the village Aiton, in several points (private gardens of AN(artorum).
the inhabitants), there were recorded and excavated
wall substructures, coins, ceramic fragments, all of them The most important part of the inscription is
proving the existence of a stopping point along the road, the indication from the end of the text: M(illia)
possible a mansio.307 P(assuum) a R(esc)VL(o) VICO AN(artorum). This

308
Daicoviciu 1928‐1932, 48‐53; Daicoviciu 1970, 224‐230;
Fodorean 2002, 55‐95. In the first publication, Daicoviciu
notes an interesting detail: he found in that point several
304
CIL III 1627. anepigraphic stone monuments. This is a solid prove, in my
305
Protase 2008. opinion, that this was an exact point where measurements
306
Rathmann 2003, 40. were made and then the milestones were distributed along
307
Blăjan, Cerghi 1978, 21‐27; Fodorean 2006, 133. the road.

34
milliarium, dated in 236 A.D., attests the construction, century and the beginning of the 4th century A.D.,
or, eventually, the restoration, during emperor during the emperors Diocletian and Maximianus.
Maximinus Thrax and his son, of a road which connected The monument was first published in 1977.310
the locality R[es]cul(um) with a certain vicus An(artorum) The monument311 was discovered with its face down,
on a distance of XVI m(illia passuum). All these buried in soil circa 1 m, in a point known with the
information were crucial in establishing that the road toponym ‘Znamăn’ or ‘Piatra Împăratului’. Its
started at the military camp from Bologa (Resculum) dimensions are: 1,92 m in height; 0,32 m in width. The
and, alongside the valley of the river Almaş, passing letters have 4 cm in height. In 1977, when the authors
through the vicus Anartorum, finished at Optatiana published the article, they specified that only the
(Sutoru). This milestone from Dacia Porolissensis and following letters could be written: IANOPPIS. They
other monuments of this kind discovered in different dated the monument, based only on one useless
provinces (Italia, Alpes Cottiae, Alpes Maritimae, criterion, its shape, at the end of the third century A.D.
Baetica, Lusitania, Hispania Citerior, Gallia Narbonensis, and the beginning of the fourth century A.D., during
Aquitania, Gallia Lugdunensis, Germania Superior, Diocletian and Maximianus’ reigns.
Raetia, Cappadocia, Arabia, Africa Proconsularis, In 1979, the monument is rediscussed in
Numidia) show an intense preoccupation of Maximinus another article.312 This time, the information is
Thrax for the construction and the restoration of the somehow different from the one published two years
roads. earlier. The author specifies that the monument is
1,82 m in height, and 0,32 m in width and it has 5
2. 4. 4. Veţel ‐ Micia (Hunedoara County) irregular sides. He actually publishes a photograph and
a drawing. Analyzing the text again, O. Bozu read two
This milestone was discovered in Veţel, rows: one with the letters IANOP and another one
Hunedoara County (Fig. 22). The name of the Roman with the letters MILI. The same author specifies that
settlement was Micia. The settlement is positioned along the inscription was martelated.
the Roman road, which connected Apulum with Micia and The unsolved problems are, in this case, the
Partiscum (Szeged). This epigraphic monument was text of the inscription and the date. In the article
published in one of the volumes dedicated to the published in 1977, the authors specified that “because
inscriptions of the Roman Dacia.309 of its shape, the milestone has the same shape as the
monuments from Dobroudja erected at the end of the
The text is: third century A.D. and in the fourth century A.D. and
suggests that it was erected during Domitian (sic!) and
IMP(eratori) C(aesari) CAIO VI/VIO Maximian, or a letter period” / “după aspect, miliarul
TRABONIA/NO GALLO P(io) F(elici) / AVG(usto) P(atri) se aseamănă cu cele din Dobrogea plantate la finele
[p(atriae)] ET / IMP(eratori) C(aesari) C(aio) VIVIO / secolului al III‐lea şi în secolul al IV‐lea şi sugerează
AFINIO GALLO / VELDOMINIA/NO [Vo] / LVC (sic) [iano] / ipoteza că este vorba de împăraţii Domiţian (sic !) şi
AVG(usto) P(atri) P(atriae) / AB A[p(ulo) M(illia) Maximian, dacă nu cumva de o perioadă mai târzie”.313
P(assuum)] / XLV. In my opinion, these arguments are
irrelevant. The shape is not a criterion for dating the
The text of the inscription indicates the distance milestones. Second, Dobroudja and Banat are two
between Micia and Apulum: XLV M(illia) P(assuum) different regions, which developed separately, with no
(66,937 km), which corresponds with the current distance common features. Third, since in Banat no other
between the actual localities Alba Iulia and Veţel. The milestones were found, how can one compare one
monument was correctly dated in 251 – 253 A.D., during monument with the milestones found in Dobroudja,
the emperors Trebonianus Gallus and Volusianus. The since there is no typology established for the
inscription represents the proof for a restoration of this monuments in Banat?
road during these two emperors. The authors underline that the text was
martelated. On the other hand, not only had the
2. 4. 5. Lăpuşnicel (Caraş‐Severin County) emperor Maximian suffered damnatio memoriae.
Therefore, I searched for emperors whose names were
The second milliarium from Dacia Superior was martelated from inscriptions and who developed
discovered in Lăpuşnicel (Caraş‐Severin County) (Fig. 23, activities related to the road infrastructure. The first
Fig. 24), along a secondary Roman road in Banat, which observation is related to the emperor Maximianus. If
connects the following settlements: Slatina Nera, Sasca
Montană, Dalboşeţ, Bozovici, Prilipăţ and Prigor. The
310
monument, discovered in situ, was dated by those who Răuţ, Bozu, Petrovszky 1977, 135‐159.
311
have published it after his aspect at the end of the 3rd Nowadays the milestone is located at the Museum of
Reşiţa.
312
Bozu 1979, 199.
309 313
IDR III/3, 50. Răuţ, Bozu, Petrovszky 1977, 148.

35
the text was martelated, why not the whole name was settlement Gostavăţu (Olt County).316 Only a small
erased? fragment survived from this chalk milestone (a
Therefore, the text was martelated and we can fragment with a height of 48 cm and a width of 26
read only several letters: IANOP. I tried to find two cm). From the whole inscription only several letters
associated emperors, one who suffered damnatio from two rows remained. The letters are 10 cm height.
memoriae and his name was erased, and the other with The whole monument could have at least 2 m in
a name ended in the dative IANO. This restricts the height (minimum 10 rows, 10 cm the height of the
dating to the third century, because the dative was used letters, plus the base and the upper part). The text is
only for this period. I found two cases: the emperors DIVI […f (illus)]. As in the other case, this milestone
Trebonianus Gallus / Volusianus and the emperors was dated also during Septimius Severus’ reign.
Gallienus / Valerianus Iunior.
Based on this information, I propose two 2. 4. 8. Copăceni ‐ Racoviţa (Vâlcea County)
lectures. The first is:
The third milestone along the valley of Olt
[IMP CAES C VIBIO TREBONIANO] was discovered at Praetorium (Copăceni ‐ Racoviţa,
[GALLO P F AUG P P ET IMP CAES] Vâlcea County) (Fig. 26). The whole monument
[C VIBIO VOLUS]IANO P [F] survived, but broken in two pieces. The height of the
[AUG P P] ………..MILI[A P] ? monument is 1,20 m, with a diameter of 40 cm. The
letters have 5 cm in height. Comparing with the first
The second lecture is: the fragmentary milestones mentioned above, the
letters are twice smaller. This shows that the first the
[IMP CAES P LICINIO GALLIENO] monuments were bigger, more accurately elaborated.
[P F INV AUG P P ET IMP CAES] The text is:
[P LICINIO VALER]IANO P [F]
[AUG]…………….…MILI[A P] ? IM[perator] CAES[ar] / [C Iul(ius) VERV(s)] /
M[aximi]NVS / PIVS FE[lix] AVG[ustus] / PON[tifex]
After a careful examination of the milestone, I MAX[imus] / TRIB[unicia] [Po]T[estate] / II CO[n]S[ul]
reached the conclusion that the monument can be PROCO[n]S[ul] / PA[ter] PA[triae] ET [C I]VL[ius]
dated during the emperors Trebonianus Gallus (June 251 VERV[s] / [Maximinus] / NOBILIS[simus] / CAE[sar] III
– August 253 A.D.) and his associate Volusianus or M[illia] P[assuum].317
during the emperors Gallienus (September/October 253 The publishers of the monument noted that
– September 268 A.D.) and his associate, his son the names of the emperors (rows 2, 3 and 10) seemed
Valerianus Junior (255 ‐ end of 257/beginning of 258 to be martelated. The monument was dated in 236
A.D). A.D., during Maximinus Thrax’s reign.

2. 4. 6. Băbiciu de Sus (Olt County) 2. 4. 9. Sucidava – Celei, Corabia (Olt County)

This milestone was found in Băbiciu de Sus (Olt The fourth milestone along the valley of Olt is
County), in the road sector between Islaz and Romula.314 dated during Constantine the Great, so from a period
One a small part of it survived315 (height 47 cm and in which Dacia was no longer part of the Roman
width 27 cm). In the first line, the letters are 6 cm high. Empire. I want to present it here, because the
The text is: IM[p(erator)] (Caes) / SEPT(imius) SEV(erus). monument proves the concern of this emperor
The milestone was dated during Septimius regarding the defense of the empire in this area. In
Severus’ reign, in 205 A.D. It shows that this road was fact, Constantine wanted to secure only the line of the
repaired in that period, maybe together with the Roman Danube. He did not conquer the southern part of the
military fortress from Slăveni. former Dacia; he only wanted to present future Gothic
attacks, focused on the area of the Balkans. Dumitru
2. 4. 7. Gostavăţu (Olt County)
316
TIR L 35, s.v. Gostavăţ; CIL III, 1421618; IDR II, 494;
Circa 5 km north of this point (Fig. 25), another
Tocilescu 1896, 1, 81, no. 12; Christescu 1937, 113; Tudor
milestone was found on the territory of the current 1968, 52; Macrea 1969, 153; Vlădescu 1986, 103; Fodorean
2006, 80. The fragment was kept in the National Museum of
Antiquities from Bucharest.
317
Translation after IDR II, 229: „For the emperor Caesar C.
314
TIR L 35, s.v. Băbiciul Episcopiei. Iulius Verus Maximinus Pius Felix Augustus, big priest,
315
CIL III 13802; IDR II, 493; Tocilescu 1896, 1, 82; Christescu investted with the second tribunician power, consul,
1937, 113; Tudor 1968, 52; Macrea 1969, 153; Vlădescu 1986, proclamed three times emperor, , proconsul, father of the
103; Fodorean 2006, 80. This fragment was kept in the land, and C. Iulius Verus Maximinus, the most nobile Caesar.
National Museum of Antiquities from Bucharest. Three thousand paces (until the fortress…)”.

36
Tudor discovered the monument in Sucidava, in 1913.318 from the Barbarians, but also assured the proper
This is a chalk cylindrical monument, with the ends movement of the armies along the border. Rufus
broken. The current height of it is 1,60 m, with a Festus (fourth century A.D.) noticed: ‘Et limes inter
diameter of 41 cm. only the left part of the inscription is Romnos ac barbaros ab Augusta Vindelicum per
kept. The letters are 5 cm height. The text is: Noricum, Pannonias ac Moesiam est constitutus’ (“And
a limes between the Romans and the Barbarians from
IMP(eratori) [D(omino)] N(ostro) [Fl(avio) Augusta Vindelicum through Noricum, Pannonia and
Val(erio) Con] / STANT[ino Aug(usto) et] / Moesia was established”) (Breviarum VIII, 1).321 During
C[A]ESS(ari)B(us) NO[stris] (duobus) / M(ille) P(assuum) I. Trajan, this road was finished and the navigation
conditions across the Danube Klisura were
The text of the inscription is written in four improved.322 At Ogradena an inscription cut in rock
rows. Based on the imperial epithets, the monument informs about the works made by the Romans to finish
was dated in 324 A.D. according to the mentioned this road in 100 A.D:323
distance (1 Roman mile), this monument was positioned
exactly 1 mile north of the pillar of the bridge build here IMP(erator) CAESAR DIVI NERVAE F(ilius) /
during the same emperor, between Sucidava and NERVA TRAIANVS AVG(ustus) GERM(anicus) /
Oescus. PONTIF(ex) MAXIMVS TRIB(unicia) POT(estate) IIII /
The four milestones along the Olt valley show PATER PATRIAE CO(n)S(ul) III / MONTIBVS EXCISI
an intense preoccupation of the emperors Septimius ANCO(ni)BVS / SVBLAT(i)S VIA(m) F(ecit).
Severus and Maximinus Thrax (and later Constantine)
for this strategic road, which connected the line of the From the text and from what we can see
Danube with the central part of Dacia, with the today at Ogradena we are aware of the huge effort
crossroad Apulum. This road was projected and used in made to construct this road, above the Danube
the two military campaigns of Trajan in Dacia (Fig. 27). waters. Large oblique pieces of wood fixed in the rock
sustained a wood bridge, a prolongation of the road
2. 5. The Roman road along the right bank of cut in the rock (Fig. 28). Two legions participated with
the Danube. Tabula Traiana logistic material and soldiers to this action: legio IIII
Flavia Felix and legio VII Claudia.324
The construction of the road on the right bank
of the Danube started during the reign of Tiberius. Two 2. 6. The main roads of Dacia
inscriptions discovered in the Gornja Klisura, one from
Gospodjin Vir and the other one from Boljetin, inform The reconstruction of the Dacian road system
about the planning and construction of this road by two must begin using the data from the Peutinger map.325
legions: IV Scythica and V Macedonica.319 The
inscriptions were dated in 33/34 A.D. 321
Mirković 2007, 27.
322
Another inscription from Gospodjin Vir, cut in An inscription dated in AD 101 discovered at Karataš
the rock 1,7 m above the Roman road, dates from 46 attests the efforts for the rehabilitation of the Danube
A.D., during the reign of Claudius (41‐54 A.D.).320 The course, in order to make it easily navigable: ob periculum
text mentions the name of Martius Macer as legatus cataractarum derivato flumine tutam Danuvi navigationem
augusti pro praetore and the same two legions involved fecit (see Nemeth 2007, 148); Šašel 1973, 80‐85; Timoc 2001,
97‐116; AE 1973, 475.
in the project, IV Scythica and V Macedonica. This road 323
CIL III 1699; Petrović 1986, 41; Rossi 1968, 41‐46; Becatti
was the axis that assured the connection between the 1982, 566; Le Roux 1998, 73.
central provinces of the Roman Empire and the eastern 324
Petrović 1986, 52: Herculi sacrum / lapidarii qui exieru /
areas. It was a limes road, which separated the Romans nt ancones facien / dos legionis IIII Fl(aviae) / et legionis VII
Cl(audiae) vot(um) so[lverunt]; Ti. Claudio Drusi f(ilio)
Caesare / Aug(usto) Germanico pontif(ice) max(imo) /
318
Tudor 1938, no. 95‐96, 1‐7; Tudor 1958, SE 142; Tudor trib(unicia) pot(estate) VI imp(eratore) XII p(atre) p(atriae)
1968, 52, 431, 506‐507, SE 188; Tudor 1971, 185‐186; Tudor co(n)s(ule) desig(nato) IIII / Leg(io) IIII Scyth(ica) Leg(io) V
1974a, 123‐127; Popescu 1976, 295, no. 278. Mac(edonica) / montibus excisis [facisque anc]onibus
319
Ti. Caesare Au[g(usti) F(ilio)] / Augusto Imperato[re] / [(s(ub)c(ura)] / Mar(tii) Marci leg(ati) Aug(usti)
Pont(ifice) Max(imo) Tr(ibunicia) Pot(estate) XXXV / Leg(io) IIII propr(aetore).
325
Scyt(hica) Leg(io) Maced(onica); Šašel 1963; Gabričević 1972, Available now in Talbert 2010 with all the former
408; Bošković 1978, 425‐463; Mirković 1996, 27‐40; Mirković contributions mentioned here. See also Talbert 2004, 113:
2007, 26‐27. ‘When colleagues ask what is now engaging my attention
320
Ti. Claudio Drusi f(ilio) Caesare / Aug(usto) Germanico after the completion of the Barrington Atlas of the Greek
pontif(ice) max(imo) / trib(unicia) pot(estate) VI imp(eratore) and Roman World (Princeton and Oxford, 2000), and I
XII p(atre) p(atriae) co(n)s(ule) desig(nato) IIII / Leg(io) IIII mention Peutinger’s Roman map, it is clear that they are
Scyth(ica) Leg(io) V Mac(edonica) / montibus excisis [facisque puzzled. They regard the map as a thoroughly studied
anc]onibus [(s(ub)c(ura)] / Mar(tii) Marci leg(ati) Aug(usti) document from which little more is unlikely to be learned.
propr(aetore). Their impression is understandable, but in fact misplaced.

37
Tabula is an itinerarium pictum, which reflects, in my In all, three roads are mentioned, 48
opinion, the Roman linear perception of space. Dacia is settlements and a total distance of 703 Roman miles
depicted in this document in the segments VI and VII (1039,385 km).
(Fig. 29, Fig. 30).326 Three roads are marked here:
Lederata – Tibiscum, Dierna – Tibiscum – Sarmizegetusa 2. 6. 1. The road Lederata‐Tibiscum
– Apulum – Napoca – Porolissum and Drobeta – Romula
– Caput Stenarum – Apulum. Sarmizegetusa and Aquae The first road is the one between Lederata
are not connected to any road, albeit after the name of (today Ram, Serbia) and Tibiscum (Jupa, Romania,
the first locality appears the distance to the next one Caraș‐Severin County) (Fig. 31). This road was traced
(XIIII MP). Five settlements are represented with double‐ on the ground, constructed and used by the Roman
tower vignettes: Tivisco, Sarmategte, Apula, Napoca and armies lead by Trajan in the first military campaign
Porolisso. Ad Aquas is represented with a special from AD 101. ‘Inde Berzobim, deinde Aizi processimus’
vignette, corresponding to spas or thermal (‘From there we advanced to Berzobis, and then to
constructions. The other settlements, villages or Aizis’), affirms the emperor in his De Bello Dacico. The
mansiones are marked only with their names and the location of the Roman settlements depicted in the
distance between them. Peutinger map is, in some points, problematic.327 Ram
The distances and settlements mentioned in is positioned on the right bank of the Danube, in
Dacia are: Serbia. On the opposite bank another important
1. Segmentum VI 2: the road between Lederata settlement is Banatska Palanka (Serbia). In this small
and Tibiscum (the Western road): Lederata‐XII MP; Apus village, military stamps were found. One of them
flumen‐XII MP; Arcidava‐XII MP; Centum Putea‐XII MP; belongs to a(la) II P(annoniorum). This cavalry troop
Berzobis‐XII MP; Aizis‐III MP; Caput Bubali‐X MP; Tivisco participated at the wars against the Dacians and then
(depicted with vignette). In all, eight settlements are was part of the Roman army in Dacia during Trajan.328
mentioned and a total distance of 73 Roman miles. Coh(ors) I Cre(tum) and coh(ors) II Hisp(anorum) are
2. Segmenta VI 3 and VII 1: the road between also attested here. Stamps from vexillationes of legio
Tierva and Porolisso: Tierva‐XI MP; Ad Mediam‐XIIII MP; VII Claudia and legio IIII Flavia were found here. These
Pretorio‐IX MP; Ad Pannonios‐IX MP; Gaganis‐XI MP; are legions from Moesia Superior.
Masclianis‐XIIII MP; Tivisco‐XIIII MP; Agnavie‐VIII MP; The next station in Tabula is Apus flumen. This
Ponte Augusti‐XV MP; Sarmategte‐XIIII MP; Ad Aquas‐ can be identified with the river Caraș. If we measure
XIII MP; Petris‐VIIII MP; Germizera‐VIIII MP; Blandiana‐ XII miles (17,742 km) from Ram, then Apus fl. will be
VIII MP; Apula‐XII MP; Brucla‐XII MP; Salinis‐XII MP; somewhere close to Orešac (Serbia). The next stations
Potavissa‐XXIIII MP; Napoca‐XVI MP; Optatiana‐X MP; could be (some of them only hypothetically) located as
Largiana‐XVII MP; Cersie‐IIII MP; Porolisso. 24 follows: Arcidava (Vărădia or Vršac); Centum Putea
settlements are mentioned and a total distance of 270 (Surducu Mare?), Berzobis (Berzovia); Aizis (Fârliug);
MP. Caput Bubali (Cornuțel); Tivisco (Jupa). The distance
3. Segmenta VI 4, VI 5 şi VII 1: the road between (73 miles – almost 108 km) is correct if the locations
Drubetis and Apulum, via Romula: Drubetis‐XXXVI MP; proposed are correct, too. There is, though, a mistake.
Amutria‐XXXV MP; Pelendova‐XX; Castris Novis‐LXX MP; Between Aizis and Caput Bubali only III miles are
Romula‐XIII MP; Acidava‐XXIIII MP; Rusidava‐XIIII MP; written. If there were not only III, but XIII miles, then
Ponte Aluti‐XIII MP; Burridava‐XII MP; Castra Tragana‐ the distance fits with the current one between Fârliug
VIIII MP; Arutela‐XV MP; Pretorio‐VIIII MP; Ponte Vetere‐ and Cornuțel. Such mistake could occur when the
XLIIII MP; Stenarum‐XII MP; Cedonie‐XXIIII MP; Acidava‐ medieval copyist transposed the information from the
XV MP; Apula. 17 settlements are mentioned and a total original. In that case, on this segment we have a total
distance of 379 MP. distance of 83 miles, which means 122,7 kilometers. At
Vărădia a Roman fortress was built in the place called
“Pustă”. 20 km north of this point, we find the camp
Rather, the Peutinger map belongs in that deceptive category from Surducu Mare. The fortress (132 x 128 m) was
of ancient texts or monuments so familiar to everyone in our built of wood and earth. At Berzovia, 20 km North of
field that a satisfactory edition or presentation is generally Surducu Mare, legio IV Flavia Felix was camped in a
assumed to exist, when really there is none”. See my review on
fortress of 490 x 410 m. The current village overlaps
Talbert’s book at http://www.plekos.uni‐
muenchen.de/2011/r‐talbert.pdf. An analysis on this topic: the fortress. The legion was withdrawn from Dacia in
Fodorean 2004, 51‐58. Moesia Superior, at Viminacium (Beograd, Serbia) at
326
I prefer to use Weber’s system, who counted the 11 existing the beginning of Hadrian’s reign. In the other
segments. Miller reconstructed the Western part of the map, mentioned point stationes could function.
adding one more segment. Talbert considers the map as a
propagandistic document, with Rome in its center, and he
developed a theory about the existence not of one, but three
327
segments in the left part of the document, so a total of 14 Diaconescu 1997, 13‐52.
328
segments. Ardevan 2007, 140.

38
 One scene on the Trajan’s Column329 depicts a history of these two campaigns and the topographic
conventional representation of a road, like in an order of the events are correct. However, one cannot
itinerarium.330 Trajan was a great military commander. find for every scene correspondences in the field,
No doubt, that he ordered the construction of this road because the Column is a propagandistic monument,
and the establishment of the camp network as soon as showing the power of the Roman army, its labor and
the Roman armies entered in Dacia. It was like Caesar, disciplina, in contrast with the Barbarians. For that
who insisted in his commentaries on the celeritas reason, many of the marching scenes are repeated
(rapidity) of his marches.331 The scene XIII from Trajan’s only to suggest this idea.
Column depicts a marching scene. Trajan stands before a
zigzag road running upward in raised relief, above two 2. 6. 2. The second road: Dierna‐Tibiscum‐
arches.332 Porolissum
Today it is almost impossible to locate in the
field all the scenes of the Column. One thing is, though, The other road in Banat (the Eastern road) is
sure: the artists who realized the Column needed a the one starting from Tierva (corrupt name, correct is
source, something to help them create the Dierna), today Orșova (Mehedinți County). It intersects
topographical order of the ‘movie’, because like in all the first one at Tibiscum. At Dierna, in this state of
Roman itineraries, this topographic order cannot be research, we cannot be sure if a Roman fortress
challenged. Therefore, it seems to me very possible that existed here. The ancient city was definitively
itineraria realized in these two military campaigns were destroyed in 1968‐1970, when a lake was projected
the source for the artists, together with the lost book here, in order to supply the hydropower station The
written by the emperor. Therefore, it seems likely that Iron Gates I.333 The next settlement mentioned in
elongated itineraria and De Bello Dacico were a Tabula is Ad Mediam. This toponym can indicate a
conscious source of inspiration for the Trajan’s Column crossroad. The distance from Dierna until here is XI
reliefs. The topographic order of the scenes is correct. Roman miles. We do not know the location of Ad
The scenes start with the crossing of the Danube and Mediam. Measuring on digital maps XI miles (16,26
then the marching of Roman armies, through Banat. km) we reach exactly a point with two roads: this one,
Two boat bridges are presented, which implies that the mentioned in Tabula, and another one, which
Roman armies penetrated the Dacian territory using at connects the thermal settlement Băile Herculane.334
least two different routes. One is Lederata‐Tibiscum and This is a deverticulum. Băile Herculane is not
the other one is Dierna‐Tibiscum. Trajan took the first mentioned in Tabula, but it was very important.
route, as the only sentence kept from his commentaries Numerous inscriptions were found here, dedicated to
shows. Tibiscum was a strategic point, located before Hercules, as the protector of the thermals waters.335
the entrance in the narrow corridor of the Bistra valley. After Ad Mediam, the next station is Praetorium, today
After these marching scenes the battle from Tapae is Mehadia (Caraş‐Severin County). The distance
depicted, and then the invasion of the Dacians in mentioned in Tabula is 14 Roman miles. A Roman
Moesia, the journey made by Trajan by boat to the camp was build here. The next station is, after 9 miles,
battlefield. After that, the military operations moved Ad Pannonios (Teregova?). Here also a fortress was
again in Banat. The Romans succeeded to approach built. From here, the next point is Gaganis, 9 miles
close to the Dacian capital. In that moment, Dcebalus North of Ad Pannonios. After another 11 miles, it
asked Trajan for a peace treaty. The first war was over. follows Masclianis, and then after 14 miles the road
The second military campaign begins with the departure reaches Tivisco. Between Orşova and Jupa today we
of Trajan from Italy, his travel through the Balkan travel along the same route, and there is a total
provinces. Then the inauguration of the bridge from distance is 97 km. The total distance recorded by
Drobeta is presented, followed again by scenes, which Tabula between these settlements is 68 miles (100,5
depict the marching of the Roman armies and so on. In km). There are two 11 miles segments, two of 14 and
the final scenes, the Romans conquer Sarmizegetusa two of 9 miles.
Regia. Decibel leaves the capital, but it is following by Tivisco (Tibiscum) appears twice in Tabula,
the Roman cavalry and commits suicide. Therefore, the one at the end of the first depicted road (Lederata‐
Tibiscum) and second along the road Dierna‐Tibiscum.
329 In the first case the settlement is depicted with
The scene at:
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:013_Conrad_Cichoriu vignette and its position indicate the end of the road,
s,_Die_Reliefs_der_Traianss%C3%A4ule,_Tafel_XIII.jpg. because there is no other line staring from there. The
330
Le Bohec 1989. second Tibiscum is depicted as a normal settlement, as
331
Chevallier 1988, 251. part of the whole segment staring from the Danube
332
’The Trajan's Column Frieze as a Confluence of Military
Geography and Triumphal Painting’, at www.history.appstate.
333
edu/sites/default/files/appalachian.../Stephensen.doc; Nemeth 2005, 39.
334
Koeppel 1980, 301‐306; Strobel 1984, 194; Diaconescu 1997, Fodorean 2006, 236.
335
29. Pippidi, Russu 1977, 76‐99 (no. 54‐74).

39
and ending in the North of the province, at Porolisso contained the same double mention of Tibiscum,
(today Zalău, Sălaj County). In the site related to information transmitted from an earlier document.
Talbert’s book on Tabula recently (Cambridge University As I mentioned above, the whole road
Press),336 everyone can consult a database regarding this depicted in Tabula between Dierna and Porolisso has a
amazing itinerarium. When mentioning the toponym total length of 270 miles in Tabula. After Tivisco, the
Tivisco, the authors affirm: “The same place recurs ‐ next point is Agnavie, today Zăvoi (Caraş‐Severin
marked with a symbol ‐ as the end of the route above to County). Here a big Roman marching camp was
the left. This puzzling duplication seems more likely to constructed during the wars against the Dacians. TP
have been made by the mapmaker than by a copyist”.337 indicates between Tivisco and Agnavie 14 Roman miles
This is correct, but in is not puzzling. The mapmaker (20,6 km). After another 8 miles, we reach Pons
used different sources. Among them, one or maybe Augusti (today Marga, Caraş‐Severin County). Then,
several depicted Tibiscum twice. This shows the after 15 Roman miles (circa 22 km) we reach the
important of this settlement during the two military capital of Roman Dacia, Sarmategte (Colonia Ulpia
campaigns and after the conquest. In the list of the Traiana Augusta Dacica Sarmizegetusa). The
settlements from Dacia, Ptolemy mentions Tibiscum settlement is represented with vignette. It was
twice, with different coordinates. The geographer from founded by Trajan as a colonia deducta. It is positioned
Ravenna makes the same “mistake”, also mentioning in the Haţeg depression.
Tibiscum twice. First, he presents the settlements placed The Roman road was identified on Austrian
along the road Dierna‐Tibiscum:338 (Fig. 32) and current maps and it was investigated in
the field on a distance of almost 16 km, from
‘In quas Dacorum patrias antiquitus plurimas Sarmizegetusa to Sântămărie Orlea.339 The walls of the
fuisse civitates legimus, ex quibus aliquantas designare city enclosed a surface of 24 ha at the beginning and
volumus, id est Drubetis, Medilas, Pretorich, Panonin, after a while 32,4 ha (Fig. 33). In AD 102 legio IV Flavia
Gazanam, Masclunis, Tibis, qui coniungitur cum civitate Felix build here a provisory fortress of 540 x 415 m
Agmonia patrie Missie’. (22,410 ha). Immediately before the foundation of the
city, the legion moved in Banat, to Berzovia. In this
“In this Dacian regions I read that in former particular area, the Roman surveyors choose, again,
times numerous cities existed, of which we will present the most suitable route for the road. They traced the
some of them, like Drubetis, Medilas, Pretorich, Panonin, route to the right side of the Hill of Haţeg, making the
Gazanam, Masclunis, Tibis, which connects with the city road more accessible (Fig. 34, Fig. 35, Fig. 36, Fig. 37).
of Agmonia from Moesia”. From Sarmizegetusa the next settlement in Tabula is
Ad Aquas. There is no line, no road linking these two
Then he mentions the other Tibiscum, on the settlements. The distance between them is XIIII Roman
road Lederata‐Tibiscum: miles. In the terrain, the distance between
Sarmizegetusa and Ad Aquas (Uroi?) is ca. 37
‘em in aliam partem sunt civitates ipsas Datias, kilometers (Fig. 38). This mistake has, in my opinion,
id est Tema, Tiviscum, Gubali, Zizis, Bersovia, Arcidaba, several explanations: 1. the copyist forgot to write a X
Canonia, Potula, Bacaucis”. before XIIII. If we add X, which is XXIIII miles (36 km),
this fits the distance in the terrain; 2. the copyist
“Also in other part cities exist even in Dacia, like: forgot a whole segment between these two
Tema, Tiviscum, Gubali, Zizis, Bersovia, Arcidaba, settlements (distance and place name); 3. the
Canonia, Potula, Bacaucis”. mapmaker had as sources several itineraria. One of
these documents stopped at Sarmategte. He inspired
The geographer from Ravenna had as source for from another one starting with Ad Aquas. This explains
Dacia an itinerarium, which can be dated after AD 168‐ the lack of the line between those two. Another thing
170, because along the main road in Dacia the is awkward here. This Ad Aquas was barely known in
settlement Macedonica is mentioned. This name refers, Roman times. The most curious thing is its
obviously, to legio V Macedonica, which was present in representation with the specific vignette. The most
Dacia from AD 168. Apart from that, he mentions other known and visited thermal places were Germisara
settlements, unknown to Tabula or Ptolemy, such as (Geoagiu‐Băi, Hunedoara County) and Ad Mediam
Canonia, Potula, Bacaucis. Therefore, the geographer (Băile Herculane, Caraş‐Severin County). An
used a document for Dacia dated after AD 168 but which explanation can be related to its position along the
main imperial road in Dacia.
After XIII miles from Ad Aquas we arrive to
Petris (Uroi?). This point is located north of the Mureş
336
http://www.cambridge.org/us/talbert/talbertdatabase. River. At Petris a crossroad existed in Roman times. In
337
http://www.cambridge.org/us/talbert/talbertdatabase
/TPPlace1737.html.
338 339
Text and translation after Hügel 2003, 87‐88. Fodorean 2007, 365‐384.

40
fact, we should say, more correct, that the main imperial River (Partiscum, today Szeged, Hungary); 2. the roads
road coming from Apulum crossed in this point the river along the valleys of Târnava Mare and Tîrnava Mică; 3.
Mureş and went further South, heading for the road that reaches the gold district, in Apuseni
Sarmizegetusa and then for Tibiscum. Another road was Mountains, at Alburnus Maior (Roşia Montană). Tabula
built along the Mureş River, from East to West, heading suggests exactly this crossroad, representing the road
for Pannonia Inferior (Partiscum, today Szeged). that connected Drobeta, via Romula, with Apulum,
Petris is followed in Tabula, after VIIII MP, by along the Valley of Alutus River. Obviously, the
Germizera (correct name: Germisara, today Geoagiu‐Băi, settlement is represented with vignette. Apulum was
Hunedoara county). The road follows the Northern, right the headquarters for the legio XIII Gemina, which stay
bank of the Mureş River. The distance in the terrain (ca. in Dacia right from the beginning until the end of the
13 km) corresponds with that indicated in the province. The city flourished during Marcus Aurelius,
itinerarium, though and observation must be highlighted when the initial preurban nucleus (in the Southern
here. I think that the mapmaker wrote Germigera part of the current city and the former Roman
because this settlement was known, but in fact, the road legionary fortress) became municipium. During
connects Petris with the military fortress from Cigmău Commodus it becames colonia Aurelia and beginning
(Fig. 39), positioned 5,5 kilometers south of Geoagiu‐Băi. with the third century AD it receives ius Italicum.
Germisara is not represented with vignette type During Trebonianus Gallus it receives the epithet
“thermal place” because of its position, outside of the Chrysopolis. The other city developed close to the
imperial road. Unlike Ad Aquas, this spa was constantly fortress, on the Cetate Hill, and during Septimius
visited in the Roman times, mainly because of the Severus became municipium Septimius Apulense.
quality of the thermal waters, and due to its position, in During Traianus Decius, it reaches the status of
the centre of the province. Marcus Statius Priscus, colonia. These two cities, together with the military
governor of Dacia Superior in AD 157 and AD 158, is fortress, represented the biggest and the most
mentioned here in two votive monuments for the gods important settlement in Roman Dacia. With an
and the protectors of the thermal waters.340 The next estimated population of ca. 35.000 inhabitants,
governor of Dacia Superior (in AD 161), Publius Furius Apulum was the most important economic and
Saturninus, is also mentioned at Germisara in two votive military settlement in Dacia. The headquarters of the
inscriptions.341 The thermal place was also visited by consular governor of Dacia was also here. The
decuriones and quaestores from Sarmizegetusa and commercial traffic developed along the Mureş River,
Apulum, augustales from Sarmizegetusa, soldiers from and a harbor was constructed to supply these intense
the auxiliary troops, a representative of a collegium activities. The medieval and modern Vauban citadel
Galatarum and another of a collegium aurariarum. now overlaps the fortress of the legio XIII Gemina (440
From Germisara after other VIIII miles (13,3 x 430 m). One aspect though should be mentioned.
kilometers) Tabula indicates Blandiana (today also The porta principalis dextra stands up even now,
Blandiana, Alba County). The distance in the terrain, showing the greatness of the former military camp.
though, is 18,9 kilometers. This is another case where The enclosure wall of the fortress was used to support
the copyist produced a mistake. To fit the information the medieval and modern buildings. Stamps with LEG
from TP with the terrain measurements, we should add XIII GEM were found everywhere, covering a vast area,
another 3 miles, to obtain XII (17,7 kilometers). Then up to the gold district in the North‐West. This shows
again, after VIII miles the road reaches Apula (Apulum, the strategic importance played by this legion,
today Alba Iulia, Alba County). Once again, we think we positioned along the main imperial road and with the
have a mistake here. In the terrain the distance is 18,79 capacity to act in different points, especially in the
km, which is ca. 12,7 Roman miles, so XII Roman miles. West and North, to protect the gold mines. In fact, an
Apulum is the most important crossroad in observation should be mentioned here. Legionary
Dacia. From here all the major roads start: 1. the road fortresses are placed along the limes. In Dacia, we do
that connects Dacia with Pannonia along the Mureş not have enough knowledge on the line of the
Western Roman frontier. West of Apulum and Potaissa
340
(the headquarters of legio V Macedonica), the most
IDR III/3, 240, 241. Marcus Statius Priscus began his career important area to defend was the gold district, and,
as an equestrian officer, receiving a decoration from Hadrian
obviously, the frontier. In this particular case, a
during the Jewish rebellion. He then served as procurator in
Southern Gaul before being made a senator and commanding strategic triangle developed between Apulum,
two legions in succession. Priscus was in charge of Dacia as a Potaissa and Alburnus Maior. This is another proof of
governor between 157 and 158. He held the consulship in 159. the Roman capacity to organize carefully the territory,
After this, he governed Moesia Superior between 160 and 161 to perceive and understand the geography of each
and became governor of Roman Britain immediately particular area.
afterwards, serving until perhaps as late as the mid 160s. Apulum is followed in Tabula by Brucla (Aiud),
341
IDR III/3, 232, 236; Piso 1972, 463‐471. This important Salinis (Ocna Mureş) and Patavissa (Turda, Cluj
character is mentioned in Dacia in 7 inscriptions. County) (see Fig. 18). We have here three segments of

41
roads, all of them with the same value, XII Roman miles. From Napoca the imperial road345 mentioned
It seems that here the copyist forgot to insert a whole in Tabula continues and the next settlement is
segment of 12 miles, since the current distance between Optatiana (today Sutor, Sălaj County). The distance
Alba Iulia and Potaissa is today 68 km. If we add another recorded in Tabula from Napoca to Optatiana is 16
12 miles (a segment), then we will have four of them, miles (23,656 km). The distance is today around 51
meaning 48 miles (70,9 km). Indeed, if we analyze the kilometers, but considering that today the current
distance between Apulum and Brucla, we see that this road has a different tract as the Roman road, our
is, in the terrain, 36 kilometers, which is 24 Roman calculations show that around 40 kilometers (26 km)
miles. Today we know the route of the Roman road in separated in Roman times Napata from Potation.
this area. It exits from Apulum and then it surrounds to Therefore, it must have been another mistake of the
the North‐West the hill called Bilag. It connects the copyist here.
currents settlements Şard, Ighiu, Cricău, Tibru and Galda Further, after Optatiana the next point is
de Jos. Measuring from Apulum to the North‐West, Largiana (today Românaşi, Sălaj County). The distance
along the route of the Roman road, after 12 miles (18 recorded in Tabula between these two settlements is
km) we reach a point close to the settlement from Tibru 10 miles. In the terrain, the same distance is around 17
and Galda de Jos. At Tibru, at ca. 200 m south of the km, which, basically, almost fits the distance recorded
village, in the place called “Rât”, in 1877 the ruins of a in Tabula (almost 15 km). From Largiana the next
building were discovered. Stamp tiles with LEG III GEM point is (after 17 miles) Cersie (today Romita, Sălaj
were also found, together with inscriptions.342 The County). However, in the terrain, along the Roman
historians advanced several opinion regarding this road, the distance is only 5 kilometers (so circa 3
building (fortress, villa rustica). In my opinion, I think miles). The final point is Porolisso (Porolissum, today
here a mansio functioned during the Roman time, close Moigrad, Sălaj County). The distance indicated in
to the main imperial road. Tabula is correct. In the terrain, we recorded almost 6
Salinis (Salinae, today Ocna Mureş or Războieni‐ kilometers between Cersie and Porolisso, which fits
Cetate) is another important strategic point. Here the the distance indicated in Tabula (see Fig. 21). Porolisso
only ala milliaria in the province garrisoned. Its name is also represented with vignette.
was ala I Batavorum milliaria. Porolissum is the northernmost point in
The next point was Potaissa. This was the most Dacia. It represents the centre of an entire
important military settlement from the Northern part of complicated defensive system. Two Roman fortresses
Dacia. With an estimated population of 20.000 were built here, and, as in other cases, a big civilian
inhabitants, Potaissa was the headquarters of the legio V settlement developed close to these camps. The
Macedonica. Its fortress (573 x 408 m) was positioned Roman road is very well preserved today at the
on the Cetate Hill, in the Western part of the city (Fig. entrance in the city. The city became municipium
40, Fig. 41).343 during Septimius Severus’ reign (res publica municipii
From Potaissa to Napoca the Peutinger map Septimii Porolissensium).346 It was one of the most
mentions XXIIII miles (35,484 km). The whole sector important military and commercial settlements in
between those two settlements was identified in the Dacia. Beside the two military fortresses, the last
terrain, surveyed and mapped.344 In this particular researches proved the existence of a dynamic city. A
sector, the Roman engineers proved again their amazing custom (statio portorii) was archaeologically identified,
skills and knowledge in finding the perfect route for the temples (among them, one dedicated for Iupiter
road. They understood perfectly the geomorphology of Optimus Maximus Dolichenus), an aerial aqueduct (the
the terrain and, therefore, the Roman road does not only one like this found, until now, in Dacia), and an
climb the big Feleac Hill, but avoids it. The engineers amphiteatrum castrense built in wood at the
preferred to choose the simple, better route from beginning of the province and rebuilt in stone during
Potaissa through the villages of Ceanu Mic, Aiton and Antoninus Pius. A large cemetery was also identified.
Gheorghieni, until the road reached Napoca. It this way, Position on the frontier, Porolissum benefited of
the Roman road is with 4 kilometers longer than the numerous military units: cohors V Lingonum, cohors I
current road, but avoiding the hill to the East, it Brittonum milliaria, cohors I Augusta Ituraeorum,
presented a better, simple route. cohors I Hispanorum quingenaria, cohors III
The Roman road approaches Napoca from Campestris, numerus Palmyrenorum Porolissensium
southeast and enters the Southern gate of the city. sagittariorum, together with vexillationes from the
Napoca is represented in Tabula with vignette, too. legions XIII Gemina, VII Claudia, VII Gemina şi III
Gallica. The population was estimated at 20.000
inhabitants.
342
CIL III 7444 = IDR IDR III/4, 55; CIL III 7745 = IDR III/4, 56; CIL
III 7816 = IDR III/4, 58; Moga, Ciugudean 1995, 191, s.v. Tibru.
343
Bărbulescu 1987; Bărbulescu 1994.
344 345
Winkler, Blăjan, Cerghi 1980, 63‐73; Winkler 1982, 587‐589; Fodorean, Fodorean 2010, 199‐204.
346
Fodorean 2001, 60‐76. Gudea 1986, 124‐125.

42
 2. 6. 3. The third road: Drubetis‐Romula‐Apula (Sânbotin, Vâlcea county) ‐ XII MP; 6. from Castra
Tragana to Arutela (Poiana Bivolari, Vâlcea county)‐
This road starts with Drubetis (Drobeta Turnu VIIII MP; 7. from Arutela to Pretorio (Copăceni‐
Severin, Mehedinţi County). This was another important Racoviţa, Vâlcea county) ‐ XV MP; 8. from Pretorio to
city in Dacia, in fact, the first Roman settlement of the Ponte Vetere (Câineni, Vâlcea county) ‐VIIII MP; 9.
province. The Roman fortress (137,50 x 123 m) was built from Ponte Vetere to Stenarum (Boiţa, Sibiu county) ‐
in stone. This was the first military camp built in Dacia. It XLIIII MP; 10. from Stenarum to Cedonie (Guşteriţa,
was positioned at the Northern part of Apollodorus’ Sibiu county) ‐ XII MP; 11. From Cedonie to Acidava
bridge. Numerous military units were garrisoned here: (Miercurea Sibiului, Sibiu county) ‐ XXIIII MP; 12. from
Cohors I Antiochesium, Cohors I Cretum saggitariorum, Acidava to Apula (Alba Iulia, Alba county) ‐ XV MP.
III Campestris civium romanorum equitata and I Along this road, the most important strategic
sagittariorum miliaria equitata. The maintaining of the fortresses were Ponte Vetere (Pons Vetus) and
fortress for the whole period (AD 106 – AD 271) and the Stenarum (Caput Stenarum). The first is located in the
prosperity of the city contradict an old idea, according to most critical point along the valley of Olt, the entrance
which the bridge was destroyed starting with Hadrian’s in the narrow path, in the mountains. Here, the
reign. The surface of the city approaches to 51 ha and it Romans literally cut the road in the rock, above the
has a polygonal shape. The civilian settlement appears river, during Hadrian’s reign. Before this, during
together with the military fortress, as a vicus militaris. Trajan, the army avoided the massive of Cozia, taking
The city became municipium during Hadrian’s reign. The another route, east of the valley of Olt. In fact,
official name of the city was municipium Aelium because of the difficulty of this sector, during the
Hadrianum Drobetense. Then it became colonia during Roman occupation of Dacia, a special military unit,
Septimius Severus. Drobeta was an important numerus Burgariorum et Veredariorum, guarded this
commercial point. A statio portorii was also in function road.349 It was garrisoned in the fortress of Praetorium
here. Recently, in December 2010, the amphiteatre was (Racoviţa‐Copăceni, Vâlcea County). This unit
randomly discovered.347 From more than a century, the constructed the Roman fortress in AD 138. The waters
historians looked for it, but they did not find it. The of Olt River destroyed almost 2/3 of the fortress. This
freeze of the Column indicates such building close to the is a general state regarding many fortresses along this
bridge foot. Exactly in this point, the amphitheatre was river. In antiquity, the course of the river Olt flowed in
found. the Northern part a little bit to the West and in the
The next point after Drubetis is Amutria. The South to the East. During time, the course changed
distance between them is 36 miles. There are several and now it presents a general tendency of
settlements between these two stations with Roman approaching the Western side of the current road.
discoveries. That is why the researchers proposed two The Roman road was projected and
routes for the road. 348 The Northern one seems to me constructed on the highest, right bank of the river Olt.
more accurate, since Ad Mutrium involves a connection Only in the sector between Sânbotin and Câineni the
with the current river Motru. The next point (after 35 road was constructed along the left bank. Its total
miles) is Pelendova (close to Craiova, Dolj County), then length, from Drubetis to Apulum, indicated in Tabula,
(after 20 miles) Castris Novis (today Castranova, Dolj is of 365 Roman miles (which would be 539,65 km).
County) and after that it comes Romula (today Reşca, The current distance is 454 km. Some mistakes are
Olt County). The road continues to North, following the recorded in Tabula also along this sector. One
right bank of the river Olt. The stations mentioned in concerns the distance between Castris novis and
Tabula are all Roman fortresses. The limes, together Romula, LXX Roman miles, an unusually high value.
with these fortresses, were realized during Hadrian’s
reign, but during the two military campaigns, the Olt
349
valley was one of the routes used by the Roman army to CIL III, 13.795 = ILS 8909 = IDR II, 587: Imp(eratore)
get close to the Dacian capital. The stations, distances Caes(are) divi Trai(ani) Parth(ici) f(ilio) / divi Nerv(ae)
and their current locations are: 1. from Romula (Reşca) nep(ote) Trai(ano) Hadri(ano) / Aug(usto) pont(ifice)
to Acidava (Enoşeşti) ‐ XIII MP; 2. from Acidava to max(imo) tr(ibunicia) pot(estate) / XXIII / co(n)s(ule) III
Rusidava (Momoteşti, close to Drăgăşani) ‐ XXIIII MP; 3. p(atre) p(atriae) et imp(eratore) T(ito) / Ael(io) Caes(are)
Antoni / no Trai(ani) Aug(usti) f(ilio) divi Trai(ani) / Parth(ici)
from Rusidava to Ponte Aluti (Ioneştii Govorei) ‐ XIIII MP;
nep(ote) divi Ner(vae) pronep(ote), tr(ibuni / cia) /
4. from Ponte Aluti to Buridava (Stolniceni, Vâlcea pot(estate) / N(umerus) burg(ariorum) et veredario(rum)
county) ‐ XIII MP; 5. from Buridava to Castra Tragana Daciae Inf(e / rioris) sub / Fl(avio) Constante proc(uratore)
Aug(usti). Dated in AD 138. CIL III 13.796 = ILS 9180 = IDR II,
587: Imp(eratore) Caes(are) Tito Aelio Hadriano / Antonino
347
http://www.mehedinteanul.ro/component/content Aug(usto) Pio trib(unicia) potes(tate) III / co(n)s(ule) III /
/article/1560; http://www.tvr.ro/articol.php?id=92472; castra n(umerus) burg(ariorum) et vered(ariorum) quod /
http://www.mehedinteanul.ro/actualitate/1707‐cercetri‐de‐ anguste / tenderet duplicato valli pede et in / positis turribus
anvergur‐la‐amfiteatrul‐roman‐descoperit‐in‐curtea‐muzeului. ampliavit / per Aquilam Fidum proc(uratorem) Aug(usti).
348
Tudor 1968. Dated in AD 140.

43
Talbert describes it as follows: ”The name immediately
starts to veer up and away from the route linework,
creating the impression that an oversight has required
its insertion here; the distance figure LXX, if accurately
copied, is inappropriately high”.350 Indeed, if we take a
close look at the map, we see that the name of the
settlement and the distance seem to be „added”,
inserted here, without an individual stretch, creating the
impression that somehow it was forgotten. In my
opinion, this is the cause for such an error of the
distance: the mapmaker did not have clear sources to
write the proper distance. Therefore, in this case, it
seems to me that this is a mapmaker’s mistake. The
correct distance should be rather XXIV (24 miles),
because the distance measured on the map is around 34
kilometers. The second mistake appears in the section
between Ponte Vetere (Câineni, Vâlcea County) and
Stenarum (Boiţa, Sibiu County), 44 miles in Tabula (65
km), when on the terrain the correct distance is 19
kilometers (so a normal sector of 13/14 miles). If we
change these, we obtain a whole distance of 269 miles,
i.e. 427 kilometers, a value more close to the real one
(454 km). Another important issue concerns the fact
that south of Romula, the road continues until the
Danube River, but this sector is not mentioned in Tabula.

350
http://www.cambridge.org/us/talbert/talbertdatabase
/TPPlace1752.html.

44
 CHAPTER 3. ELEMENTS OF THE DACIAN LANDSCAPE. military equipment findings, inscriptions (around 200),
ROADS AND RURAL SETTLEMENTS all of them speak about a very dynamic city. The
legion, strategically positioned along the main Roman
3. 1. Potaissa and surroundings road, 72 miles away from Apulum, controlled and
defended the Western frontier of Dacia, and the gold
3. 1. 1. The legionary fortress and the city district from Alburnus Maior.

Potaissa was the most important military 3. 1. 2. The aqueducts

settlement from the Northern part of Dacia. With an
estimated population of 20.000 inhabitants, Potaissa The Roman water supply system was so
was the headquarters of the legio V Macedonica. Its carefully designed and maintained that even today we
fortress (573 x 408 m) was positioned on the Cetate Hill, are astonished by these structures.355 The engineer’s
in the Western part of the city. achievements in this domain were so outstanding that
Initially Potaissa was a vicus. The city existed Plinius or Vitruvius didn’t hesitate to admire the
certainly from the first years of the province. Potaissa is aqueducts and to write about them. Even after a long
mentioned in the text of the milestone found at Aiton351 period of time, in the modern era, engineers and
and in the Ptolemy’s list. The main moment in the architects inspired their works from the Roman
development of this settlement was 168/169 A.D., achievements.
when, in the context of the Marcommanic wars, legio V The settlements of Roman Dacia were, of
Macedonica was transferred here from Troesmis course, part of this program. At Ulpia Traiana
(Moesia Inferior, today Igliţa, Brăila County). As a Sarmizegetusa, Apulum, Romula, Ampelum, Drobeta,
consequence of this measure, Potaissa developed so archaeological discoveries and inscriptions provide us
rapidly that in 197 A.D. it became municipium Septimium important information about the water supply system.
Potaissense. Septimius Severus rewarded the fidelity of An aerial aqueduct from Dacia is attested at
the legion during the civil wars. As in the case of Porolissum. Traces of other water pipes and aqueducts
Apulum, two urban settlements are known at Potaissa. are present in at least 86 settlements and 21 military
The first was the vicus, which became municipium during camps in Dacia.356
Severus and it is attested with this status also during With an estimated population of 20,000
Caracalla. The other one developed in the proximity of inhabitants, including the legion V Macedonica,
the military fortress. It is documented in Ulpianus (De Potaissa benefited of two aqueducts: one for the city
censibus, in Digestae, L, 15, 1 9) as a colonia with ius and another for the military camp.
Italicum during Severus (Patavissensium vicus, qui a divo
Severo ius coloniae impetrativ). Potaissa is the tipical 3. 1. 2. 1. The spring
settlement where the military element played an
essential role in its development. Two aqueducts The spring chosen by the Romans can be
supplied with water the city and the military fortress.352 located today in the point called “Izvorul Copăcenilor”.
The main imperial road crossed the whole city and went It is located in the south‐western part of Copăceni, at
further in North, towards Napoca. The military fortress the northern limit of Trascăului Mountains, on the
was connected with a deverticulum (2640 m), which right side of the current road Turda ‐ Petreşti. From
started from the main road in Copăceni (a rural this point to the military camp the distance is around
settlement North of Potaissa).353 A Roman bridge was 5000 m, following the line of the hills. This line begins
built over the river Arieş, in the Southern part of the from the altitude of 525 m at caput aquae (Fig. 42, Fig.
city.354 This allowed the road to cross over and continue 43) and it ends at 375 m altitude, on the hill where the
towards Napoca and Porolisso. Prata legionis extended Roman military camp was built. Starting from the
across a big surface. In North the limit was the Feleac same point, another aqueduct was built for the city. Its
Hill and in South the right bank of the river Arieş. The route is orientated, in the first part, to North‐East,
Western and Eastern limits were established along the until it reaches the Racilor Rivulet. Further on, the
courses of some rivulets. Mapping the stamp tiles with aqueduct follows the course of this rivulet, heading
LEG V MAC, LVM (and other different forms) was the South‐East to the Roman city.
method to prove the military control of this territory. A Delimited at North by the Racilor Valley, the
large cemetery was positioned along the Roman road, Trascău Mountains are represented close to Sănduleşti
south of the city. Another one existed in the Western by a narrow strip of Jurassic limestone, extended in
part. Temples, a pottery fabrica, hundreds of coins,
355
See Litaudon 2004, 71‐85; Grewe 1986; Grewe 2002;
351
CIL III 1627. Gallo 2007; Litaudon 2007. Studies on hydraulic on Roman
352
Fodorean 2011a, 95‐108. aqueducts were published by H. Chanson: Chanson 2002, 43‐
353
Fodorean 2006, 148‐150. 57; Chanson 2002a, 3‐12.
354 356
Fodorean 2011b, 143‐147. Băeştean 2007, 89‐144.

45
the peak of Sând, (759 m).357 The drainage network The pipe was found in one piece: 60 cm length,
created here an interesting, particular landscape. The external diameter 16,5 cm, internal diameter 12,5 cm
Racilor Valley forms here the Gorge of Tureni. The water (Fig. 47). Three decades ago, in 1978, west to the
from this spring has qualities and properties which make military fortress, close by the porta decumana, other
it good even nowadays. The discovery and use of such pipes from the same aqueduct were discovered.364
springs in Roman period is described by Vitruvius.358 These are identical in diameter, only the lengths are
different (43 cm, 55 cm). The same aqueduct was
3. 1. 2. 2. The modern historiography identified in the gardens from the Western side of the
village Copăceni.365 This point is located south of the
In 1810 Moise Nicoară noticed, at Copăceni, the current road between Petreşti and Turda, on the right
traces of the aqueduct. The indication regarding the side of it (keeping the same direction mentioned
spring is extremely general: “I climbed up close by the above).
channel, on a hill”.359 Few years later, M. J. Ackner and J. To sum up, these recent archaeological
F. Neigebaur mentioned the traces of the same discoveries combined with older information allow
aqueduct.360 At the end of the XIXth century, Orbán establishing the route of this aqueduct. It starts from
Balázs presented in a book the antiquities from Turda.361 Izvorul Copăcenilor (525 m) and, after 500 m, it passes
In a subchapter about aqueducts, he noticed the on the right side of the road between Petreşti and
position of the spring, the qualities of the water, the Turda (520 m), keeping the same direction (South‐
approximate route of the aqueduct and the possible East). Close to the road to Sănduleşti (453 m), it was
existence of an aqueduct for the Roman camp placed on discovered in two points. Further on, keeping the
Zânelor Hill: “From here, at a distance of one mile in the same direction, it ends at the entrance in the Roman
hill above Copăceni, close by the road which goes to the military fortress (375 m) (Fig. 48).366
mountain (“Drumul Mocanilor”), there is a corridor of The aqueduct could assure a maximum
stone, where a rich spring called Şipotul (Cişmeaua) de discharge of 15 liters/second. This means 54.000 liters
Piatră (Kőcsorgó) is placed, with a rivulet of water thick of water in an hour and 1.296.000 liters in a day. It
as an arm, cold as ice, which flows in a sort of stone means that every soldier benefited of around 216
basin. The Romans collected it from the beginning. They liters of water every day. But, of course, the major
stole it from its riverbed, forced it to enter in the pipes quantity of water was used for the thermal buildings
of the aqueduct and guided it to the Roman camp and situated in praetentura dextra.
the city of Potaissa”. Interesting information and There is, though, a problem in understanding
drawings about the aqueducts are present in the notices how the Roman engineers did maintained a constant
of I. Téglás.362 The presentation of the archaeological flow rate on such conditions, with such a slope. In
discoveries in from Sănduleşti begins with a order to understand these aspects, one should know
geographical description of the region. There are several the ancient flow rates, which is extremely difficult. It is
drawings of the limestone massive in the place called the case of Potaissa, we can assume, based on other
Vágottkő, close by the spring (Fig. 44). examples, that close to the spring the Roman
engineers built a stone basin (caput aquae), which
3. 1. 2. 3. The aqueduct for the Roman fortress collected the water of the spring. In order to ensure a
constant flow rate for the aqueduct, they could use a
70 m South‐West of the road Turda‐Petreşti simple solution: to provide this basin with overflows
and 40 m south of the road to Sănduleşti (Fig. 45), in the and calculate its position for a flow rate of 15 l/sec.
autumn of 2007, during the excavation of a trench for a The aqueduct has a total length of 5000 m
gas pipe, there were discovered fragments from the and a pipe has 50 cm in length. So, basic calculations
aqueduct which supplied the Roman military camp, at a show that at least 10.000 ceramic pipes were
depth of – 0,80 m. Two years earlier, in the winter 2005‐ necessary to complete the aqueduct. We suppose that
2006, when the works for the construction of the it was built by the soldiers from legio V Macedonica
highway Braşov‐Borş started, another water pipe was after their arrival at Potaissa, in AD 168.
discovered, at the same depth, almost in the same place
as the other one (Fig. 46), 130 m North‐East of the 3. 1. 2. 4. The aqueduct for the city
highway and 30 m South to the road to Sănduleşti.363
Starting from the same point, Izvorul
357
Pop 2007, 45. Copăcenilor, an aqueduct supplied with water the city
358
Vitruvius 1964, 337‐338. of Potaissa. Its traces have been noticed several times,
359
Bărbulescu 1980, 285. beginning from the XIXth century, in the gardens of the
360
Bărbulescu 1994, 68.
361
Balázs 1889, 51‐53.
362 364
Bajusz 2005, 348, 350‐352. Bărbulescu 1994, 68.
363 365
I express my gratitude for dr. Sorin Nemeti and dr. Mariana Fodorean 2006, 332.
366
Pîslaru for their help. Terrain investigations carried out on February 29, 2008.

46
inhabitants from Copăceni, in the Western side of the diameter of 10 cm. It is possible that an aqueduct was
village, by I. Téglás. Investigations made in 1977‐1978 in function along the Pardei Valley.367
had as result the identification of the aqueduct in five So, recent archaeological discoveries,
points, on a distance of 2,1 kilometers, on the right side combined with older information and data, allow
of the valley of Copăceni, beginning from the old mill creating an image about the Roman water supply
situated in the North‐Western part of the village to the system of the fortress and the city of Potaissa. Two
former farm from Turda Nouă (Fig. 49, Fig. 50). The aqueducts were constructed: one supplying the
traces of the aqueduct disappear at the entrance in the fortress, with a maximum discharge of 15 liters/sec.
modern city of Turda. In 1986 Gh. Lazarovici identified and another one supplying the city, with a maximum
the aqueduct on a distance of 7‐8 m, in a point situated discharge of 50 liters/sec. The spring provided a
600 m west of the entrance in Turda. The pipes have 39 significant quantity of water for the camp and the city:
cm in length, the sides thick of 3,8 cm and the diameter around 5,600,000 liters of water every day (5,600 m3).
is 25,5 cm. So, between the old mill from Copăceni to
the entrance in the Roman city the aqueduct had a 3. 1. 3. Rural settlements around Potaissa
length of almost 4000 m. The height difference is 36 m
(386 m – the old mill, 350 m the city of Turda). So there Because of the rapid development of Potaissa
is a slope of 9 m at every kilometer (less than 1%), after the arrival of the legio V Macedonica in 68 A.D.,
almost according with the values provided by the around the city we are able today to map and register
Romans (Vitruvius recommended a slope of 5 m at every a substantial number of rural settlements. I will
kilometer and Palladius 9,7 m). present and describe here several of these
The average length of one ceramic pipe is 39 settlements: Potaissa – “Valea Sărată”, Potaissa –
cm. The total length of the aqueduct is almost 5000 m. “Poiana Lişca”, Mihai Viteazu, Cheia, Corneşti,
So, at least 12,800 pipes were used to complete the Moldoveneşti, Petreştii de Sus, Petreştii de Mijloc,
aqueduct. It is difficult to tell when this aqueduct was Petreştii de Jos, Copăceni, Ceanu Mic, Aiton, Rediu,
built. Potaissa developed rapidly after the arrival of the Vâlcele, Mărtineşti, Bogata, Călăraşi, Viişoara, Bolduţ,
legion. So this aqueduct could be realized in the same Ceanu Mare. These settlements can be grouped in
period with the aqueduct for the military camp. several categories: 1. the first two, Potaissa – “Valea
Assuming a 25 cm diameter pipe, the Sărată”, and Potaissa – “Poiana Lişca” are positioned
calculations show a maximum flow rate of about 50 within the current territory of Turda, relatively close to
liters / second. This means 180,000 liters in an hour and the former ancient city; 2. the settlements from Mihai
4,320,000 liters in a day for a population estimated at Viteazu, Cheia, Corneşti, and Moldoveneşti form the
15,000 inhabitants. The result is maximum 288 liters for second group. These settlements developed close to
every citizen of Potaissa. the vicinity of the Roman road which connected
Potaissa with Alburnus Maior along the valley of the
3. 1. 2. 5. Other discoveries river Arieş; 3. north of this road and west of the
legionary fortress, three settlements form the third
It is difficult to establish, today, how the group: Petreştii de Sus, Petreştii de Mijloc, Petreştii de
Romans distributed the water within the city of Potaissa. Jos; 4. the fourth group is formed by the settlements
Several discoveries of pipes show, though, that this aligned along the main imperial Roman road:
system was in use. All these discoveries are Copăceni, Ceanu Mic, Aiton, together with other
concentrated in the Roman city, in a zone with many settlements close to this road: Rediu, Vâlcele, and
traces of buildings. Along the valley of Sănduleşti, which Mărtineşti; 5. the fifth group, formed of the
separates the hill called ‘Cetate’ from the other one settlements from Bogata and Călăraşi, positioned
called ‘Zânelor’, Téglás noticed and drew a stone block along the main imperial road, south of Potaissa; 6. the
(70 x 65 x 35 cm), with an orifice in the middle with the sixth group, consisting of the settlements from
diameter of 40 cm (Fig. 51). He noticed that it belonged Viişoara, Bolduţ and Ceanu Mare.
to an aqueduct. Ceramic pipes were discovered on
Bălcescu Street, South‐East from Cetate hill. A water 3. 1. 3. 1. Watchtowers
pipe was identified on Cheii Street, in 1964, when the
road to Aiud was constructed. The ceramic pipes have a Recently we were able to identify, based on
length of 26,5 cm and a diameter of 10 cm. In the point archaeological data, information from modern
called Furdulăşeni (‘Forduló‐mál’), close to the South‐ manuscripts and aerial photographs, three
Eastern corner of the Roman fortress, another water watchtowers, all of them positioned west of the
pipe is known. Traces of another water pipe were legionary fortress from Potaissa.368
observed in Piaţa Romană, close to the former beer
factory. In 1952‐1953 other ceramic pipes were 367
discovered when the construction of the General School Bărbulescu 1994, 72‐80.
368
no. 3 began. The pipes have 40.5 cm in length and a I would like to thank M. Pîslaru for some of the
information.

47
 The first one, the northernmost, is recorded in 3. 1. 3. 2. Potaissa ‐ ‘Valea Sărată’
the manuscripts of Téglás István.369 Téglás describes the
ruins of this tower: “January, 1911. West of the fortress, This is relatively a newly discovered
in the area of the Cetate Hill, close to the Sind rivulet, on settlement.371 It is situated approximately 4 kilometers
the land of dr. Szentkirályi Lajos, close to the pit called north‐east of Turda. An abundant ceramic material is
Ördöngös, a watch tower was found (specula). Because spread at the surface of the terrain, both prehistoric
it caused problems for the agricultural works, in January and from Roman times. The ceramic can be observed
1911 the walls were excavated and the stones were on a surface of ca. 100 x 70 m. Stones, mortar and
transported from there. I saw the walls of the bricks were also found (Fig. 52). In order to establish
foundation, 96 cm above the terrain, and I could make a the nature and the full chronology of the site, further
drawing. The walls were constructed using chalk from research needs to be done.
Sănduleşti, without mortar. Big tiles were also found.
They also found there a millstone. If for the foundation 3. 1. 3. 3. Potaissa – ‘Poiana Lişca’
the Romans used stone, if seems possible that the walls
were from wood, and the roof was of tiles. To fix the A rural settlement was identified in the place
wooden beams, they cut into the walls deep holes, of 42 called Lişca, 8 km South‐East of Potaissa.372 Surface
cm. the distance between these holes is 1,46 cm. The examination documented the abundance of stones,
diameter of the tower was 11,56 cm. The walls were bricks, pottery, coins and small finds from military
thick of 0,92 cm. From the tower walls, a part of 2,5 m is equipment.
missing”. The tower is positioned circa 1050 meters west
of the south‐western corner of the legionary fortress. 3. 1. 3. 4. Mihai Viteazu
The second tower is positioned approximately
880 meters south (in straight line) of the first one and it The archaeological repertory of Cluj County
was discovered during the preventive archaeological mentions at Mihai Viteazu several settlements. Two
excavations caused by the construction of the are particularly interesting, because these are new
Transylvanian highway, in 2006 (11 September – 29 discoveries. In the place called Pataklejáró (meaning
September, km 14 + 500). A section of 9 x 7 m, oriented ‘descent towards the river’) or Lejáró (‘descent’)
N‐S, with the maximum depth of ‐2,25 m was excavated. fragment of prehistoric and Roman pottery were
The tower is located in the northern part, close to a found (Fig. 53). The river is the valley called Bădeni,
small road heading west, towards Sănduleşti. The stone which flows from South, crosses the village and finally
foundation of the tower was discovered. The dimensions flows into the Arieș (Aranyos) River. In the
of the tower, on the inside, are (S‐N 2,90 m, close to 10 archaeological repository of Cluj County these points
pedes), and E‐V 3,60 m. The shape is rectangular, with are erroneously marked north of the village. This point
the long sides orientated east‐west and the short sides is situated south of the village. The terrain
orientated north‐south. The foundation is preserved on investigation had as result the discovery of a very
a total height of 2 meters. The thickness of the walls is important rural settlement.373 At the surface of the
about 0,5 m. terrain fragments of ceramic, stones, and tiles were
The third tower is located on the hill called Șuia found.
(“Suja‐domb”). This hill is located north of the Arieș In the point entitled “Sajkút” recently there
(Aranyos) River, and south‐east of the hill entitled were found traces of Roman buildings (Fig. 54). This
Nagytündér. The Şuia hill is positioned south of the settlement is described by Téglás István. In 1899 he
Fairies hill, and they are separated by the river called writes about the discovery, here, of some walls
Pardei. The tower is described by the same Téglás belonging to a Roman building. Then, in 1910, he visits
István: “1906. towards north‐west of Turda, at Suia, this spot and notes the presence of bricks. The
along the road heading towards Cheile Turzii, in 1906, at settlement is situated ca. 200 meters west of the
the end of a trench, the foundations of a Roman building current road which heads south of Turda towards Alba
were discovered. A large quantity of bricks and tiles was Iulia. A field walking realized in 2012 had as
also found. Probably it was a Roman farm, but it could consequence the discovery, at the surface of the
also be the foundation of a Roman watch tower, terrain, of Roman ceramic fragments, and prehistoric
because it has a circular shape. The people travelling tools.
towards Meszko (Mischiu) observed that circular shape
in the terrain.”370

371
Rădeanu, Fodorean 2010, 331.
372
Nemeti 2004, 89‐100.
369 373
Bajusz 2005, 545‐546. Terrain investigations during the spring of 2012 with my
370
Bajusz 2005, 779. colleague Sorin Nemeti.

48
 3. 1. 3. 5. Petreştii De Sus, Petreştii de Jos provides a short description of the archaeological sites
identified within the territory of Luncani: „On 26th of
Circa 350 m north‐west of the entrance in the March 1906 I was guided by Pal Balint. I saw the
village of Petreştii de Sus, close to the road heading Roman settlement from Luncani. That surface is
towards Borzeşti, traces of a former rural settlement positioned on the northern side of the land of the
were found.374 The traces consist of fragments of count Kémeny (currently this terrain belongs to Mrs.
ceramic from Roman times, bricks, and substructures. In Hischmaier), on the field, in the triangle made by the
the village of Petreştii de Jos other traces of a former two big water springs of the rivulet Tyukeria. The
settlement were discovered north of the village, close to remains of the settlements are spread on a surface of
the current road.375 circa 0,5 kilometers in length. I saw a lot of Roman
bricks and tiles and ceramic fragments. These are
3. 1. 3. 6. Copăceni spread here and there on the field” (Fig. 56).
The analysis of the maps from the first, the
The village of Copăceni, located circa 6 second and the third military surveys lead to the
kilometers North‐West from Potaissa was known as observation that Téglás copied his data using these
locations of a rural Roman settlement. Traces of an maps. 994 m south east from the current road DN 15
aqueduct which supplied the water to Potaissa, Roman (measured on digital maps and using a straight line,
stamped bricks of the legion V Macedonica and the perpendicular on DN 15), 963 m south from the
Roman road which connected the military fortress with southern corner of the village of Luna, and 1369 m
the main imperial road, were located around the WNW of the corner of the former ‚CAP’ (agricultural
village.376 Archaeological finds lying on the Northern part complex before 1989 – Cooperativa Agricolă de
of the village were observed, spread across an area ca. Producție), I located the Roman site.
100m x 50m (Fig. 55). The field walking around the area
noticed the presence of Roman pottery, block stones 3. 2. Napoca and surroundings
and mortar. No other visible structures on the ground
were documented. 3. 2. 1. Napoca. The Roman city

3. 1. 3. 7. The settlement from Luncani The city flourished during Hadrian, when
became municipium Aelium Hadrianum Napocensium.
The village of Luncani is positioned in the lower The city was surrounded with a wall in opus
basin of the Arieș River, 19 kilometers south‐east of quadratum, which enclosed a total surface of 32,5 ha.
Turda (Roman Potaissa). The settlement belongs, Napoca had an average population of 15.000
administratively, to the village of Luna. The large valley inhabitants. During Marcus Aurelius’ reign the city
of Arieș (much larger in the western part comparing to became colonia Aurelia Napoca. Septimius Severus
the eastern one) permitted, during Roman times until rewarded the city with ius Italicum. The Roman city is
the modern period, activities related to the cultivation almost totally covered now by the medieval one. Even
of a fertile land. The name of the settlement during so, we are now able to know the position of the
modern times was Grind (Aranyosgerend in Hungarian, Roman forum, right in the center of the Unirii Square
or Gerend). On the Austrian maps belonging to the first and under the St. Michael church. A big cemetery
military survey, the settlement is mentioned as Gerend. existed along the Roman road, south of the city.
The archaeological repertory of Cluj County Because of the ius Italicum, numerous landowners
presents some general archaeological finds discovered positioned their villae rusticae in the nearby vicinity of
within the territory of the settlement. Very important is the city. This was a pretty good business; they didn’t
to stress one fact: some monuments and other artifacts pay the land taxes and they had a good opportunity to
were collected in Luncani in the XIXth century by József distribute their products in the big city. Napoca was
Kémeny, in his castle. The Roman road was identified also the headquarters of the procurator Augusti of
within the territory of the village, but this indication is Dacia Porolissensis, who was in charge of the army and
useless. responsible with the laws, finances and the
A decisive contribution in the understating and administration of this province. Napoca was also a
location of the archaeological discoveries in and around very important crossroad. A route started from here
Potaissa had István Téglás (1853‐1915).377 Téglás and headed west, up to the military camp from
Gilău.378 This route continued along the valley of
374
Crişan, Bărbulescu, Chirilă, Vasiliev, Winkler 1992, s.v. Someşul Mic, following the right bank of the river,
Petreştii de Sus, no. 6, 310. until it reached another military camp, in today’s
375
Crişan, Bărbulescu, Chirilă, Vasiliev, Winkler 1992, s.v. Gherla.
Petreştii de Jos, no. 3, 308.
376
Crişan, Bărbulescu, Chirilă, Vasiliev, Winkler 1992, s.v.
Copăceni, 159‐161.
377 378
Bajusz 2005, 30. Fodorean 2002a, 97‐102.

49
 3. 2. 2. Rural settlements landscapes looked,383 in order to understand landform
history and dynamics, and explain, by combining field
Some 8 km to the northwest of Napoca, on the observation and physical experiment, how this
hill “Pustfalău”, a Roman farm was signalled.379 landscape was transformed.384 Regarding the
According to the short notice published at the time, landscape, it is clear that in changed a lot comparing
traces of Roman stoned‐walls and of an aqueduct were to the Roman era. So, former sectors of Roman roads,
visible on the ground in early `70. Another villa rustica military fortresses etc. are difficult to identify today in
was archaeologically investigates on the opposite side of the terrain. Old maps, like those made by Austrians,
the valley, on the hill Tulgheş. It is surrounded by a wall show us terrain details which are hard to observe or
which encloses several buildings and a bath complex.380 inexistent on the current maps. The information can
The third Roman farm, located circa 5 km north of be stocked today in digital form and used for various
Napoca, on the Lomb hill, was discovered in 2008, research projects.
during the rescue excavation requested by an Between 1763 and 1787 all the territories of
entrepreneurial project.381 The villa, 50 m wide by 40 m the Habsburgic Monarchy were surveyed and mapped.
in length, partially destroyed by successive landslides, This is known with the official name “The First Military
had 5, possibly 6 large rooms divided by stone‐walled Survey”. The results of this activity are quite
foundations. It is worth mentioning that traces of the spectacular: 3589 hand‐drawn coloured map sheets,
building were not visible on orthophotographs before measuring approximately 61 x 42 cm, in a scale of
excavation, as the area was largely covered by pasture. 1:28.800. For Transylvania, 280 sheets were drawn.385
This survey was followed by a second one, “The
3. 3. Ilişua (Bistriţa‐Năsăud County) Second Military Survey (Francis’)”, from 1806 ‐ 1869.
Emperor Francis II ordered this operation. The purpose
3. 3. 1. The Austrian maps was to correct the old maps, now that the Austrian
Empire (Kaiserstaat Österreich) was created in 1804.
Austrian maps are, today, an outstanding The maps were more accurate, in the same scale
source of research for historians, archaeologists or (1:28.800).386 The survey of Transylvania was carried
geographers. The investigation and analysis of these out between 1860 and 1872.387 After the creation of
maps and the identification of elements that changed the Austro‐Hungarian Monarchy (1867) it was initiated
the historical landscape are present in our attention for the third military survey.388 This action was carried out
quite a time.382 The elements that compose this in a short period of time (1869 ‐ 1887). The progresses
landscape, such as courses of rivers, settlements, hills, in topography, cartography and geodesy are reflected
buildings, roads, stone bridges, appear on these maps. in the quality of the maps created (1:25.000 and
By studying them, we can extract a lot of information 1:75.000 scale).389 In 1896 the fourth survey started,
regarding the important changes from the last 200
years. The importance of these maps is crucial. The 383
Herz, Garrison 1998; Aston 2002; Holliday 2004; Johnson
three topographic surveys realized in the 18th and 19th 2007; Wescott, Brandon 2000; Weathley, Gillings 2002;
century marked a huge step in the development of Mehrer, Wescott 2006.
384
cartography. It is interesting to see also the general Mac 1987, 566‐578; Irimuş 1997, 245‐248; Irimuş 1998;
context that determined the rulers of the Habsburgic Irimuş 2006.
385
Empire to map all the territories. The great advantage DVD The First Military Survey/Die Erste Militärische
Aufnahme, www.arcanum.hu, published in October 2006.
for archaeologist is related to the content of these
From a number of almost 3.400 maps resulted from this
maps: the Austrian surveyors and cartographers were survey, 968 map sheets were published, containing 23.000
very interested in representing the most accurate names of 9.974 settlements. DVD Die Josephinische
version of the represented territory, including the Aufnahme. Siebenbürgen und das Banat von Temes,
Roman antiquities. They marked on these maps former Transylvania and Temes, published in April 2005 and the
Roman roads, military fortresses, bridges, settlements. DVD Die Josephinische Aufnahm. Das Königtum Ungarn/the
In all, these changes, gradually realized, changed the Hungarian Monarchy, published in October 2004.
386
landscape. The man himself made this, together with DVD The Second Military Survey/Die Zweite Militärische
the forces of nature. We, as archaeologists, together Aufnahme (Georeferenced), www.arcanum.hu. The DVD
contains 1.111 map sheets and 25.000 names of 11.044
with the geographers, seek to understand how
settlements. It was published in October 2006. See also the
DVD Military Surveying: Kingdom of Hungary and Temes/Die
zweite militärische Vermessung: Königreichs Ungarn und
Banat von Temes, published in December 2005.
387
Timár et alii 2007, 83; Timár et alii 2008, 127.
379 388
Crişan, Bărbulescu, Chirilă, Vasiliev, Winkler 1992, s.v. Molnár, Timár 2009, 116.
389
Chinteni, 106. DVD The Third Military Survey 1869 ‐ 1887: Ungarn,
380
Alicu et alii 1995, 619‐633. Siebenbürgen, Kroatien‐Slawonien/Die dritte militärische
381
Cociş, Fodorean, Ursuţiu, Bârcă 2011, 565‐574. Aufnahme der Österreichisch‐Ungarischen Monarchie,
382
Fodorean 2005, 185‐201; Fodorean 2006a, 997‐1010. 1:25.000 (Georeferenced), www.arcanum.hu, published in

50
but it was suspended nineteen years later, in 1915, due with a map which presents the area between three
to the World War I. settlements: 1. in the Western part Fel‐Ör (Uriu de
Susu, today Uriu); 2. in the Northern part Alsó–Jllosva
3. 3. 2. Ilişua. The Roman settlement (Ilişua); 3. in the Southern part Csicsó–Keresztur
(Cristeştii Ciceului). It is a triangle between these three
The Roman fortress from Ilişua (Fig. 57) is settlements, crossed in the middle by the river Ilişua.
positioned 22 km North‐East from Dej, at the base of the All the major Roman discoveries are positioned in the
hill called “Măgura” or “Cetate”, circa 500 m south of Eastern part of the river Ilişua (its left bank). The
the center of the village, on the left bank of the valley distance between the river Someşul Mare (North) and
Ilişua. In the triangle formed in the Western part by the the settlement of Ilişua is about 2.2 kilometres. In this
village Uriu, in the North by Ilişua and in the Southern area K. Torma described in his study the presence of
part by Cristeştii Ciceului, numerous discoveries were numerous Roman ruins. The traces of the Roman
mentioned during time. The majority of them are fortress were mentioned early, in 1831, when K.
present to the West of the river Ilişua. Torma excavated it in several points. He discovered
The Roman fortress is positioned south to the inscriptions and other materials. Then in 1847 J. F.
valley of Ilişua. From this point there is a good visibility Neigebaur described again this site. Between 1858 and
to South and West. The Roman fortress was known in 1862 the same K. Torma made archaeological
the second half of the 19th century. K. Torma published a investigations again (Fig. 58). We know, until now, the
study related to this important strategic point on the approximate position of several buildings: 1. the
Northern frontier of Dacia.390 The fortification was after Roman fortress (182.2 × 181.5 m); 2. in the Eastern
that in the attention of the specialists all the time. In part of the fortress: a temple (?), marked by the
1997 the first general presentation of the fortress and discovery of five inscriptions; 3. in the North‐Eastern
the civilian settlement was published.391 part of the fortress, in the higher point, called Măgura
The modern cartography helps us to Hill, K. Torma mentioned a Roman building (a watch
understand better the position of the fortress and the tower?); 4. baths, positioned at North‐West and South
civilian settlement. The maps from the first military to the fortress; 5. the Roman road, with a total length
survey of Transylvania (1763 ‐ 1785) show us in the area between Uriu and the fortress of around 2.3
around Ilişua some details. First, the course of the river kilometers; 6. the Roman cemetery, positioned on the
Ilişua changed radically in the period between this first right bank of the river Ilişua, along the road; 7. another
topographic survey (1763 ‐ 1785) and today. Few road, from the Southern gate of the camp to the
elements are represented on this map: the roads, the settlement of Cristeştii Ciceului; 8. South of the
rivers and the settlements, with no other information settlement of Ilişua, between the left bank of the river
regarding the relief. This last one is marked by hachure. and the base of the hill “Măgura”, K. Torma made
Numerous details are presents on the maps from the researches and discovered a quadrangular
second military survey (1806 ‐ 1869), based on the first construction and inscriptions. On the map from the
network of horizontal control points (triangulation). The second military survey the position of the fortress is
Second Military Survey is considered much more marked.
accurate, as it is based on a geodetic and surveying The Roman road is marked on Torma’s map
foundation of good quality. The projection of the second on a distance of around 1.5 kilometres, starting from
survey was Cassini, but was not precisely applied. This is Uriu until the valley of Ilişua. Of course, funerary
a transverse cylindrical projection, tangent and inscriptions, tombs, other monuments (sarcophagi,
therefore equidistant along the central meridian. funerary lions, coins, bricks and ceramics) were
In our case, we can observe that the ruins of discovered along this road. The road appears on the
the Roman fortress were clearly visible at that time. For currents 1:25.000 map as a secondary one. Further on,
that, the position of the fortress is marked exactly on from the valley of Ilişua until the fortress the road is
the map. This information is almost contemporary with marked by K. Torma with interrupted points, meaning,
the researches made by K. Torma, who published his maybe, that this sector of almost 1 kilometer was little
study about Ilişua in 1864 ‐ 1865. The study is illustrated visible on the terrain at that time. This road has a
general orientation West‐East, positioned North of the
river Someşul Mare. Another sector of road is
March 2007, which contains 1.333 map sheets of the full
territory (1:25.000 scale georeferenced map sheets of the mentioned by K. Torma starting south of the fortress
Kingdom of Hungary, Transylvania, Croatia and Slavonia); see until the settlement of Cristeştii Ciceului. This one has
also the DVD with the 1:75 000 scale maps, The Third Military a length of around 2 kilometers.
Survey 1869 ‐ 1887: Österreichisch ‐ Ungarischen Monarchie, The maps of the third military survey are
1:75.000 (Georeferenced), which contains 752 map sheets of more accurate. The survey of this region was realized
the full territory and 40.000 settlement names. This DVD was in 1872. The map of this region shows the same area
also published in March 2007. around Ilişua. This time the Roman fortress is marked
390
Torma 1864‐1865, passim. with the toponym Römer‐Schanze.
391
Protase, Gaiu, Marinescu 1997, 27‐110.

51
 Ilişua represents an important settlement on On the other hand, between the military fortress from
the Northern part of Dacia. The Roman Arcobadara392 Cigmău and the watering place there is no evidence of
developed around the fortress, built here rapidly after a Roman road. More, the ancient locality Germisara is
the conquest by soldiers from legio XIII Gemina. The not represented with the specific vignette for thermal
settlement is positioned on the left bank of the river buildings, as we see in the other case, at Ad Aquas,
Ilişua. This river changed its course quite a lot in the last today Călan (Hunedoara County), along the Roman
200 years, as the maps prove. Of course, a bridge was road that crosses the province of Dacia from South to
built over this river, but its traces are no longer visible. North. My explanation is that, although Germisara was
In all, we have another outstanding example of how well known in the Roman epoch for its thermal waters,
Austrian surveyors manage to register all the details of as we can see from the arrangements of a complex
the terrain, including the position of the fortress. piscine’s system, archaeologically investigated,394 its
position, outside of the imperial road, made
3. 4. The Roman road from Geoagiu‐Băi unnecessary the representation of the specific symbol
(Hunedoara County) for thermal waters. The absence on Tabula
Peutingeriana of such Roman roads as that between
During the summer of 2001 I investigated a plot Geoagiu and Cigmău should not amaze us, since on
of land in the Geoagiu‐Băi area (Hunedoara County), in the antique itinerarium don’t appear other roads,
order to identify a Roman road that was never much more important in Dacia. One example is the
mentioned before in the archaeological literature. road Apulum‐Micia‐Partiscum, alongside the Mureş
The investigation area covered the area Valley (a section of this Roman road is epigraphically
between the Geoagiu Valley, in the East, the village of attested by the Roman milestone discovered at Micia).
Geoagiu in the South and the locality Geoagiu‐Băi.393 I don’t criticize here the usefulness of Tabula
This area was known in the Roman era by the name of Peutingeriana; it was proved many times the
Germisara. Archaeologically and topographically, the importance of this Roman itinerarium in establishing
Roman city and the Roman fortress are positioned the road network in Roman Dacia. This section of
within the territory of the current village of Geoagiu, in Roman road, between Cigmău and Geoagiu‐Băi, is not
the East, and Cigmău in the West. So, one can present on TP because the main highway passes only
distinguish two points situated on the northern, right through Germisara from Cigmău and not through the
bank of Mureş, close to the main military road that thermal settlement.
connected Ulpia Traiana Sarmizegetusa with Apulum. In the Geography of Ptolemy, Germisara is
One of these cities, which had benefited by the thermal mentioned in the list of the most important cities in
waters, had a civilian and bathing character. This place is Dacia.395 On the map made by I. B. Cătăniciu
situated north of Geoagiu. The other place, which Germisara is situated along the Roman road Tibiscum
appeared a little later, had a military character and – Ulpia Traiana Sarmizegetusa – Hidata (Aquae) –
included the Roman fortress from Cigmău and the Germisara – Apulum – Marcodava – Salinae – Potaissa
civilian settlement (vicus militaris). Under the name – Napoca – Porolissum.396
Germisara, during the Roman times, one can separate In his Cosmographia (A description of the
three places: 1. the Roman fortress from Cigmău, world), the Anonymus Geographicus from Ravenna
situated on the “Turiac” plateau, at “Pogradie” point; 2. enumerated the localities inside of Dacia from North
the civilian settlement (vicus militaris), placed between to South. In the Roman road section Apulum –
Cigmău and Geoagiu; 3. the watering place, situated 5 Sarmizegetusa – Acmonia is placed also Germisara:
km north of the Roman fortress. “Also, over the Danubium river, there are the cities of
In this investigated geographical space, placed Moesia Inferior, as: ”Porolissos, Certie, Largiana,
South‐West of the bathing place, I have been able to Optatiana, Macedonica, Napoca, Patabissa, Salinis,
identify a section of the Roman road which connected Brutia, Apulon, Sacidaba, Cedonia, Caput Stenarum,
Geoagiu‐Băi with Cigmău. This road assured the Betere, Aluti, Romulas. Also, close by Cedonia, there is
connection with the main road Apulum‐Micia‐Partiscum a city named Burticum, Blandiana, Germigera, Petris,
(Szeged). Aquas, Sarmazege, Augmonia, Augusti.“397
The cartographic and geographic antique Therefore, the cartographic and geographic
sources mention only the name of the ancient locality antique sources do not provide information about a
Germisara. Tabula Peutingeriana places Germisera on Roman road.
the imperial Roman road Sarmizegetusa‐Apulum, The first mention about the presence of a
between Petris (Uroiu) and Blandiana (Vinţu de Jos), at military fortress at Cigmău dates from 1844 and
IX m(illia) p(assuum) away from both of these localities.
394
Pescaru, Pescaru 1995‐1996, 325‐339.
392 395
Nemeti, Bărbulescu 2007, 107‐118; Nemeti, Bărbulescu Ptolemeu III 9, 4, Γερμιγερα (Germizera).
396
2010, 446‐455; Nemeti 2010, 395‐433. Cătăniciu 1987‐1988, 151 and fig. 1, 161.
393 397
Velcea, Savu 1982, 216. GeogrRavenn, IV, 7, Germigera.

52
belongs to András Fodor. Important observations were Aquae, Tabula does not represent it with the
made by J. F. Neigebaur, who appreciated that between characteristic symbol (a house with large courtyard),
the villages Cigmău and Geoagiu the Roman civilian because the Roman road did not pass through the
settlement was positioned. M. J. Ackner, A. Ipolyi and C. watering place; the road touches only the fortress and
Gooss assumed Neigebaur’s opinion.398 But, the settlement from Cigmău. The watering place was
unfortunately, there are no references regarding the positioned a little more in interior, at Geoagiu”.402
presence of a Roman road here, in this region. The archaeological repertory of the
V. Christescu did not mention anything, even as Hunedoara County mentions the military fortress, the
supposition, about the existence of a Roman road civilian settlement and the watering place.403 There is
between the thermal place from Germisara and the no mention about the existence of a Roman road.
imperial road, which traversed the whole province. It is So, although during the last few decades
mentioned just the route of the road along the valley of numerous archaeological researches (the watering
the river Mureş, together with the settlements, listed place from Germisara, the civilian settlement, the
from West to East.399 Roman cemetery and the military camp) were made,
The two studies written by Emil Panaitescu and they never mentioned the presence of a Roman road
dedicated to the road network in Roman Dacia are, in this archaeological area.
unfortunately, extremely poor in information and with a The research of the Roman road from
general character. So, it appears logical that such Roman Geoagiu‐Băi began at the place where is the crossing
road as this one, between Germisara and Cigmău, do not point between the current road that goes to the
appear on the road maps made by the Romanian present thermal place, and other graveled road, that
historian. On these so called “maps” are represented, in climbs up the leisurely slope of the Geoagiu plateau.
the area that interests us, just two Roman roads, which The distance measured from the entrance in Geoagiu‐
began from the main road crossing point of Dacia, Băi to the point where appears clearly, at the surface,
Apulum: a road to Alburnus Maior and other road to the Roman road, is 4,5 km (Fig. 59). My hypothesis is
Micia. that the contemporary road is, from its beginning, the
In 1956 Nicolae Gostar has published an article Roman road, because I have been able to observe the
dedicated to the inscriptions and monuments from agger of the Roman road.
Germisara.400 This study has two parts: the first part is a The most interesting observations concern the
discussion on some new inscriptions; the second part is Roman road superstructure. The technique of building
dedicated to the military fortress and the civilian the superior pavement, by fitting many several stone
settlement from Germisara. The author debates upon blocks of different size, to create a good travel surface,
the problem of the antique settlement. He concludes was always used in the case of the main roads. So,
that the name of Germisara had covered in the Roman technically speaking, this road is a via silica strata. The
era the watering place and also the military fortress paving of Roman roads with polygonal blocks was
from Cigmău, positioned 5 km south. Anyway, there is designated to the important roads. This technique
no mention about a Roman road between the military required a particular technology of extracting the stone
fortress and the civilian settlement. from the quarries and the transport of this material of
In 1968 I. I. Russu has published the most construction. In our case, close by the Roman road
important Roman epigraphic discoveries from the functioned a quarry of travertine, which was exploited
archaeological area of Hunedoara County.401 The author in the Roman period. The organization of paving the
analyzes a number of inscriptions and presents a map of major roads of Rome was on a larger scale in the
the area Ulpia Traiana – Aquae – Micia – Germisara – second century AD.
Ampelum. Neither him does not include the possibility The importance, in the Roman era, of these
of a presence of a Roman road. paved roads, is demonstrated by the classification
The 1968’s study of D. Tudor is not different, made by Ulpianus in the second century AD.
from our standpoint, from the other studies described Technically, this author distinguishes between three
here. When he presents the Roman settlement from types of roads. In the first place are the roads paved
Germisara, the historian does not deny the existence of with stone blocks (viae silicae stratae), followed by the
a Roman road between the watering place and the roads paved with gravel (viae glareae stratae); the last
military fortress from Cigmău, but he no other details are the roads that have at the surface a simple level of
are provided: “Although in the time of the Roman gravel settled and leveled (viae terrenae).
Empire Germisara was one of the most important The role of this Roman road was to connect
watering places in Dacia, much more important than the Roman military fortress from Cigmău where was
located the auxiliary troop Numerus Singularium
Peditum Britannicorum, with the watering place,
398
Gostar 1956, 87‐88.
399
Christescu 1929, 103; Christescu 1937, 109.
400 402
Gostar 1956, 57‐99. Tudor 1968, 130.
401 403
Russu 1968, 87‐107; Russu 1970, 517‐528. Luca 2005a, 72‐73.

53
situated 5 km north of the fortress. So, it was an access via vicinalis, meaning a road that lead to a settlement.
road (deverticulum) to the thermal baths and a On the other side, the same Roman road is a via publica,
ramification from the main road Sarmizegetusa – because it was used by all the people who traveled in
Apulum. this area. From the technical standpoint, the Roman
The thermal place from Germisara was visited road is a via silica strata. The Roman road functioned in
very often in the Roman era because of the qualities of the whole Roman period. The proof is the presence, in
the thermal waters. The auxiliary troop had as mission the military camp from Cigmău, of the auxiliary troop of
to defend and protect the main road that connected Brittans, together with vexillationes from legio XIII
Ulpia Traiana Sarmizegetusa and Micia with Apulum. Gemina, which participated to the construction, the
Generally, this troop assured the safety of the whole arrangement and the maintenance of the Roman road.
place. The discovery of this new Roman road make us to
think that the troop located at Cigmău had as mission to 3. 5. Other roads in Roman Dacia
defend and protect also this access road to the thermal
baths. At Cigmău we find also vexillationes from legio VII The investigation of the roads from Roman
Claudia and the archaeological evidence confirm that. Dacia can be divided in five periods: 1. The XVI‐XIX
So, the military fortress and the civilian settlement were centuries, which is the period when the first
connected to the main highway Apulum‐Ulpia Traiana information on Roman roads, in certain medieval and
Sarmizegetusa by the road between Cigmău and modern documents, was published; 2. From the half of
Geoagiu‐Băi. the XIXth century until the years 1930‐1935 of the last
The archaeological evidence discovered in the century, when there were “discovered” step by step
thermal place proves the massive participation of these some of the main roads from Dacia, especially in
troops at the construction of the baths. Between these South‐West, in Banat;404 3. The period between
complex arrangements we notice a piscine in the rock, 1925/1935‐1950, when there were published the first
with the diameter of 7,59 m. In this context, one can synthesis on the Roman roads from Dacia, but with a
suppose that the Roman road was built by the same very general character;405 4. The period between the
military troop from Cigmău. The Roman road was built Second World War until de 70’, when it began the
at the same time with the presence of the auxiliary systematic research of the Roman roads, especially in
troop of Brittans in the military fortress. The troop is Oltenia; 5. The period from 1975 until nowadays,
registered in Moesia Superior in 106‐107 A.D.; from when several articles which presented the routes, the
here, it participated at the campaigns against Dacia. infrastructure and the superstructure of the main
After 106 A.D., the troop is present in the new created roman roads from Dacia were published.406
province. In 157 A.D. the auxiliary troop is present in
Dacia Superior. I. I. Russu thinks that in the second half 404
Torma 1864; Torma 1880; Torma 1880a, 101‐117; Gooss
of the second century A.D., the troop changed his name, 1874; Balázs 1863‐1871; Stefulescu 1893, 340‐342; Halavats
becoming Numerus Singulariorum Britannicorum. Even if 1896, 12‐14; Finály 1902, 380‐383; Tocilescu 1900, 118‐119;
we can’t establish for sure if the troop was present from Pârvan 1906, 20‐28; Dumitrescu 1911, 107‐110; Téglás 1913,
the first year of occupation at Cigmău, the Roman 57‐58; Marţian 1920; Pârvan 1923, 29, 46, 48, 115, 128, 140;
military camp was already built in the first half of the Pârvan 1926, 109‐110.
405
second century A.D. At this point, we can suppose that Simu 1924, 15‐18; Cucu 1929, 45‐52; Pănuca 1930, 43‐44;
the Roman road was built in the same period. In this Christescu 1929, 96‐110; Panaitescu 1936, 3‐14; Christescu
1937, 104‐114; Panaitescu 1938.
way, at the beginning of the second century A.D., the 406
Ferenczi 1974, 111‐127; Tănase 1980, 289‐294; Tănase
Roman road from Geoagiu offered the best conditions of 1995, 79‐104; Pădureanu 1982, 67‐74; Wollmann 1996, 70‐
access to the thermal place. It was a ramification from 71; Gudea 1996, 99‐125; Mitrofan 1997, 613‐619; Mitrofan
the main highway Ulpia Traiana Sarmisegetusa‐Apulum. 1997a, 717‐723; Baltag 2000, 111‐113; Blăjan, Theiss 2000,
We can also suppose that this road was in function even 215‐260; Blăjan, Theiss 2000a, 85‐122; Fodorean 2002b, 15‐
after 271 A.D. So, this road that functioned in all the 32; Fodorean 2002c, 613‐631; Nemeti, Nemeti, Fodorean
period in which Dacia was a Roman province and after 2003, 69‐75; Fodorean 2003a, 155‐177; Fodorean 2003b, 59‐
the withdrawal of Aurelian. 80; Fodorean 2003c, 323‐330; Fodorean 2003d, 55‐68;
As in other cases, the course of this Roman road Fodorean 2003e, 7‐20; Fodorean 2004a, 523‐530; Fodorean
2004b, 63‐69; Fodorean 2004c, 71‐87; Fodorean 2005a, 153‐
was evidently planned with skill, and laid out with a
163; Fodorean 2005b, 331‐446; Fodorean, Fodorean 2005,
complete grasp of the general features of the zone to be 111‐122; Fodorean 2006b, 165‐344; Fodorean 2006c, 135‐
passed through. It results that, during the construction of 152; Nemeth, Fodorean, Matei, Blaga 2011a, 329‐350;
this road, as it happened in other cases, the Roman Fodorean 2010, 49‐66; Fodorean 2010b, 93‐102; Fodorean
engineers have turn to the best account all the 2011c, 51‐62; Fodorean 2011d, 430‐445; Pătraşcu,
advantages offered by the configuration of the terrain. Fodorean, Fodorean 2011, 57‐64; Fodorean, Pătraşcu,
This road represents, practically, the ramification from the Fodorean 2012 (forthcoming); Fodorean 2012, 255‐279;
main road Ulpia Traiana Sarmizegetusa‐Apulum to the Fodorean 2012a (forthcoming); Fodorean 2012b, 145‐152;
watering place from Geoagiu‐Băi. So, the Roman road is a Fodorean 2012c, 81‐132; Fodorean, Fodorean 2010a, 81‐88;
Fodorean, Fodorean 2012, 175‐180; Fodorean, Fodorean,

54
 Starting from the classifications made by the denomination was given in the medieval age to the
Roman jurists and from the data that we have regarding Roman roads, which had a paved surface, different
Dacia, I divided the roads into three categories: I. Roads from that of the medieval roads, which were mudded
of major importance, main highways (first of all military in the rainy seasons.
roads, inside and along the frontier of the province, “The old men road” (“drumul batrânilor”) is
which assured the mobility of the Roman military units; another toponym found in Dacia. It refers to the the
commercial roads, which assured the functionality of the Roman road in the sector between Dej and Căşeiu,
export and import of different products); II. Secondary investigated in the terrain for the first time in 1930 by
roads (the roads which connected the main roads, Emil Panaitescu. The Roman road was still in use
different settlements, Roman farms, rural settlements, during the 60’ of the last century.
or roads which gained during time the status of ”The ancient road” (“drumul vechi”) is the
economical roads, which connected to the main road name is mentioned in the popular tradition for the
system the quarries of stone, the salt exploitations and Roman road in the proximity of the Roman military
the gold mines); III. Roads of little importance camp from Bumbeşti.
(ramifications ‐ deverticulae which shortened the During the medieval ages, the presence of
distance between different points, constructed, in many a Roman road is suggested by the toponym “salt
cases, by the owners of Roman farms in order to gain road” or “stone road”. The salt was always an
access to the major market centres). important product, exported during the Roman era
The toponimy provides information about the and, of course, during the entire medieval period.
presence of Roman roads. In Dacia there are several With this toponym we know today at least two former
interesting toponyms. The most frequest is “Trajan’s Roman roads, which assured, in the Roman era, the
road” („drumul lui Traian”), with versions like “Trajan’s connection with Pannonia Inferior: the military main
path”, Trojan’s path” or “Emperor’s road”. The most road Napoca‐Porolissum and the Roman road
frequent denominations of this kind are related alongside the valley of Mureş.
especially to the route of the imperial Roman road The presence of former Roman milestones
Drobeta – Tibiscum – Apulum – Napoca – Porolissum. As is suggested by toponyms as „the stone of the
the Via Alutana and other secondary roads, this Roman Emperor”, „the stone of punishment”, and “the
road is named by the local inhabitants “Trajan’s road” or written stone”. The location of former Roman
“Trajan’s path”. With the same name is known the milestones is indicated by denominations as „the
Roman road at the entrance in the locality of Turda. emperor’s chair”, „the emperor’s pillar”, „at the
Moise Nicoară, who travelled in this region, observed pillar”, „at the chair”, „the judgement stone”. These
this road in 1810. He was extremely glad when he saw hypothesis are confirmed by the discovery, in Banat,
the tracks of the Roman road. He names this road of a Roman milestone close by the village of
„Trajan’s road”.407 Lăpuşnicel, in a place called „Znamăn” or „the
A draw of the zone Călăraşi –Turda made by emperor’s stone”.
Téglás presents the route of the imperial Roman road, in An interesting road is the one identified on
the sector between the valley of Arieş and the the terrain between Cluj and Gilău. During the autumn
intersection with the current road to Unirea (Fig. 60).408 of 2000 and the spring of 2001, I investigated a plot of
With the same toponym can be identified the imperial land, in order to identify the roman road between Cluj‐
Roman road in the sectors Sarmizegetusa – Germisara – Napoca and Gilău (Fig. 61). The starting point of the
Blandiana409 and Sarmizegetusa – Ostrov. research was the short description made by the
Another toponym is “the Stone road” (“drumul Romanian researcher Mihail Macrea in his book about
pietros”), or “the stone path”, which defines the type of the life in Roman Dacia. The results of these
construction.410 In some medieval documents the investigations on the whole are the following. The
toponym “the dry road” can be found. This Roman road is situated on the right side of the actual
road between Cluj‐Napoca and Gilău. The Roman
engineers built the Roman road by taking account the
Moldovan 2013 (forthcoming); Fodorean 2013 (forthcoming);
local geomorphologic, geological and hydrological
Fodorean 2013b (forthcoming); Fodorean 2013c (forthcoming);
Fodorean 2013d (forthcoming); Fodorean 2013e conditions for high‐secured road traffic. On its length
(forthcoming); Irimuş, Fodorean, Petrea, Fodorean 2011, 23‐ of 8 km from the starting point of our research and up
28; Fodorean, Irimuş, Fodorean, Moldovan 2011, 361‐373; to the auxiliary Roman fortress in Gilău, the medium
Irimuş, Fodorean, Petrea, Rus, Cocean, Pop 2009, 39‐48; slope in of 1˚. The infrastructure of the ancient road
Fodorean, Fodorean 2008, 103‐112; Irimuş, Petrea, Surdeanu, has two successive layers: 1. a gravel bed, brought
Fodorean, Pop 2009, 493‐505. from the valley of Someşul Mic; 2. a limestone layer
407
Bărbulescu 1980, 283. (slabs of minor size) (Fig. 62).
408
Téglás 1913, 58. The Roman road Cluj‐Napoca ‐ Bologa belongs
409
Blăjan, Theiss, Preda 1994, 171.
410 to the category of the so‐called secondary roads. It
Macrea, Protase 1959, 446; Moga, Ciugudean 1995, 95‐
had first a strategic role, to assure the connection
96, s.v. Galda de Jos.
55
between the Roman city Napoca and the auxiliary camps area; 3. data obtained by analyzing the main
from Gilău and Bologa. This road was marked on geomorphologic characteristics of the territory crossed
different maps showing Roman Dacia as an uncertain by the Roman road. On an Austrian map from 1882 it
road (TIR L 34 and the map published in the first volume is represented a road on the right bank of the river
of IDR). At the end of his study published in 1864, Torma Someş, between the localities Szamos Ujvar (Gherla)
Károly did not represent this road, but only the imperial and Szek (Sic). From here, the road continues to South,
road between Potaissa and Napoca. heading to Klausenburg (Cluj‐Napoca). Another
The Roman road starts from Napoca and then Austrian map from the beginning of the last century
has a direction towards West, to the auxiliary fortress confirms this hypothesis. On this map the whole route
from Gilău and from here to the western frontier of of the Roman road is represented. On the same map it
Dacia Porolissensis, to the military fortress from Bologa. is also represented the Roman fortress from Gherla,
From this point of view, Napoca can be considered an situated on the right bank of the valley of the river
important crossroad, after the main crossroad from Someşul Mic, South‐West of the current city. The
Dacia, Apulum. We know that through the gates of the Roman fortress and the civilian settlement are placed
ancient city Napoca entered several roads. Through the in an area that corresponding to a triangle, between
Southern gate entered the main military road Potaissa‐ the valley of the river Someşul Mic, the so‐called
Napoca (along the route Copăceni – Tureni – Ceanu Mic “Canalul Morii” and the current road Cluj‐Napoca ‐
– Aiton ‐ Gheorghieni). The same road continues Gherla. On the Austrian map, the road is marked with
through Baciu, Mera and Şardu and then reaches two parallel lines, one continued and another
Porolissum. Through the Eastern gate entered the road interrupted. In these conditions, the route of the
that connected the military fortress from Samum Roman road between the settlements Gherla and Sic
(Căşeiu) with Napoca, along a route alongside the valley can be established. The road begins from the West
of Someşul Mic, crossing by the following actual villages gate of the Roman fortress and, after 400 m on the
and towns (from North to South): Buneşti, Băiţa, Silivaş, direction NV‐SE, it arrives to the current road. From
Iclozel, Jucu de Sus and Apahida. this point, keeping the same direction, after another
Another road investigated in the terrain is the 200 m the road changes its direction. It goes then
sector from Gilău to Izvoru Crişului. During the summer another 550 m, until it reaches a current road. Here it
of 2001 I investigated an area in the Izvoru Crişului makes a curve and then changes its direction again to
region, in order to clarify the route of the Roman road SE. After another 500 m, the road reaches Valea
between Gilău and Bologa. Some remains of this road Sărată. This entire sector goes at the base of the
were observed in a point situated 1,5 km North from the Gherla Hill. From Valea Sărată, the road follows the
actual locality Izvoru Crişului. Close by the end of the course of the river on the direction NE‐SE, on a
village, on the current road to Huedin, a current road distance of another 3000 m. It follows then a large
leads to the right, at the mentioned point. The curve with a radius of 130 degrees, and after that the
investigations had as result the discovery of a sector of Roman way changes again its course, following the line
the Roman road. The route of the ancient road was of the level curves, to SSE, on a distance of almost
followed on a distance of almost 700 meters, in the area another 1000 m, north from the “Lacul Ştiucilor”. In
describes before, placed 1,5 km North of the actual this point the Roman road crosses over a current road.
village Izvoru Crişului. From here the route of the Roman road is practically
There are two groups of Roman roads close to marked by the points with Roman discoveries
Potaissa: 1. the main roads, which are: a. the imperial belonging to the area of the village. With a total length
Roman road between Războieni‐Cetate and Napoca; b. of almost 9,5 km, calculated between the Roman
the road on the inferior valley of the river Arieş; 3. the camp from Gherla and the South‐West of the village
road on the valley of Mureş; 2. several natural paths, Sic, the Roman road has eight long alignments: two
which are: a. the path that connected the settlements sectors of 3000 m, one of 1500 m, two of 500 m each,
placed alongside the river Valea Largă; b. the path that one sector of almost 400 m and another one of 200 m.
connected the settlements placed alongside the valley Interesting data are related to the
of the river called Pârâul de Câmpie; c. the path that infrastructure, superstructure and the technical
connected the settlements placed alongside the river characteristics of the Roman roads from Dacia
Iara. Porolissensis. I offer ten examples (Aiton‐Gheorghieni,
The Roman road that connected the localities Piaţa Cipariu – Cluj‐Napoca, Baciu‐Mera‐Şardu,
Gherla and Sic (Cluj County) is very interesting (Fig. 63). Zimbor, Sânmihaiu Almaşului, Porolissum, Cluj‐Napoca
The reconstruction of the Roman route is based on three – Gilău, Iclozel‐Silivaş, Căşeiu‐Dej, Dej‐Ilişua) of Roman
categories of sources: 1. modern cartographic resources roads, in order to observe how these roads were built.
(an Austrian map from 1882, another one from the The most important idea related to the construction of
beginning of the last century); 2. information from the the Roman roads of Dacia Porolissensis is that the
archaeological repertory of Cluj County, where are infrastructure and the superstructure of the roads is
mentioned several points with Roman discoveries in this different from one region to another. Although the

56
ancient juridical sources of the Roman period describe the province from the North of the Danube.
the theoretical principles related with the construction Unfortunately, few of them approach the investigation
of Roman roads, in practice all those things were of the Roman roads that connected these farms.
conditioned by the nature of soil and the geological Evidently, in the Roman era were in function numerous
conditions, which represented everywhere the main secondary roads that assured the connection between
parameters in the art of building roads. The Roman road these farms with the main commercial centers of Dacia.
between Potaissa and Porolissum was a road built by the The study of these problems revels, practically, which
army for the army needs of communication. The other were the main economical routes on the territory of the
Roman roads (between Cluj‐Napoca‐Gilău, Cluj‐Napoca‐ province.
Dej, Dej‐Căşeiu and Dej‐Ilişua), were built for the needs Because it was the most common form of
of the army and also for the needs of civilians. agricultural production, the villa rustica represented
In Dacia Superior, I analyzed the following an economic unity with production designated to the
sectors of Roman roads: Războieni‐Cetate – Bogata, internal market and also for the export. In order to
Apulum‐Brucla, at the West of the Ighiu village (Alba assure the profit of their unities, the owners of these
county), Apulum‐Brucla, 2 km South of Aiud, villas placed them in the most fertile areas of Dacia:
Sarmizegetusa‐Ostrov, Lederata‐Tibiscum, at Bocşa the Valley of Mureş and the south of Oltenia.
Română, Tibiscum‐Ulpia Traiana Sarmizegetusa, The Roman villas were spread not only in
between the localities Iaz and Obreja, Dierna‐Tibiscum, these geographical areas, but also in other regions,
in the point “Rovină”, on the valley of Timiş, Slatina which were colonized from the beginning of the
Nera‐Prigor, at Lăpuşnicel, at the point called “Cetate”, province, as the territory around Napoca, the zone
Micia‐Partiscum, at Simeria (Hunedoara county), from the South of Apulum, the zone close by the
Geoagiu‐Cigmău, Călugăreni and, the last sector, at northern limes and the Banat. In Eastern Dacia, with
Micăsasa. From the analysis of all these sectors these the exception of the Roman farm from Inlăceni, there
are the main observations concerning their are not known until now other villas.
infrastructure: 1. the Roman engineers followed no So, the most important five areas where we
hard‐and‐fast rule, but made their roads according to find the majority of the Roman villas from Dacia are: 1.
the situation and to the materials available, and perhaps the area close to the North‐Western limes; 2. the basin
in a different manner at different times; 2. the number of the river Someşul Mic; 3. the Valley of Mureş; 4.
of the levels, which compose the infrastructure of the Banat; 5. Southern Oltenia (Fig. 64).
Roman roads, is different from a sector of road to It is quite clear that the products obtained
another and also from a point to another of the same from the exploitation of the land were designated to
sector of road. the internal markets from the main cities of Dacia. If
we see the problem from this point of view, it is
3. 6. Roads, villae rusticae, economy, strategy. obvious that in order to be profitable, a villa needed to
Shaping the landscape of Roman Dacia be connected to the main road system of the province.
Speaking in terms of the development of Roman
Economically speaking, the role of the roads agriculture, the location of a villa close to a major
was major. For example, all the Roman farms needed to artery of communication was extremely important.
be connected to the road system, in order to be When this option was not possible, the solution was
profitable. One of the major factors that contributed to the building of a road, in order to connect the villa to
the development of the agriculture in Roman Dacia is the major transport routes.
relied to the existence and the functioning, on the There are two Roman farms positioned close
territory of the province, of numerous villae rusticae, by the north‐western frontier. The first is placed at
some of them very important as constructions. Even if, at Bobâlna (Cluj County) and it had the possibility of
a certain point, the attention of the Romanian scholars connection with the Roman road in the sector Dej‐
was concentrated especially in the investigation of the Căşeiu. The distance between the location of this villa
urban civilization of Roman Dacia (which, actually, is quite and the road is of almost six kilometers. A via vicinalis
normal, considering that the civilization of Dacia was between this villa and the main Roman road was
urban), there were, during time, many researchers and probably in function in the Roman era. This way, the
archaeologists who manifested quite an interest owner of the villa had the possibility to go to the closest
concerning the Roman villas. As a consequence of this city (in this case Porolissum) in order to sell his
fact, today we know almost 70 agricultural farms on the products. The second villa is located in Gârbou (Sălaj
territory of Dacia. Some scholars think that this number is County), close to the road alongside the valley of Almaş.
close to one hundred. In the Romanian archeological This Roman road assured the connection with the
literature there are many studies and articles with direct Roman military camp from Tihău. From the villa to this
reference to the Roman villas in Dacia, to the spread of road there are almost six kilometers.
these Roman farms, their typology and their importance There are 15 villas placed close to the
and role played in the development of the agriculture in valley of the river Someşul Mic. The Roman farms from

57
Dezmir, Sânnicoară, Apahida (Tarcea Mică) and Gherla the sector Apulum ‐ Ulpia Traiana Sarmizegetusa: Strei
are placed alongside the secondary Roman road Cluj ‐ and Sântămăria ‐ Orlea. Close by the city of Hunedoara
Apahida ‐ Jucu de Sus ‐ Bonţida ‐ Iclozel ‐ Silivaş ‐ Băiţa ‐ it is attested a Roman farm at Mănerău. Another
Buneşti ‐ Gherla ‐ Dej. This road is archaeologically Roman farm was discovered at Orăştioara de Sus.
known in the sectors Iclozel‐Silivaş and Băiţa‐Buneşti. Along the Roman road via Bumbeşti‐Vâlcan Pass we
The Roman farm from Ciumăfaia is placed find the villa rustica from Hobiţa. All these Roman
North‐West of the village, at 13 kilometers from the road farms were placed relatively close by the capital of
alongside the river Someşul Mic, on the valley of Chidea, Dacia, Ulpia Traiana Sarmizegetusa.
in the point “Păluta”. The owner of this villa, known from In Banat, until now, we are able to locate
the inscriptions, is Publius Aelius Maximus. He lived in four Roman farms, at Ramna, Brebu, Apadia and
Napoca but he administrated in the same time his villa. Caransebeş. In this region the land is fertile and
The Roman villa from Chinteni is located suitable for agricultural activities. Another villa in
close to the same Roman road Cluj‐Dej. The Roman farm Banat is the one from Dalboşeţ, located along a
is placed 10 km North‐West from this road. The access secondary Roman road.
to the markets from Napoca was, in this case, easy. The The Roman farms are concentrated, from
Roman villas from Baciu, Suceagu and Viştea are spread the point of view of the quality of the terrain, in the
alongside or close to the imperial Roman road Napoca‐ most fertile zones of Dacia. This is quite normal,
Porolissum. because the owners knew the importance of the
Another region with Roman farms is the area terrain in order to achieve a good production.
close by the same imperial Roman road, in the sector From the other point of view, if we look at
Tureni‐Aiton. These villas are those from Miceşti, the map with the repartition of the Roman farms in
Mărtineşti, Vâlcele and Aiton. All of them had in the Dacia we can clearly see that the majority of them are
Roman era great opportunities for connection with the spread alongside the main Roman roads of Dacia.
main road of the province. The Roman farm from Izvoru Several of them are located close by the main artery of
Crişului is placed along the secondary road Napoca‐ communication Tibiscum‐Ulpia Traiana Sarmizegetusa‐
Gilău‐Bologa. Apulum‐Potaissa‐Napoca‐Porolissum: Ramna, Brebu,
The majority of the Roman farms located Apadia, Caransebeş, Sântămăria‐Orlea, Strei, Mănerău,
along the Valley of Mureş are close to the Roman road. Şibot, Răhău, Straja, Cricău, Ciumbrud, Aiud, Ciugudu
This road is also known from the Tabula Peutingeriana de Sus, Gligoreşti, Călăraşi, Aiton, Miceşti, Vâlcele,
and connects the settlements Turda, Războieni‐Cetate, Baciu, Suceagu and Viştea.
Aiud and Alba Iulia. From this point, the main road Alongside the Roman roads Sucidava‐
continues to South, until it reaches the capital of Dacia, Romula and Islaz‐Romula we find another big group of
Ulpia Traiana Sarmizegetusa. Another Roman road goes villas, those from Orlea, Celei I and II, Vişina Veche,
from Apulum, alongside the inferior course of the river Brastavăţu, Grădinele, Vlădila I and II, Deveselu,
Mureş, passes through Deva and Veţel and then reaches Caracal, Vădastra and Urzica (between Sucidava and
Szeged, in Pannonia Inferior. Romula) and Tia Mare, Cilieni, Rusăneşti, Brezuica,
Here are, listed from North‐East to South‐ Slăveni and Fărcaşele (between Islaz and Romula).
West, the Roman farms located along the valley of Mureş: The other Roman farms are located close to
Călăraşi, Gligoreşti, Ciugudu de Sus, Aiud, Ciumbrud, secondary roads (deverticulae). These roads are,
Cricău, Straja, Răhău, Şibot and Deva. generally, from the point of view of the infrastructure,
Two Roman farms benefited of particular viae glareae stratae.
locations, those from Miercurea Sibiului and Apoldu de Therefore, numerous farms have a proper
Sus‐Levejoare. They were both placed in the Depression position in direct rapport with the communication
of Apold, a small geographical unit belonging to the system of the province. This situation is due to the
Secaşului Plateau. This region, traversed by the river excellent organization of the Roman road system in
Apold, had always a strong agricultural function. The Dacia. The main and secondary roads are equally
land is very fertile and for this reason we find here these spread in the territory, in order to assure good
villas. They also have an ideal position in direct relation connections. The spatial integration of Dacia by the
to the communication system of central Dacia. These second and third century A.D. had a number of
two Roman farms are positioned along the main important implications for the nature of trade and the
commercial and strategic road alongside the valley of economy of the province.
Olt: Romula ‐ Caput Stenarum ‐ Apulum. This is the third
road illustrated in Tabula Peutingeriana. This road 3. 7. The Roman roads after the
assured, in the Roman era, the connection between the abandonment of Dacia
South and the center of Dacia. It was constructed in the
first years after the conquest of Dacia. There is a strong relation between ancient
Another group of villae rusticae is and modern roads, especially in areas like the former
concentrated close by the main Roman road of Dacia in Dacia, where almost no medieval roads were built.

58
Therefore, to discover former roads, one should consult simple and also logical, if we think at the fact that after
the modern maps, where some of the modern viae the Roman occupation we do not know other major
vicinales might be former Roman roads. Or, as Raymond works concerning the road infrastructure. It is possible
Chevallier noticed, the map of the Roman roads exists, that some of these Roman roads were repaired in a
virtually, on the modern maps. So, can one establish a certain moment, but the majority were used
relationship between the routes of the Roman roads and successfully until the modern era, when new roads
the routes of the actual roads? And if we really can were built.
discuss the equation Roman roads – modern roads, what The first conclusive observation is that the
are the arguments? relief and the hidrography conditioned the placement
In Roman Dacia there are numerous cases of within the geographical space of the roads. The Middle
sectors from different Roman roads, overlapped by the Age is a period when no major roads were built north
current roads. I defined two main categories: 1. Roman of the Danube, within the territory corresponding to
roads that today are partly overlapped by modern roads; the former Roman Dacia. From this point of view, there
2. Roman roads, which were used successfully from the is an advantage to study the roads of Dacia, because
Roman era until the present time, without, any change we have the possibility to identify easier some sector of
regarding their infrastructure and superstructure. Roman roads, by using cartographic instruments. As a
In the first category I grouped five sectors of conclusion, the methodology of the research of the
Roman roads, all of them belonging to the imperial road: Roman roads must be extended, by using other
1. the sector from the entrance in the city of Cluj‐ different sciences and also by analysing the
Napoca; 2. the sector between Cluj‐Napoca and Aiton; 3. cartographic documentation (the old military Austrian
the sector between Aiton and Tureni; 4. the sector maps made for the territory of Transylvania and the
between Tureni and the entrance in Turda Nouă; 5. the current topographical maps).
Roman road between Turda – Bogata – Călăraşi –
Războieni‐Cetate. In these sectors, my observations on 3. 8. Concluding remarks. The roads of
the terrain have shown that the Roman roads were very Roman Dacia
bad preserved. In some points I was not able to identify
this road at the surface of the terrain. Between Turda The antique sources (cartographic, epigraphic
and Tureni, the actual European road 15 overlaps on and geographic sources) offer important information
long distances the Roman road; this situation remains regarding the roads from Roman Dacia. As I
the same between the localities Tureni and Gheorghieni, emphasized, Tabula Peutingeriana mentions the main
where the Roman road is overlapped in many points by roads. The Roman milestones are few, comparing with
the current road. So, from Turda to Cluj‐Napoca, via other provinces, but important in establishing the
Aiton, the Roman road is located parallel or overlapped chronology of the Roman roads. The Geography of
by the modern roads. The explanation is of Ptolemy indicates only the important routes in Dacia.
geomorphologic and topographical nature: the Roman The Trajan’s Column represents a source that must be
engineers have chosen the best alternative to build the used with extremely precaution. The medieval and
route of this Roman road, in order to avoid the difficult modern sources were also very helpful for us.
areas, with small slopes and curves with large radius. In Dacia Porolissensis the following roads are
This alternative was accepted and of course adopted by identified in the terrain: 1. Potaissa‐Napoca; 2.
the engineers from the modern period, when they have Napoca‐Şardu; 3. Sutoru‐Porolissum; 4. the
built the actual roads. ramification of the imperial Roman road to the military
In the second category I have included those legionary fortress from Potaissa (today Turda, Cluj
sectors of Roman roads used until now: 1. the Roman County); 5. the road Turda‐Războieni. After terrain
imperial road in the sector Baciu ‐ Şardu; 2. the sector researches, I identified, described and mapped the
between the localities Iclozel and Silivaş, where the following Roman roads: 1. the ramification
remains of the Roman road remained clearly at the Gheorghieni‐Dezmir‐Someşeni; 2. the Roman road
surface on the main street of the village; 3. the sector Turda ‐ Mihai Viteazu ‐ Corneşti ‐ Moldoveneşti ‐ Buru
between Băiţa and Buneşti, with a length of almost six ‐ Sălciua ‐ Baia de Arieş ‐ Bistra ‐ Roşia Montană; 3. the
kilometres; this road is used even today; 4. the sector Roman road Cluj‐Napoca ‐ Someşeni ‐ Apahida ‐ Jucu ‐
between Dej and Căşeiu, still in use in the years ’60 of Bonţida ‐ Iclozel ‐ Iclod ‐ Silivaş ‐ Băiţa ‐ Buneşti –
the last century; 5. the Roman road alongside the valley Gherla ‐ Dej, identified in the terrain in the sectors
of Mureş, in the sector Aţintiş – Cecălaca, which passes Cluj‐Napoca ‐ Someşeni ‐ Apahida ‐ Jucu ‐ Bonţida,
through the middle of the first village mentioned; 6. the Iclozel ‐ Silivaş, Băiţa ‐ Buneşti, Buneşti ‐ Gherla ‐ Dej;
Roman road from Geoagiu‐Băi, outstanding preserved 4. the Roman road Gherla ‐ Sic; 5. the Roman road
and used until nowadays; 7. the sector of the Roman Cluj‐Napoca ‐ Floreşti ‐ Gilău; 6. the Roman road Gilău
road between Sarmizegetusa and Ostrov. All these roads ‐ Izvoru Crişului ‐ Bologa; 7. the Roman road alongside
were used during the Middle Age until the modern the valley of the river Mureş in the sector Iernut‐
period. How can one explain that? The answer is quite Cipău; 8. the Roman road Turda ‐ Buru ‐ Iara ‐

59
Băişoara; 9. the road Turda ‐ Luna ‐ Luncani ‐ Gligoreşti; sources. Anyway, I think that a figure more closet o
10. the Roman road alongside the river Valea Largă; 11. the former reality is 3500 miles of roads build in the
the Roman road alongside the river Pârâul de Câmpie; former province of Dacia.
12. the Roman road Cluj‐Napoca ‐ Apahida ‐ Căianu ‐
Sărmaşu ‐ Glodeni; 13. the road Bologa ‐ Almaşu Mare ‐ 3. 9. The bridges of Roman Dacia
Sutoru; 14. the road Bologa ‐ Buciumi ‐ Românaşi; 15.
the Roman frontier road: Tihău ‐ Ileanda ‐ Căşeiu; 16. Today we know data concerning these
the road Dej ‐ Ilişua ‐ Orheiu Bistriţei ‐ Brâncoveneşti; 17. bridges from several categories of documents: 1. antic
the Roman road alongside the valley of Mureş: cartographic sources, as Tabula Peutingeriana, which
Brâncoveneşti ‐ Cristeşti ‐ Războieni‐Cetate. mentions three place names with direct reference to
In Dacia Superior the following roads were bridges: Pons Augusti, Pons Aluti, Pons Vetus; 2. the
identified in the terrain: 1. Lederata‐Tibiscum; 2. Dierna‐ scenes from the Trajan’s Column; 3. modern
Tibiscum; 3. Lederata ‐ Dalboşeţ ‐ Lăpuşnicel ‐ Petnic – cartographic sources, especially Austrian military
Mehadia; 4. Surduc‐Ramna; 5. Vărădia ‐ Dognecea ‐ maps; 4. archaeological researches and terrain
Bocşa Română; 6. the Roman imperial road Tibiscum ‐ observations. The location of the Roman bridges in
Ulpia Traiana – Apulum; 7. the Roman imperial road in Dacia can be approximated also if one knows exactly
the sector Apulum ‐ Brucla – Salinae; 8. Cigmău‐ the routes of the roads and the elements of the
Germisara; 9. Apulum ‐ Micia – Partiscum; 10. Apulum ‐ landscape (rivers, rivulets). My presentation will
Ampelum ‐ Alburnus Maior; 11. the road along the valley describe the bridges from Dacia, based on
of the river Târnava Mică: Apulum‐Obreja‐Târnăveni‐ archaeological and historical research.
Sărăţeni; 12. the Roman road along the valley of the
river Târnava Mare: Apulum‐Obreja‐Micăsasa‐ 3. 9. 1. The Peutinger map and the bridges
Sighişoara‐Odorhei; 13. the Roman road Apulum ‐
Sacidava ‐ Caput Stenarum; 14. the Roman road that There are circa 30 place names on Tabula
connected the legionary fortresses located along the Peutingeriana with direct reference to bridges: Ponte
Eastern frontier of the province: Călugăreni ‐ Sărăţeni ‐ Abei (I 2), Adriani (V 5), Aeli, Aeni, Aerarium, Aluti (VII
Inlăceni ‐ Odorhei ‐ Sânpaul ‐ Olteni ‐ Breţcu; 15. the 5), aufidi (VI 5), Ponte Augusti (VII 5), Aurioli,
Roman road Caput Stenarum‐Cincşor‐Feldioara‐Hoghiz‐ Campano, drusi, Dubris, longo, Pontem, Ponte
Olteni‐Angustia. Mansuetina, Nartiae (I 2), Nerviae, Saravi, Sarvix,
In Dacia Inferior, based on available data, I was Scaldis (II 3), Secies, sociorum, sonti (IV 5), Tiluri, Ucasi,
able to identify, describe and map the road along the vetere (VIII 1), Ulcae, Zita Municipium, ad Duos Pontes,
valley of Olt, Via Alutana, from Sucidava to Caput Pontes Tessenios, Pontiae insulae, Pontibus, Pontici.
Stenarum and the road Drobeta‐Bumbeşti‐Pasul Vâlcan‐ Three settlements with reference to bridges are
Ulpia Traiana. mentioned in Dacia (Fig. 65).
In the province Dacia Porolissensis the Romans Pons Aluti (today Ioneştii Govorei, Olt County)
built four main roads, which have a total lenght of circa is positioned along the road called Via Alutana, an
120 kilometers (circa 80 Roman miles), and 15 important, strategic route, which connected the
secondary roads, with a total lenght of circa 700 regions from South with those inside the Carpathian
kilometers (circa 475 Roman miles). So, the Roman have Mountains. The road is depicted in the Peutinger map.
built in this province approximately 555 miles of roads. The distance between Rusidava (today Momoteşti) and
After I analyzed the roads from Dacia Superior, I reached Ponte Aluti is XIIII MP (20,699 km). The Roman road was
the following conclusions. The Romans have built nine identified on the right bank of the river Olt. It connected
main roads, with a total lenght of circa 1220 kilometers the Roman military fortresses placed from South to
and 24 secondary roads with a total lenght of circa 1200 North, along the limes. The place name Pons Aluti
kilometri. So, the Roman have built in this province probably refers to a bridge built by Romans to overpass
approximately 2420 kilometers (circa 1636 miles) of one of the affluent of the river Olt, possible the river
roads. After I analyzed the roads from Dacia Superior, I called Guguianca or the valley called Miclişoaia.
reached the following conclusions. The Romans have Pons Vetus (today Câineni, Vâlcea County) is
built three main roads, with a total lenght of 650 located along the same road, in a strategic point.
kilometers (439 miles) and three secondary roads, with a Today there are two settlements here: Câinenii Mari,
total lenght of 530 kilometers (358 miles). So, the on the right bank of the river Olt, and Câinenii Mici, on
Roman have built in this province approximately 1180 the left bank. The Roman road and the military
kilometers (798 miles) of roads. fortress are positioned on the right bank. This point
As a conclusion, I can appreciate that the total represents the beginning of the narrow valley of Olt.
length of the roads in Dacia is approximately 4420 Until the XXth century, a custom house functioned
kilometers (2989 Roman miles). Of course, other sectors here, because of its position, between two historical
of roads were destroyed during time, and today they can provinces: Muntenia and Transylvania. Pons Vetus
only be reconstructed based on cartographic or other probably refers to another Roman bridge, over the

60
river called Valea Urii. The road was built in the first valley called Căpuş. The position of the military camp
years after the conquest of Dacia, or maybe during the from Sutoru and the route of the Roman road imply
two military campaigns. here the presence of a bridge.
Pons Augusti (today Marga, Caraş‐Severin The city of Napoca, positioned in the valley of
County) is positioned alongside the valley of Bistra, close Someş, is relatively little known, because is it
to Sarmizegetusa. In the vicinity of this point, at Zăvoi, overlapped by the medieval and current city. Even
the Romans built a marching fortress during the Dacian with this situation, some elements can be
wars. From here, the Roman imperial road was reconstructed. The Roman bridge should be located
identified in the terrain and on the Austrian military close to the current bridge over the river Someş.
maps from the XIXth century. The bridge was built, At Potaissa, we do not posses visible remains
probably, over a Southern affluent of Bistra, close to the of the Roman bridge. We know, from written
current village Marga. In fact, here, in the medieval documents of the XIXth century, that this bridge was
period, this bridge functioned and it is mentioned in a positioned close to the mill called ‘Bethlen’. This
document from September 9, 1439, signed by the construction is situated on the right bank of the river
Hungarian king, Albert of Habsburg: pontem in via Arieş, circa 275 m South‐West of the current bridge
Vaskapu versus Karansebes.411 over Arieş, close to the confluence of the Sănduleşti
valley with Arieş (Fig. 69). The Roman bridge was
3. 9. 2. The Trajan’s Column mentioned in 1833 by J. Ercsey, who found
construction materials used for the bridge in the Arieş
Bridges are quite numerously depicted and valley. In 1882 the ruins of one pillar from the right
most of wooden‐framed construction (Fig. 66). Many of bank of the river were visible, and on the left side
these scenes where bridges appear are impossible to were visible wood structures. In this point the width of
locate in the field nowadays. Another aspect is the the river is around 60 m. 42 stone blocks were dragged
repetition of such scenes, because of the propagandistic out of the Arieş valley and used at different building in
character of the monument. Trajan's bridge (Fig. 67) was the town.
the first bridge built over the lower Danube. It was The remains of the Roman bridge from Dej
projected by Apollodorus and constructed East from the were reported for the first time in the literature by
Iron Gates, close to Drobeta‐Turnu Severin. The Iuliu Marţian in 1920.412 He observed the traces of the
structure was 1,135 meters in length (the Danube is 800 pillars in the valley of the river Someş. In another book,
meters‐wide in that area), 15 meters in width, and the same Marţian offers new data.413 The most accurate
reached 19 meters in height (measured from the river's description of the bridge was made by George
surface) (Fig. 68). It was built in a short period of time Mânzatu.414 He published a plan of the bridge, at scale
(between AD 103 and AD105). 1:1000, with the exact place of the bridge. The position
of the bridge is also confirmed by the route of the
3. 9. 3. Austrian maps Roman road.
The remains of the bridge from Gherla were
There is important information on these mentioned at the beginning of the XIXth century when
documents concerning the Roman settlements or roads the modern bridge was built. With this occasion, stone
or bridges. An interesting example is offered by a map at blocks used by local people as construction material
the scale 1:75.000. Close to the fortress from Hoghiz it is were discovered. One exact cartographic observation
written „Standort des Römerburg Pons Vetus“. The was made by J. Ornstein, with the position of the
fortress is located on the left bank of the river Olt. The Roman military camp from here.
Roman road was constructed on the right bank. So the At Gligoreşti, the position of the bridge can
Romans built here a bridge to connect the fortress with only be supposed because of the route of the Roman
the road. road. Archaeological excavations were made here, but
with no results. The village of Gligoreşti is rich in
3. 9. 4. Archaeological researches Roman traces. A statio functioned here. Many other
bridges existed in Dacia. Unfortunately, today we can
During the summer of 2008 archaeological only estimate their number, according to the routes of
excavations made in the military vicus from Porolissum the Roman roads.
had as results, among others, the discovery of a Roman
bridge pillar, built over the river called “Citera”. The
bridge was built on the route of the main imperial
Roman road. A supposed Roman bridge can be located
at Sutoru (Optatiana?). Here the Roman road which
goes alongside Almaşului valley had to cross over the 412
Marţian 1920, 17.
413
Marţian 1921, 25.
411 414
Rusu 1996, 249‐252. Mânzatu 1926.

61
 CHAPTER 4. RECREATING THE LANDSCAPE OF ROMAN because the landscape was ‘untouched’ and these
DACIA USING HISTORICAL 19TH CENTURY elements were more visible comparing to nowadays.
CARTOGRAPHY, DIGITAL DATA AND GIS The geographical space was free of highways, or big
cities. In fact, the density of modern roads,
4. 1. Premises. The topography and the settlements and other infrastructure elements was
landscape of Roman Dacia smaller. The economic development of the last 50
years dramatically changed this landscape. Sometimes,
In the last 22 years, the attempts of the central this economic ‘interests’ leaded to the destruction of
institutions to create, use and update a national the archaeological patrimony.
database with all the archaeological sites of Roman The Romanian archaeologists and historians
Dacia have failed. All these data are available online.415 made efforts to know the topography of Roman Dacia.
The reasons of the failure mentioned above are: 1. most They use classical methods, i.e. fieldwalkings and
of the archaeological data used were actually copied for excavations, in a period of ‘romantic archeology’,
older sources (the archaeological repertories of several when there were no economic pressures, no
counties); 2. the databases contain only extremely ‘deadlines’, no preventive archaeology. During the
general information about each site. This leads to 1950’s, a project started in Romania, focusing on the
another problem: the location of a large number of creation of the National Archaeological Repertory. A
these sites is a hard task, because of the inexact big problem occurred during this period. Because of
topographic data provided; 3. the lack of new methods the communist regime, the topographical maps
to discover, evaluate and map new archaeological sites published by the Military Topographical Direction
(the study of older maps, the use of aerial archaeology). (Direcţia Topografică Militară) were strictly considered
Compared to other programs developed in Europe (we secret. The aerial photographs had the same status.
would like to mention the National Mapping Program Or, to produce topographic studies and landscape
developed in Great Britain, with excellent results416), the analysis, one need, first, maps, otherwise it is
attempts made in Romania are, until now, useless, in impossible to realize achieve this task. After the
lack of the use of new methods. One of these methods is 1990’s, this situation changed, but slowly. The first
the analysis of each archaeological region, the creation archaeological repertory published was the one for the
of a real GIS database, the mapping of the sites using Cluj County (1992).417 This work established a pattern
digital methods. for the future publications of this kind. The modern
In this chapter I will use digital data, former settlements were alphabetically described, starting
maps from the 18th and 19th century, archaeological with the earliest discoveries (prehistory) and
information, and aerial vertical photographs, to continuing chronologically, to Roman times and post
reconstruct several elements of the landscape of the roman discoveries. Almost every description was
former province Roman Dacia, including fortresses, completed with ‘maps’, which, in fact, were hand
roads and watch‐towers. copies of portions from topographical maps, including
In the XIXth century there were major only the surfaces close to every settlement described.
improvements in mapping within Europe. They took After 1992, other repertories were published: Alba,418
three forms. First, the publication of cadastral maps, Mureș,419 Covasna,420 Arad,421 Harghita,422 Sibiu,423
made for taxation of administrative purposes, was a big Brașov,424 Caraș‐Severin,425 Hunedoara,426 and Sălaj,427
step. The second major development was the growing but unfortunately, methodologically nothing changed.
importance of large‐scale military surveys. The third
417
form is the representation, within these maps, of Crişan, Bărbulescu, Chirilă, Vasiliev, Winkler 1992.
418
elements which formed the Roman landscape. Anyone Moga, Ciugudean 1995.
419
who studied the modern cartography noticed an Lazăr 1995.
420
’appetite’ to map all the terrain details, including Cavruc 1998.
421
elements of the topography of the former Roman Hügel 1999.
422
Cavruc 2000.
provinces: roads, settlements, bridges, milestones, 423
Luca, Pinter, Georgescu 2003. Also available online at
legionary or auxiliary fortresses, stationes, mansiones, http://arheologie.ulbsibiu.ro/publicatii/bibliotheca/repsibiu/
thermae, villae rusticae, aqueducts etc. This ‘appetite’ or cuprins.htm.
this abundance of such details in the 19th century maps 424
Costea 1996.
425
has a logical explanation. Mapping former Roman Luca 2004; Luca 2004a; Luca 2005; Luca 2006.
landscape elements was easier in the 19th century, 426
Luca 2005a (available online at:
http://arheologie.ulbsibiu.ro/publicatii/bibliotheca/xvi/reper
toriu%20arheologic%20hunedoara%20mic.pdf); Luca 2005b
415
See at http://www.cimec.ro/Arheologie.html (e‐Patrimoniu. (available online at: http://arheologie.ulbsibiu.ro/publicatii
Institutul de memorie culturală, cIMeC.ro). /bibliotheca/chunedoara/cuprins.htm).
416 427
http://www.english‐ Luca, Gudea 2010. Available at:
heritage.org.uk/professional/research/landscapes‐and‐ http://www.brukenthalmuseum.ro/pdf/Biblioteca_Brukenth
areas/national‐mapping‐programme. al/XLV/BBXLV.pdf.

62
So, when preventive archaeology started to be practiced 4. 3. Cartography and archaeological
in Romania (from 2000’s until now), the archaeologists researches in Romania. Unsolved issues
realized that they don’t have many instruments of work,
no maps presenting uniformly the discoveries from a The online databases presenting the
certain area, from a certain period, no micro‐regional archaeological sites from Romania
topographic studies. (http://ran.cimec.ro/) record 13852 sites. Of these,
2551 sites belong to the Roman period. Nowadays, of
4. 2. Modern cartography. Maps used for the all sites, circa 90 per cent of reported sites, included in
identification of the archaeological sites this online database, and in the regional gazetteers
(archaeological repertories) are just indicated by finds:
After the end of the Seven Years’ War against artefacts (mainly ceramic fragments) or building
Prussia (1756–1763), a cartographical registration of the materials scattered on the ground surface.
Habsburgic Monarchy’s crown lands was commissioned Nowadays, we are dealing with a terrible
by the empress Maria Theresa. The surveying lasted for situation concerning these sites: 1. a lack of a real,
twenty‐three years (1763–1787) and resulted in 3589 comprehensive, cartographic digital database, where
hand‐drawn coloured map sheets. After the foundation all the archaeological sites should be mapped; 2. a lack
of the Austrian Empire (Kaiserstaat Österreich) in 1804, regarding the use of aerial archaeology to reconstruct
the 2nd survey of 1806–1869 was based on the first the elements of the landscape of Roman Dacia; 3.
network of horizontal control points (triangulation). The detailed investigations in the terrain, supported by
entire area of the Austro‐Hungarian Monarchy was detailed cartographic analysis concerning
mapped during the 3rd survey, in only eighteen years archaeological sites.
(1869–1887). Especially the second and the third The Romanian archaeologists and historians
military survey are masterpieces. They are outstanding made great efforts, during time, to know the
in quality regarding its data content, drawing features topography of Roman Dacia. Until recently, they used
and aesthetic appearance. The archaeologists classical methods, i.e. fieldwalkings and excavations, in
understood their importance and after the publication a period of ‘romantic archaeology’, when there were
of these maps they started to use them to reconstruct no economic pressures, no ‘deadlines’, no preventive
the landscape of some former Roman provinces. So far, archaeology. But nowadays, when large infrastructure
the following DVDs were published:428 1. The First projects (highways, commercial or residential centres)
Military Surveying. Transylvania and Temes (April 2005); began all over the country, preventive archaeology is
2. The First Military Survey: Königreich Ungarn – the only solution to protect, save and capitalize the
Georeferenced version. It contains 3400 colorful, archaeological patrimony.
handmade, 1:28.800 scale map sheets, and 23000 So, massive infrastructure projects, combined
names of 9974 settlements with sophisticated search with the law regarding the planning, have requested
engine (October 2004); 3. Second Military Survey of maximum efforts from archaeologists, but,
Hungarian Kingdom and Temes (December 2005); 4. The unfortunately, the documentation regarding the
Second Military Surveying: Kingdom of Hungary and archaeological sites remain, in big parts, at the level of
Temes ‐ Georeferenced version (December 2005); 5. the years ’70.
First & second military survey of Transylvania. This DVD This represents, in my opinion, a huge lack in
contains the Transylvanian sheets of the first and second the Romanian scientific community. We are dealing
military surveys of the Habsburg Empire (November with a terrible situation. The European Convention for
2007); 6. The Third Military Survey 1869‐1887: Ungarn, the protection of the archaeological patrimony from
Siebenbürgen, Kroatien‐Slawonien, 1:25.000 (March La Valetta (adopted at La Valetta on 16th of January
2007); 7. The Third Military Survey 1869‐1887: 1992 and ratified by Romania by the law no.150 from
Österreichisch‐Ungarischen Monarchie, 1:75.000 (March 24 July 1997) asks, at the beginning, the following: “…it
2007). is important to institute, where they do not yet exist,
A very valuable cartographic source for the appropriate administrative and scientific supervision
identification of former elements of the Roman procedures…”. In 2000, the government adopted the
landscape is the group of military maps realized at the GO 43/2000 concerning the protection of the
beginning of the last century. These are officially named archaeological repository. But in applying these
‘directory plans’ (‘Planuri directoare de tragere’). These
maps contain old toponyms, points, places of former regarding these maps. So far, within their project entitled
Roman fortresses, or traces of former Roman roads.429 ‘eHarta’ (http://earth.unibuc.ro/articole/eHarta), they
scanned and digitized 1425 map sheets, from a total of 1700
(covering the whole territory of Romania). These maps can
428
See additional data at: be downloaded for free at:
http://www.arcanum.hu/english/kiadvanyaink/terkep/. http://earth.unibuc.ro/harti/download‐planuri‐tragere.php.
429
Vasile Crăciunescu, Ioan Rus, Ştefan Constantinescu, Ionuţ In this section, the authors offer a total number of 2341 map
Ovejanu initiated in 2010 and finished in 2011 a project sheets.

63
legislative measures, the sites needed to be properly to show how Roman fortresses, watch‐towers, or
known and mapped. Roman roads, were projected and positioned in the
During the 1950’s, a project started in Romania, most suitable areas.
focusing on the creation of the National Archaeological The fortress from Bologa is positioned in the
Repertory. Soon after this moment, due to lack of eastern part of the village, 200 m south of the current
cooperation between specialists, the project was road Bologa‐Huedin, and 300 m east of the valley
partially abandoned. After the 1990’s, this situation called Hențu. The fortress431 is located in the triangle
changed, but very slowly. The first archaeological formed by the valley of the river Hențu with the valley
repertory published was the one for the Cluj County of Crișul Repede. The camp is a rectangle with the
(1992). This work established a pattern for the future dimensions 205 x 121 m. The Roman engineers choose
publications of this kind. The modern settlements were strategic positions for a series of watch towers
alphabetically described, started with the earliest positioned along a 66 kilometers line, above the Meseș
discoveries (prehistory) and continuing chronologically, Mountains. These towers were able to visually
to Roman times and post roman discoveries. The communicate with the fortresses positioned in the
topographic indications and the maps are, in many valleys of the river Agrij and Almaș: Bologa, Buciumi,
cases, almost useless. The indications in text, in many Românași, Romita, and Porolissum. In this particular
cases, are formulated like this: “…in that part of the case, the fortress from Bologa communicates with
village…”, “…on the territory of the settlement X…” or several towers, positioned in the highest points
“…. South, North, East or West of this around it. The fortress is positioned in the visual range
point/road/terrace/river etc.” The maps published in of the tower from Măgura Bologa. This tower also
these repertories are extremely general, sometimes communicates with another one, discovered of the hill
with no scale, difficult to read. called ‘Vârfu Ţiclu’ (altitude 760,2 m). The tower from
Another problem is related to the information the last mentioned point visually communicates with
contained in the List of the Historical Monuments (Lista other 8 towers, all of them raised on the highest hills.
Monumentelor Istorice / LMI). This list can be consulted Our analysis using Global Mapper (‘Shed Analysis’)
online.430 In many cases, archaeological structures found started from archaeological data, which confirm the
at the ground surface, mainly consisting in ceramic existence of a tower on the hill ‘Vârfu Ţiclu’.432
fragments, are categorized and registered as sites We can see that from this point one could
belonging to the category A (sites with national have visual contact with all the other towers. The
importance). All the records have individual codes northernmost one is positioned on the hill ‘Dealu
(random example: CJ‐I‐m‐A‐07180.01). ‘m’ refers to Grebenului’ (‘Vărfu Grebeni’, altitude 970,0 m). The
monuments, ‘I’ refers to the category Archaeology. ‘A’ distance between this tower and the one from ‘Vârfu
represents the first group of monuments, of national Ţiclu’ is, in straight line, of 6732,5 meters. All this
and universal value. ‘B’ represents the second category: visual camp is covered from south to north, from
monuments representative for the local cultural ‘Vârfu Ţiclu’. From this point one could also
patrimony. This classification is based on the law 422/ communicate with the tower positioned 1547 meters
18th July 2001 regarding the protection of the historical south, on the hill ‘Măgura Bologa’. And, to sum up, the
monuments and the government ordinances no.
2682/2003 (regarding the approval of methodological
regulations for the classification and the register of the 431
See Gudea 1997, Gudea 1997a and Gudea 1997b, 39‐42.
historical monuments, and of the List of the historical 432
I used for all our case studies: 1. Software ‐ Global
monuments) and 562/2003 (elaborated by the Ministry Mapper 12; 2. Digital elevation data (SRTM – Shuttle Radar
of Transportation, regarding the technical regulation Topography Mission), Romania, resolution ‐ 45 m. I
focused on the regional plans). In order to update, and overlapped the topographic maps, 1:25 000 scale, covering
maintain an accurate database, continuous terrain the whole territory of Romania. Further, to provide
investigations must be realized, because otherwise sites information for our goal, I use the commands ‚map texture’
which no longer exist (destroyed by agricultural works, and ‚shed analysis’. I digitized, for each case, the position of
for example) are registered in the lists. former Roman fortresses, or roads. I also used, to work with
accuracy, all information available from older maps,
especially those realized by the Austrian cartographers, to
4. 4. Case study: the defensive system around
identify and to maps these former elements of the Roman
the Roman fortress from Bologa (Cluj County) landscape. I would like to thank my colleague Ciprian
Moldovan, from the Faculty of Geography Cluj‐Napoca,
Because of its terrain and its particular position, Babeş‐Bolyai University, Department of Regional Geography
Dacia is packed with examples of what we call the and Territorial Planning, who helped met o produce these
adaptation of the constructions to the general maps. SOme of this data were presented in 19‐20 April
conditions of the terrain. My examples will provide data 2012., in Barcelona, at the international conference entitled
Digital approaches to cartographic heritage, organized by
the ICA Commision on Digital Technologies in Cartographic
430
http://arhiva.cultura.ro/Files/GenericFiles/LMI‐2010.pdf. Heritage and the Institut Cartogràfic de Catalunya.

64
fortress is visible from ‘Vârfu Ţiclu’ and ‘Măgura Bologa’. the hill called ‘Cetate’ (altitude 375 m), positioned
So, using all these data, I reached an important west of the current city. This place was also close to a
conclusion. The fortress from Bologa communicated stone quarry (from here up to north, to the quarry
with the towers from ‘Vârfu Ţiclu’ and ‘Măgura Bologa’. from Sănduleşti, the distance, in straight line, is circa
The last mentioned tower had visual contact with other 5,5 kilometers). Another important aspect was related
9 towers, all positioned north of these two, all on high to the water source for the camp and the ancient city.
hills. This source was identified and used by the Romans
close to the stone quarry. The plateau provides a slight
4. 5. The Roman imperial road between slope: towards north‐west, where porta decumana
Potaissa and Napoca was built, the terrain is a little higher comparing to the
east. From the north‐eastern corner of the fortress
In 106 A.D. Dacia became Roman province. one could easily visually observe the Roman road up to
Before the conquest, during the two military campaigns the top of the hill called ‘Dealul Dăbăgăului’. Our shed
in 101‐102 A.D. and 105‐106 A.D., the Roman engineers, analysis demonstrates that towards north, there was
leaded by Balbus, succeeded to project and to start the visibility up to Aiton, and in south, all the valley of
construction of the first Dacian ‘highway’: the road Arieş was visible, almost to the point when this river
starting from the Danube, towards the Banat region, flows into the Mureş River. Once again, using digital
including two branches ‐ the Western road, from data, combined, obviously, with archaeological
Lederata to Tibiscum, and the Eastern road, from Dierna information, we can demonstrate the powerful
to Tibiscum. preoccupation of the Roman engineers to carefully
In fact, these two branches were the two lines occupy the geographical space, and to create strategic
used by the Roman army to penetrate the Dacian and economic advantages using this space.
territory. Connecting together at Tibiscum, the road
continued along the valley of the river Bistra, in the 4. 6. The Roman fortress from Gherla (Cluj
narrow corridor also known with the name ‘the Iron County). Historical maps and digital data
Gates of Transylvania’, until it reached the future capital
of Dacia, Ulpia Traiana Sarmizegetusa. From here, the Locating Roman fortresses on modern maps
road continued to North, towards Apulum, Potaissa, is a topic which entered into my attention from many
Napoca, ending at Porolissum, the northernmost point years now. The method I use is simple. The landscape
of the Dacian province. From south to north, the road changed dramatically in the last 100 years or more.
has a total length of circa 450 kilometers. The The Austrian surveyors, and the cartographers, in
construction started in 101‐102 A.D. and probably ended order to accomplish their task, i.e. mapping the
around 110 A.D. We know this from an interesting territory of the Habsburgic and later the Austro‐
discovery of the 18th century. In 1758, at Aiton (Cluj Hungarian Empire, recorded almost every detail in the
County) a Roman milestone was discovered, with an terrain. The results? Several former Roman fortresses
inscription informing that this road was constructed were marked and described in these maps.
during Trajan. According to the inscription, the road was I will start our examples with the Roman
built in 108 A.D. Probably soon, in the next two years, military fortress from Gherla (Cluj County). The
the Romans succeeded to finalize the construction of fortress is positioned on the right bank of the river
the most important road in Dacia. Someșul Mic,434 in a triangle formed by the river, the
Between Potaissa and Napoca this road was so‐called Canalul Morii (the Mill‐Chanel) and the
extensively identified in the terrain and mapped with national road E 15 Cluj‐Napoca – Dej. In the maps from
accuracy. The total length in this sector is 36 kilometers, the third military survey, as well as in the military
i.e. 24 Roman miles. The slope is small. The general maps created at the beginning of the 20th century, the
direction is from south‐east to north‐west. In several place of the fortress is clearly marked as a rectangle
points, close to the area of the current village Ceanu (Fig. 70).
Mic, the road was recently the object of some Beside the fortress, the maps also show the
preventive archaeological researches. What is more route of the modern secondary road coming from
important, as our shed analysis demonstrate, is the south via Iclozel – Silivaș ‐ Hășdate. This is, in fact, the
position of the legionary fortress from Potaissa433 former Roman road, maintained and used until
(Turda, Cluj County), in relation to this road and the nowadays as a secondary road. After reaching the
other one from south, heading towards Războieni‐ fortress, the road crossed the river (the traces of a
Cetate. Choosing the location for one big legionary bridge were not found) and continued via Băița and
fortress as the one from Potaissa (23,37 ha) was not an Bunești to north, to Dej (Fig. 71). The position of this
easy task. The only one big plateau in this area was/is fortress is strategic. As the fortress from Bologa, or
Sutor (Sălaj County), or Cășeiu, or Cincșor, the fortress
433
For this: Bărbulescu 1987; Bărbulescu 1994; Bărbulescu
434
1997. Protase, Gudea, Ardevan 2008.

65
was erected close to the valley of the river, to block 4. 9. The Roman fortress from Breţcu
possible attacks coming from North along this line. (Covasna County). Historical maps and digital data

4. 7. The Roman fortress from Hoghiz (Braşov Another fortress marked on the Austrian
County). Historical maps and digital data military maps is the easternmost fortress in Roman
Dacia: Brețcu437 (Covasna County), ancient Angustia.
Another interesting example is offered by the The fortress is positioned exactly 692 meters north‐
fortress from Hoghiz.435 The fortress was discovered in east of the catholic church from the village, 3464
1949. Since then, no systematic archaeological meters north of the geodesic point marked on the
excavations were made there, only several small current maps at Chirilău (east of the village of
surveys. The directory plans published in 1953 do not Mărtănuș, on the hill called ‘Dealul Măgurii’) and 6349
specifically mentions the toponym ‘Roman fortress’, but meters west‐south west of the entrance in the village
another important word: ‘la Cetate’ (Fig. 72). Always, of Oituz (Fig. 74). On the maps from the first military
this toponym indicates a fortress. The Roman fortress is survey the fortress is marked as a rectangle, with the
positioned on the left, southern bank of the river Olt, toponym ‘Alte Schantz’. On the maps from the second
circa 1055 m south‐east of the center of the village military survey the same place is marked also as a
Ungra, 1796 m west of the southern entrance in the rectangle, without any other indications. The same
village of Hoghiz, and 3652 m north from the church situation can be found on the maps from the third
from the village Cuciulata. The plateau where the military survey. On the plans from the beginning of the
fortress was built is delimited by the level curve of 460 20th century (1917), the same Roman fortress is also
meters, and the maximum altitude here is 470 m. On the marked, as a rectangle. The currents maps do not
military Austrian maps from the third survey, the provide anymore this type of indications. The fortress
fortress is marked as a rectangle in the same spot, and (positioned at 46º02′59.06ʺ N and 26º18′30.26ʺ E,
with a supplementary, essential remark, in German: altitude 607 meters) had a perfect strategic position,
‘Standort der Römer Lagers Pons Vetus’ (the third blocking the entrance into the province from East,
military survey). The same drawing and toponym is from the Oituz Pass.
present in the maps from the second military survey. In
the maps from the first military survey (1763‐1785), a 4. 10. The Roman imperial road from
rectangle symbolizing the fortress is drawn, and within Sarmizegetusa to Sântămărie Orlea (Hunedoara
this rectangle it is specified: ‘Altes Schloss. Rudera’. County)

4. 8. The Roman fortress from Râşnov (Braşov In 2005 and 2006 I conducted terrain
County). Historical maps and digital data investigations, combined with the collection of
archaeological data and the study of modern maps. As
The same Austrian military maps mark clearly a consequence, I managed to identify and clarify the
the position of the Roman fortress from Râşnov,436 route of the imperial road between Sarmizegetusa and
ancient Cumidava. On the maps from the first military Subcetate.438 I first analyzed the ancient and medieval
survey (1763‐1785) the fortress is marked as a rectangle, sources concerning this road. The most interesting
with the toponym ’Schantz’. On the maps from the documents are the modern Austrian military maps,
second military survey the same point is marked as a which show the route of the imperial road between
rectangle, in an area named ’Ober der Erdenburg’. On Sarmizegetusa (Várhelÿe vulgo Gradistÿa) and
the maps from the third military survey the fortress is Subcetate (Szup Csetatÿe), through (from SW to NE)
also marked as a rectangle, and a toponym is present: Ostrovul Mare (Nagÿ Ostro), Unciuc (Uncsukfalva),
’Erdenburg’, close to the value of the altitude ‐ 610 m Sânpetru (Szent Peterfalva), Săcel (Szatsal), Bărăştii
(Fig. 73). The fortress from Râşnov is positioned Haţegului (Baresd) and Sântămăria‐Orlea (Szt. Maria /
between three settlements, along the valley of the river Orliá Bóldógfalva). The road is marked with a red line
Bârsa, on the eastern, right bank of the river. The in two sectors: 1. from the North‐Eastern corner of
fortress is erected at 2001 meters in straight line north Sarmizegetusa to the North of the village Ostrovul
west from the farm from Râşnov, 2643 meters west of Mare, on a distance of 6,5 km, with the indication
the southern exit from the city of Cristian and exactly at „Landstrasse aus Banath nach Szaszváros"; 2. from
2273 meters south‐east of the church from Vulcan (1512 Unciuc to Subcetate, on a distance of 11 km, with the
meters south‐east of the 90º curve made by the road indication „Trajaner Weg".
which enters in the settlement of Vulcan from South). I identified the structure of the Roman road in
several points: between Bărăştii Haţegului and
Subcetate, at the entrance in Bărăştii Haţegului,

435 437
Protase 2003, 125‐134. Gudea 1980, 255‐365; Vlădescu 1986, 83‐85.
436 438
Gudea, Pop 1971. Fodorean 2007, 365‐384.

66
between Săcel and Sânpetru and then close by the general orientation from South‐West to North‐East. In
church from Unciuc. In this point, but also in those some points the Roman engineers built bridges over
mentioned above, the structure of the Roman road several water courses, as river Râuşor, Odovajniţa,
could be easily observed at the surface of the terrain. It Râul Mare, Valea Mare, the valley of Sibişel and at the
is formed by a layer of stones extracted by the Romans confluence of the river Râul Mare with Strei.
from the valleys placed closed by the route of the road.
Along the route of the imperial Roman road, 4. 11. The Roman road between Gelmar and
several rural settlements are attested in Sântămăria Şibot on Austrian maps
Orlea, Săcel, Sânpetru, Cârneşti, Ostrovul Mare and
Haţeg. Recently, a Roman construction was identified in This is a secondary road, positioned in the
Ostrovul Mic.439 central part of Transylvania, south of the river Mureş.
The construction seems to be a villa rustica. Between Gelmar and the village of Aurel Vlaicu a
Archaeological investigations were carried out in 2009 former Roman road is marked on the maps from the
and 2010 and the results were published. The editors first topographic survey. The road had a general
specified that “clădirea se situa în territorium‐ul Coloniei direction from West to East and is mentioned on a
Dacica Sarmizegetusa, la cca. 5 km E de capitală şi la distance of around 5 kilometers. Between Gelmar
aproximativ 1 km S de drumul imperial, vizibil pe câteva (Gÿalmár) and Bentzent (today Aurel Vlaicu) the road
porţiuni şi denumit de localnici “drumul lui Traian”440 is mark with the name „Drum Trajan”. After that,
(“the building is positioned within the territorium of between Bentzent and Siboth it is marked with the
Colonia Dacica Sarmizegetusa, circa 5 kilometers east of name „Alter Römer Weeg”. We observed that on the
the former capital and approximately 1 kilometer south currents maps this sector of road is marked as a
of the imperial road, still visible on several sectors and county road. On the maps from the second and third
denominated by the local inhabitants Trajan’s road”). On military survey the road appears, but only with his
the orthophotographs I studied I saw traces of the route, without the toponym mentioned above (Fig.
former Roman building. The place is positioned, in fact, 75). Another place where is mentioned a possible
exactly at 3.65 kilometers east of the Roman former Roman road is North of Tărtăria, as we can see
amphitheatre from Ulpian, and exactly 3.404 km east of on the first topographic survey. The indications
the north‐eastern corner of the former Roman city. The offered by these maps can provide a clue regarding
Roman road can be easily observed on the vertical aerial the route of the Roman road along the valley of
photographs and it is marked on all the maps with the Mureş.
denomination “Trajan’s road”. I identified this road on
Austrian maps and on modern maps published in 1940, 4. 12. The Roman road from Alba Iulia to
1954 and 1958. Şard and Ighiu
I also observed that several plans and
topographic maps of the modern settlement of An interesting situation can be observed in
Sarmizegetusa (Austrian map with the scale 1:28.800, the case of the Roman imperial road which from
topographic map at the scale 1:25.000, and another Apulum connected the settlements from Şard, Cricău
modern map at the scale 1:5000) clearly show some and Galda de Jos. This route could be the former
roads with the direction from West to East (decumani). Roman road. It is marked on the maps from all the
The road placed at North is the imperial Roman road. three surveys. The road has a general direction, in its
The final point where I identified the route of the road is first part, to North‐West. Close to Şard a ramification
close by modern road to Clopotiva. Here the Roman goes along the valley of the river Ampoi to the
road can be observed at the surface of the terrain. settlements Ampelum and Alburnus Maior. From Şard
Recently, my colleagues F. Marcu, G. Cupcea and Al. the road continues and then arrives at Galda de Jos.
Diaconescu identified close to Sarmizegetusa the former This was the most plausible variant of road, because in
traces of centuriatio.441 front of Alba Iulia, in the Northern part, the Bilag Hill
Between Sarmizegetusa and Subcetate the blocks partially the access. So the Romans decided to
Roman road has a length of almost 19,5 km. Its route construct the road by avoiding this natural obstacle.
was identified in the field in the following sectors: 1.
from the North‐Eastern corner of Sarmizegetusa to the 4. 13. The Roman road along the valley of
river Râuşor (1 km); 2. from the river Râuşor to the the river Arieş from Potaissa to Alburnus Maior
modern road to Clopotiva (250 m); 3. between the road
to Clopotiva and Ostrovul Mare (3 km); 4. from the The Roman road along the valley is one of the
church of Unciuc to Subcetate (10 km). The route has a most interesting sectors of roads in Dacia. It is
mentioned in numerous archaeological studies as a
439
key road which connected one of the most important
Băeştean, Tutilă 2010, 173‐183. military settlements in Dacia, Potaissa, with Alburnus
440
Băeştean, Tutilă 2010, 174. Maior (Fig. 76, Fig. 77, Fig. 78, Fig. 79). Together with
441
Marcu, Cupcea 2011, 543‐560; Diaconescu 2010, 133‐162.

67
the road along the valley of Ampoi these routes create a sophisticated constructions, built to remarkably fine
strategic triangle between Potaissa, Apulum and tolerances, and of a technological standard that had a
Alburnus Maior. It appears on a sector close to Buru on gradient (for example, at the Pont du Gard) of only
the maps from the first survey. 34 cm per km, descending only 17 m vertically in its
The Roman discoveries along the valley of Arieş entire length of 50 km (31 miles). If this would not
are concentrated close to Potaissa. From the point when been enough, the Romans also were conscious about
the valley of Arieş enters in the Transylvanian the advantages offered by the thermal waters. Using
Depression we have three settlements with important these hot springs, they built baths in Britannia (Bath
discoveries: Mihai Viteazu, Cheia and Moldoveneşti. It is and Buxton), in Gallia (Aix and Vichy), in Germania
possible that the road, until the point when enters in the (Wiesbaden, Aachen), or in Pannonia Inferior
mountains, have been supervised by military points with (Aquincum).443 Some of these locations rapidly
towers located on hills with good visibility, such as one became important centers for recreational and social
called „Cetatea Babei”, positioned between the villages activities in Roman communities. Libraries, lecture
of Cheia and Corneşti. Another possible point with a halls, gymnasiums, and formal gardens became part of
tower can be located on the hill “Dealul Cetăţii”, exactly some bath complexes. In addition, the Romans used
in the point where the early medieval fortress was the hot thermal waters to relieve their suffering from
constructed (Fig. 80, Fig. 81, Fig. 82). From this point diseases. The Roman bath included a far more
one could control all the valley of Arieş until Turda and complex ritual than a simple immersion. ‘Were the
Câmpia Turzii, with an outstanding visibility. baths, then, and their concomitant aqueducts, a
The three settlements, Mihai Viteazu, Cheia luxury?’ This question of Trevor444 finds its answer
and Moldoveneşti, concentrate almost all the easily: it depends what we understand today as
discoveries from this area. For example, in Mihai Viteazu ‘luxury’ and what Romans did understood. In an
we know about the discovery of epigraphic monuments advance civilization like the Roman Empire was, bath
with votive and funerary character. We must outline was not considered a luxury.
that all these monuments were discovered in secondary
position. Although we have this situation, we must say 4. 14. 1. Germisara ‐ the ‘five stars’ thermal
that here a rural settlement functioned in the Roman accommodation in Roman Dacia
era. In the village of Cheia, positioned on the same road,
there were discovered numerous materials and this is an The area between Geoagiu Valley, in the East,
important indication for another rural settlement. From the village of Geoagiu in the South and the locality
Moldoveneşti we know a big number of epigraphic and Geoagiu‐Băi was named in the Roman era
sculptural monuments. Many of these are very bad Germisara.445 The toponym is of Dacian origin.
preserved, only in small pieces. As in the other case, Archaeologically and topographically, the Roman city
these were found in secondary position, but other and the Roman fortress were extended on the
discoveries are a clue for saying that here a rural territory of the current village of Geoagiu, in the East,
settlement functioned in the Roman era. and Cigmău in the West. So, we can distinguish two
Along the middle course of the river Arieş we points situated on the northern, right bank of Mureş,
can’t identify points with certain Roman presence, many close to the main military road that connected Ulpia
of them being related with antiqur gold exploitations. Traiana Sarmizegetusa with Apulum. One of these,
which took advantage of the thermal waters, had a
4. 14. ‘Spa’ vignettes in the Peutinger map. civilian character. This place is situated north of
Thermal places in Roman Dacia Geoagiu. The other, which developed a little later, had
a military character and included the Roman fortress
It is hard today for us to understand, in an era from Cigmău and the civilian settlement (vicus
in which we make online reservations, fly by plain, ’see’ militaris). We can say that under the name of
using Google earth places we have never been, or Germisara three areas have functioned in the Roman
schedule our time carefully, how other civilizations era: 1. the Roman camp from Cigmău, situated on the
developed their perception concerning free time and the “Turiac” plateau, at “Pogradie” point; 2. the civilian
possibility to benefit of natural resources. But we would settlement (vicus militaris), placed between Cigmău
be surprised to see that, besides our technological and Geoagiu; 3. the thermal settlement,
means, Roman world was conscious about these things, approximately positioned 5 km north of the Roman
too. The passion of the Romans for waters is famous.442 fortress (Fig. 83, Fig. 84).446
It was transformed in exquisite, outstanding works of
art. These were the aqueducts. Hundreds were built all
443
over the Roman Empire. They were extremely Yegül 2009.
444
Trevor 2002, 6.
445
See, for a short presentation, IDR III/3, 211‐13.
442 446
Blackman, Trevor 2001; Deman 2005; Landels 2000; Trevor Pescaru, Pescaru 2001, 439‐452; Wollmann 1968, 109‐
2002. 120.

68
 Tabula Peutingeriana places Germigera along visited the thermal settlement, since two inscriptions
the imperial Roman road Sarmizegetusa ‐ Apulum, with his name mentioned were found here.453 In IDR
between Petris (Uroiu) and Blandiana (Vinţu de Jos), at III/3, 232 Saturninus dedicates this votive altar to the
IX m(illia) p(assuum) away from both of these health gods, obviously after a pleasant voyage here at
settlements. Between the military fortress from Cigmău Germisara, and an efficient thermal treatment, as one
and the thermal settlement a Roman road was identified who entirely benefited of the healing powers of the
and investigated in 2002‐2003.447 As I noticed above, thermal waters.
Germisara is not represented in Tabula with the specific Beside these two important persons,
vignette for thermal buildings. Instead, Ad Aquas (today governors of Dacia Superior, monuments mention
Călan, Hunedoara County) is depicted with the specific other people who visited this place and dedicated
vignette. The explanation relies on the fact that inscriptions. One of these monuments is IDR III/3, no.
Germisara was famous as thermal settlement in Roman 233.454 This votive altar, raised for the health of the
Dacia, but its position, north to the main road three emperors (Septimius Severus, Aurelius
Sarmizegetusa ‐ Apulum, determined the mapmaker, Antoninus ‐ Caracalla and Septimius Geta) was placed
using the same principle of selecting the information, here from the order of the governor of the three
not to represent it with vignette. Dacian provinces, Lucius Octavius Iulianus around 200‐
The remains of the Roman spa are visible today. 201 A.D. The person designated to fulfill this order was
They are situated west of the current thermal complex. the commander of the auxiliary unit of cavalry Ala
The Romans were extremely pragmatic. This is the Asturum.
reason why here they literally excavated the travertine Aurelius Crhestus, a Roman citizen with
promontory and created an outstanding, open air, Roman gentilicium (Aurelius) and a Greek cognomen,
system of basins, on a circular surface of circa 90‐95 m. also dedicated an inscription for the health gods.455
During time, beside this, numerous other artifacts were The members of the collegium Galatarum (citizens
discovered: 1. a temple dedicated to Nymphae448; 2. who came in Dacia from Asia Minor) dedicate an
statues representing the divinities of health protection inscription pro salute imperatoris to Hercules
(Aescupalius and Hygia, Hercules); 3. seven gold votive Invictus.456 The members of collegium Aurariarum,
plates found in the nimphaeum;449 4. a marble statue with their representing person, Lucius Calpurnius,
representing Diana; 5. small finds, mainly coins. Beside dedicate another inscription to Jupiter, also pro salute
these, we are aware of the importance of this place if imperatoris.457 An officer (centurio) from legio V
we analyze the Roman inscriptions found here. These Macedonica dedicates an altar to Jupiter.458 All these
are published in IDR III/3, no. 230‐247 (votive examples show that Germisara was intensively visited.
inscriptions). Some of them were raised by very Maybe the most interesting example to
important persons involved in the administration of sustain what we already highlighted above is the
Dacia Superior. inscription IDR III/3, 243. This is a votive altar
Marcus Statius Priscus,450 governor of Dacia identified by the middle of the XVIth century in Orăştie,
Superior in 157 ‐ 158 A.D., is mentioned at Germisara in where the text was copied by M. Singler. The dedicant,
two votive monuments for the gods and the protectors a signifer from the military trooped garrisoned in
of the thermal waters.451 He began his career as an
equestrian officer, receiving a decoration from Hadrian 453
during the Jewish rebellion. He then served as IDR III/3, 232; IDR III/3, 236.
454
Votive altar, fragmentary kept (broken in the right side),
procurator in Southern Gaul before being made a
the camp of inscription is deteriorated in the center by a
senator and commanding two legions in succession. ‘circle’ shape, obviously a modern intervention made by a
Priscus was in charge of Dacia as a governor between person who wanted to use the monument for a purpose. Its
157 and 158 A.D. He held the consulship in 159 A.D. dimensions are: 100 x 52 x 46, with letters of 4 cm height.
After this, he governed Moesia Superior in 160 – 161 The monument was discovered in a point situated north of
A.D. and became governor of Roman Britain Geoagiu Băi, on the left side of the Geoagiu valley. It was
immediately afterwards, serving until perhaps as late as kept for a while in the medieval castle Kuun, where it was
the mid 160s. identified and copied by A. Fodor. Text: Fortuna[e] / pro
Publius Furius Saturninus452 was also the salute / aug(ustorum) n(ostrorum) (trium] / L(ucius) Octavius
I[u] / lianus co(n)s(ularis) II[I] / Dac(iarum) fieri iussit /
governor of Dacia Superior in 160 A.D. He may have
instante … L Ge‐ (?) / M A N T [p]rae[f(ecto) a]lae /
Astu[rum_ _ _ _ _ ] B. Translation: ‘To (the goddess) Fortuna,
447
Fodorean, Ursuţ 2001, 203‐220; Fodorean 2006, 257‐265. for the health of our three augusti, Lucius Octavius Iulianus,
448
On the cult of Nymphae in Roman Dacia: Ghinescu 1998, consular of the three Dacia, ordered for this (monument), it
123‐144. took care for (this monument) Aelius Geminus (?),
449
Pescaru 1988‐1991, 664‐666. praefectus alae Asturum _ _ _ _’.
450 455
On this character: Urloiu 2010, 65‐66. IDR III/3, 231.
451 456
IDR III/3, 240, 241; Rusu 1988‐1991, 653‐656; Rusu, Pescaru IDR III/3, 234.
457
1996, 33. IDR III/3, 235.
452 458
Piso 1972, 463‐471. IDR III/3, 237.

69
Cigmău, close to Germisara, raises the monument Most of the new buildings carry the imprint of an
because he escape the danger of death maybe after he impressive Austrian Baroque style. The thermal
benefited of the qualities of the thermal waters. The settlement is visited by important people: emperor
inscription dated from 186 A.D. Josef II, Emperor Francis I, Emperor Franz Josef. In
1852, Herculane was considered the most beautiful
4. 14. 2. Ad Aquas (Călan) thermal settlement of Europe. Numerous inscriptions
are dedicated to Hercules, which was the protector of
This settlement is represented in Tabula the thermal waters.462
Peutingeriana with vignette. Călan is positioned on the One of the most interesting inscriptions found
left bank of the Strei River, at the altitude of 230 m. The in Băile Herculane is a votive altar of marble, 73 x 37 x
thermal water resources are positioned circa 2 30 cm. The base and the upper part have an elegant,
kilometers north of the current city. (Fig. 3) During symmetric shape. This monument stood a while
Roman times, the same point was positioned exactly actually built in the wall of the bridge over the Cerna
along the main imperial road of the province. The River, within the thermal settlement.463 This is an
settlement had the status of pagus, as the inscriptions outstanding example with direct reference to the
prove (pagus Aquensis). healing powers of the thermal waters from Băile
Archaeologically, today we can still visit the Herculane. After a long infirmitas, a husband raises
Roman basin, directly cut in the rock.459 It encloses a here an altar for the gods of health, specifically
total perimeter of circa 94 m (length of 14,2 m, width of mentioning the she was cured ‘through the power of
7,2 m and a depth of 4 m). The water source is still the thermal waters’.
active today. The water of these sources has an average That Băile Herculane was intensively visited
temperature of 23° ‐ 24°. Epigraphically, we know that during Roman times is no longer a new fact. This is
this settlement was also intensively visited in the Roman proved by the inscriptions.464 Numerous soldiers are
era. Six inscriptions are published in IDR III/3 (no. 6, 7, 8, mentioned. For example, IDR III/1, 54, is a votive altar,
9, 10, 11). Among those who came here, we mention of marble, discovered in the XVIIIth century in Băile
Quintus Decius Vindex, financial procurator of Dacia Herculane and during the same century transported at
Superior. He erected a monument for Fortunae Vienna. The dedicant Marcus Aurelius Veteranus was
Augustae.460 Another important character who visited praefectus in the legion XIII Gemina from Apulum. He
Ad Aquae was Caius Iulius Marcianus, decurion in Ulpia came here to benefit of the qualities of the thermal
Traiana Sarmizegetusa and also member in the waters. Another interesting inscription is a votive altar,
administrative staff of pagus Aquensis. discovered in 1736.465 As recognition at the end of
their long journey from Ulpia Traiana Sarmizegetusa to
4. 14. 3. Băile Herculane Rome, the delegates, who formed the provincial
embassy of Dacia, erected at Băile Herculane this altar.
The third point on the map of Roman Dacia They travelled to Rome to participate to the ceremony
with thermal waters is Băile Herculane.461 During Roman of installation of Marcus Sedatius Severianus in his
times it was also intensively visited. The name of the consulship. Before that, he was the legatus legionis of
settlement also appears in the work of the Anonymous the legio V Macedonica at Troesmis. After his mission
of Ravenna (Medilas). The Roman ruins were discovered in Apulum ended, when he return to Rome (in 153
during the XVIII century. During the Habsburgic and A.D.) the Dacian delegates go to Rome. Returning back
Austro‐Hungarian Empire the name of the settlement in the province, they erected this monument as an
was Herkulesbad / Herkulesfürdő. expression of gratitude because they returned safe
The discoveries consist of water pipes, basins, home.
public and private buildings, sanctuaries, altars with
inscriptions dedicated to the gods of the health, statues
of divinities and votive reliefs, funerary inscriptions,
462
reliefs and funerary monuments, sarcophagi, stamped 19 inscriptions published in IDR III/1 (no. 54 to 68).
463
tiles of several military troops (legio VII Claudia, XIII IDR III/1, no. 55.
464
Gemina, IV Flavia Felix), coins. Roman Ad Mediam was a Numerous monuments are dedicated for Hercules: IDR
III/1, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68.
totally different settlement, separated from the military 465
IDR III/1, 56: Text: Dis et Numinib(us) / Aquarum /
fortress from today’s Mehadia, where cohors III Ulp(ius) Secundinus / Marius Valens / Pomponius Haemus /
Delmatarum was garrisoned. Only from 1817 the Iul(ius) Carus Val(erius) Valens / legati Romam ad /
settlement received an official name. In 1736 begins the consulatum Seve / riani c(larissimi) v(iri) missi incolu / mes
reconstruction and the modernization of the ‘baths’. reversi ex voto / E A. Translation: ‘To the gods and to the
holy powers of waters, Ulpius Secundinus, Marius Valens,
Pomponius Haemus, Iulius Carus, Valerius Valens, delegates
459
Rusu, Pescaru 1996, 23‐24. send to Rome to the consulship of Severianus, clarissimus
460
IDR III/3, 7. vir, returned (home, in Dacia), safe, released the vow freely,
461
Bozu, Micli 2005, 123‐42. as is deserved’.

70
 4. 14. 4. Concluding remarks. The thermal 4. 15. Pierre Lapie, Louis Bonnefont, S. F. W.
settlements and the road system Hoffmann, the modern cartography and the roads
from the Roman Empire and Dacia
Germisara, Ad Aquas and Ad Mediam represent
three important Roman thermal settlements from Dacia. 4. 15. 1. Premises
It is obvious, from what I presented above, that all three
were intensively visited. These points of attractions Cartography developed fast in the last
offered for the inhabitants the opportunity, the chance decades, becoming an important part of historians’
for healing, but they also were perceived as touristic work. In 2005, Matthew H. Edney made an excellent
settlements. These ‘resorts’ offered what the Romans observation: ’The study of the history of cartography
borrowed from Greeks: the concept of leisure as a state underwent substantial changes in the second half of
of mind. They all were connected to the road the twentieth century. In 1960 it was little more than a
infrastructure of roads. Germisara was positioned 7 branch of map librarianship and connoisseurship, an
kilometers north of the main roads of Dacia and antiquarian backwater with relatively limited academic
connected with another road, well preserved even significance. Yet today, after a dramatic ‘paradigm
nowadays. Ad Mediam was positioned 5 kilometers east shift’ in the 1980s, the history of cartography is a
of the road which connected Dierna (today Orşova, widely respected field of study in the Anglophone
Mehedinţi County). The toponym itself indicates a world. Scholars across the humanities and social
settlement positioned close to the middle part of this sciences increasingly find the study of maps to be
road. Ad Aquas (Călan, Hunedoara County) was located intellectually challenging and the interdisciplinary
along the main road of Roman Dacia, which connected insights their study generates to be academically
the Danube line with the northern parts of Dacia, via rewarding. The most obvious components of this
Lederata – Tibiscum – Ulpia Traiana Sarmizegetusa – intellectual revolution were J. B. Harley and David
Apulum – Potaissa – Napoca – Porolissum. This road was Woodward’s massive History of Cartography (Harley
the ‘highway’ of Roman Dacia. It was built during the and Woodward, 1987‐2007) and Harley’s own
two military campaigns of Trajan in Dacia and finished polemical and pyrotechnical essays (most reprinted in
immediately after the conquest. A Roman milestone Harley, 2001).’466
discovered at Aiton (between Potaissa – today Turda, In the Festschrift zum 70. Geburtstag von
Cluj County, and Napoca, today Cluj‐Napoca, Cluj Anthony R. Birley, Richard Talbert published an article
County) dated in 108 A.D., during Trajan, demonstrates about a map which, as the author affirms, skipped the
that the Romans succeeded to built this road up to the attention of the historians.467 In fact, it is a set of nine
northern parts of the province. maps, at a scale of approximately 1:3,400,000,
Using the infrastructure, and all the facilities illustrating, according to a modern representation, the
created, including a rapid colonization of the new Roman world. The geographical space represented
province (Eutropius, Breviarum ab urbe condita, 8, 6: starts from the Antonine Wall and Britain in the left
Traianus victa Dacia ex toto urbe Romano infinitas side and ends to Hierasycaminos on the border
copias hominum transtulerat ad agros et urbes between Egypt and Nubia. The maps are part of a two
colendas), people of all social statuses (soldiers, volume project, commissioned by Agricol Fortia
functionaries of the states) started to travel, to d’Urban (1756‐1843).468 The book, entitled Recueil des
communicate, to benefit of all the advantages of the Itinéraires Anciens comprenant l’Itinéraire d’Antonin,
new province. The society of Roman Dacia (as well as of la Table de Peutinger et un choix des périples grecs,
the whole Roman Empire) became very dynamic. These avec dix cartes dressées par M. le Colonel Lapie, was
three thermal settlements were very attractive, as the published only posthumously in 1845 by the
archaeological finds and inscriptions inform us. Imprimerie Royale, Paris.469 The maps were created by
Communication, as an essential element for any one of the most famous French cartographer of the
civilization, was done ‘physically’ by infrastructure, XIXth century, Pierre M. Lapie (1799‐1850). The maps
which provided opportunities for goods and people to present the routes from three ancient sources: Tabula
travel and organize a territory. Communication also
meant the possibility for people to travel, to interact, to 466
Edney 2005, 14‐29.
exchange information. 467
Talbert 2008, 149‐156.
My examples, together with others already 468
The full name of this character is Agricole Joseph François
known from other provinces, are strong evidences to Xavier Pierre Esprit Simon Paul Antoine Fortia d’Urban.
contradict with solid arguments the old concepts spread Remarcably, he published many other contributions. At
in the historiography, according the which the Roman http://catalog.hathitrust.org/Record/001957916
Empire was a space of static communities. On contrary, some of his works are mentioned.
469
we discover, step by step, the huge resources of the It can be consulted online, entirely, at
Roman Empire and how people interacted with http://books.google.com/books?id=yi4VAAAAQAAJ&printse
themselves and with the landscape. c=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepag
e&q&f=false.

71
Peutingeriana, Itinerarium Antonini and Itinerarium text, starts with Viminacium and ends with Tibiscum;
Burdigalense sive Hierosolymitanum. The cartographer B. The second one, numbered CXIV, starts with
also provided lists (in four columns) of the routes in each Faliatis/Taliatis and ends with Porolisso; C. The third
of these sources, with distances, in Roman numerals and route (CXV) starts with Drubetis and ends with Apula.
the Arabic‐numeral equivalent. In fact, these are the routes mentioned in Tabula
The maps created by Pierre Lapie were Peutingeriana. As a matter of fact, in the preface it is
assembled in a separate volume. They form, according stated: “Nous livrons enfin au public cette collection
to Talbert’s description, a 3 x 3 set, numbered from 1 to des Itinéraires anciens commence, il y a près de quinze
9 in horizontal sequence. Every map is 51.5 cm wide and annèes, sous les auspices et aux frais de M. le marquis
37.5 cm width. Assembled, they form a 150 cm wide by de Fortia. […] Les cartes, jointes au volume que nous
109 cm cartographic document. The title of the map is plaçons sous les yeux des savants, exigeait d’ailleurs
written on sheet 1, in the left upper corner: ORBIS un soin tout particulier. Dressées par M. le colonel
ROMANUS AD ILLUSTRANDA ITINERARIA ANTONINI Lapie, elles devaient être mises en rapport avec le
BURDIGALENSE TABULAM PEUTINGERIANAM PERIPLOS texte, et représenter toutes les positions, toutes les
ITINERARIA MARITIMA DELINEATUS A. P. LAPIE localités, toutes les dénominations géographiques
GEOGRAPHO IN COMITATU REGIO MILITARI CHILIARCHA contenues dans l’Itinéraire d’Antonin, dans la Table de
IN ADMINISTRAT REC BELLIC COLL TOPOGRAPH Peutinger et dans les Périples grecs”.470
PRAEFECTO LUTETIAE A M DCCC XXXIIII. On sheet 8,
bottom right, the cartographer represented eight styles 4. 15. 3. The first road: ‘Viminatio (al
in which the route linework is drawn in the map. Viminacio) Tiviscum. De Ram à Lugos’
Unfortunately, these lines are very hard to differentiate.
They are so thin. The eight types of lines correspond to The first route mentioned in the text is the
the following categories of roads: 1. a thick line – roads one between Viminacium and Tibiscum. Lapie
mentioned in Itinerarium Antonini, Burdigalense and mentions the settlements and distances exactly like
Tabula Peutingeriana; 2. two equal parallel lines – roads they are mentioned in Tabula Peutingeriana. The table
mentioned in Itinerarium Antonini and Tabula where the distances are recorded has four columns: 1.
Peutingeriana; 3. two parallel lines, the one up thinner the first with the antique name of the settlement and
than the other one – routes mentioned in Itinerarium its modern correspondent; 2. the second and third
Antonini; 4. the reverse situation from no. 3 – roads column, gathered together under the title ‘Distances
mentioned in Tabula; 5, 6, 7, 8 – four different styles on marquées dans le Table’ present the distance from
pointed lines representing the routes mentioned in Tabula written in Roman numerals and their Arabic‐
Itinerarium Burdigalense and Itinerarium Antonini (5), numeral equivalent; 3. the fourth column presents the
Itinerarium Burdigalense (6), Itinerarium Burdigalense ‘distances mesurées par M. Lapie’, also expressed in
and Tabula Peutingeriana (7) and Viae Romanae, de Roman miles, but with Arabic‐numerals equivalent.
quibus silent scriptores veteres (8). Mountain ranges are The distances and settlements included in the
shown by hachuring. Only the ancient names of the first route are (I will mention the distances mentioned
settlements are marked. in the column 2, because those measured by Lapie are
based, often, on wrong correspondences for the
4. 15. 2. Roman Dacia in Lapie’s map Roman settlements): 1. Lederata (Weiskirchen) – X; 2.
Apo Fl. (Karach, riv.) – XII; 3. Arcidava (Gross Kakova) –
The former Roman province is represented in XII; 4. Centum Putea (Szardok) – XII; 5. Bersovia
four sheets: the bottom right of sheet 2, the bottom left (Boksan) – XII; 6. Azizis (‘près Szocsan’) – XII; 7. Caput
of sheet 3, the right upper part of sheet 5 and the left Bubali (‘leg. Caput Bubale. Source de la M. Bogoniez’)
upper part of sheet 6. The province is located between – III; 8. Tivisco (al. Tibisco), ’A l’E. de Prisaka’ – X. He
the parallels of 43° and 49° (Northern latitude) and the mentions 8 settlements and a total distance of 83
meridians of 19° and 24° (Eastern longitude). Roman miles.
The only element of terrain represented in the On the map, the route is represented as a zig‐
map is the Carpathian mountains, named in the map zag line, starting from Viminacium. Up to Arcidava the
Alpes Bastarnicae sive Carpathus Mons. The main river road line is represented close to the river Apo fl.
network is provided: Danuvius Fl., Ordessus sive Tibiscum is written with bigger letters comparing to
Ardeiscus F. (Argeş River), Aluta F. (Olt River), Tibiscus F. the others. The other settlements written in this way
(Timiş River), Marisia F. (Mureş River) and Parthiscus are, in Dacia, Ulpia Trajana Sarmizegethusa, Apulum,
sive Thysia F. (Tisa River). Napoca and Paralissum (Porolissum). These are the
The settlements provided in the map as well as settlements mentioned in Tabula with vignettes.
in the list are, most of all, mentioned in Tabula
Peutingeriana. They are grouped in three itineraries,
mentioned at pages 248‐249. According to Lapie’s list,
these are: A. The first itinerary, numbered CXIII in Lapie’s 470
Urban 1845.

72
 4. 15. 4. The second road: Faliatis‐Porolissum mentioned in Tabula, put it is among the settlements
mentioned in the Ptolemy’s Geography.472 In the maps
This route is registered with no. CXIV. The from the XIXth century, this settlement regularly
settlements and distances mentioned by Lapie are: 1. appears north of Apulum. Unfortunately, a modern
Tierva (al. Tierna). Alt Orsova – XX; 2. Ad Mediam. correspondent for it can not be confirmed now.
Mehadia – XI (corrected by Lapie with 15); 3. Pretorio.
Kornia – XIII; 4. Ad Pannonios (al. Ad Pannonias), ’Près 4. 15. 5. The third road: Drobeta‐Apulum
Raska’ – IX; 5. Gaganis. Szadova – IX; 6. Masclianis. Korpa
– XI (corrected by Lapie with 15); 7. Tivisco (al. Tibisco), This road starts from Drobeta and ends at
‘A l’Est de Prizalca’ – XIIII; 8. Agnaviae (al. Agnavae), ‘Au Apulum. The settlements and distances mentioned in
Nord de Cserescha‐Birztra’ – XIIII; 9. Ponte Augusti. Lapie’s list are: 1. Drubetis. Rogova – XXI; 2. Amutria
Bauezar – VIII; 10. Sarmategte (al. Sarmizegethusa (al. Amutrium), ‘Prés de Cstatye’ – XXXVI; 3.
Colonia). Varhely – XV; 11. Ad Aquas. Oklos – XIIII; 12. Pelendova. Tchegartcha – XXXV; 4. Castris Novis.
Petris. Piski – XIII; 13. Germizera. Gyalmar – VIIII; 14. Craiova – XX; 5. Romula, ‘Tourna, en face de Nikopol’ –
Blandiana, ‘A l’ouest de Mühlenbach’ – VIIII; 15. Apula LXX; 6. Acidava, ‘Prés de Saede’‐ XIII; 7. Rusidava.
(al. ad Apulum Colonia). Karlsburg – VIII; 16. Brucla. Draganest – XXIIII; 8. Ponte Aluti (al. Alutae), ‘Pont sur
Dreikirchen – XII; 17. Marcodava. Miriszlo (this is not l’Alouta à l’Hipotest’ – XIIII; 9. Burridava, ‘Près de
mentioned in Tabula, only in Ptolemy’s Geography. Pletchoi’ – XIII; 10. Castra Tragana (al. Trajana). Voitest
Though, Lapie records the distance of XII miles); 18. – XII; 11. Arutela. Broundeni – VIIII; 12. Pretorio.
Salinis (al. Salino). Thorenburg – XII; 19. Patavissa (al. Babeni – XV; 13. Ponte vetere, ‘Au sud de Rîmnik’ –
Patavissum). Pata ‐ XII; 20. Napoca (Colonia). Gyerla ou VIIII; 14. Stenarum, ‘Talmacs, au N. de Rothenthurn’ –
Szamosujvar – XXIIII; 21. Optatiana. Kapjan – XVI; 22. XLIIII; 15. Cedoniae. Hermannstadt – XII; 16. Acidava.
Largiana (al. Cargiana). N. Honda – XV; 23. Cersiae. Koncza – XXIIII; 17. Apula (al. Apulum Colonia).
Berkess – XVII; 24. Porolisso (al. Parolisso). Nagy Banja – Karlsburg.
IIII (according to Lapie’s measurements, 9 miles). In the map, the line of the road between
The distances mentioned are according to those Drobeta and Acidava is strange represented, because
from Tabula, with the same statement, that he started of the wrong location of the ancient settlements. Thus,
to record them mentioning first the distance between Romula is positioned close to the Danube, while in
Faliatis and Dierna. reality it corresponds with the modern settlement of
Some observations must be highlighted here. Reşca (Olt County).
First, the modern correspondents of the major part of The location of the other settlements is also
the settlement are totally wrong. But, in fact, this was very general. What is striking is the case of the
the level of the knowledge regarding the Roman settlement Stenarum. Lapie’s location is correct. The
settlements in the XIXth century. For example, Salinis is current name of the village is Tălmaciu, north of the
located at Thorenburg (modern Turda, Cluj County), settlement from Turnu Roşu. In this case the
because here a salt exploitation developed in this cartographer knew exactly the location, while this
period. Salinis is in fact today’s settlement Războieni‐ settlement was an important crossing point in all the
Cetate / Ocna Mureş, where also salt resources are periods between Oltenia and Transylvania.
recorded. Then, a more interesting example is that of Three mistakes appear in the map. First, in
Potaissa, located at Pata. The explanation is the Banat, Lapie represents two rivers: Apo fl., in the
similarity of toponyms. But the location is totally wrong. West, and Apus fl., in the East. In reality, we know only
Pata is today a small village in Cluj County. Potaissa is one river with this name, also mentioned in Tabula as
the modern Turda. At Potaissa legio V Macedonica was Apo fl. Tibiscum is correctly positioned in Banat, But
garrisoned during Marcus Aurelius’ reign.471 Very striking Lapie mentions another settlement, Tiriscum,
is the location of Napoca (modern Cluj‐Napoca), a city somewhere West of Apulum! The same mistake
which was known very well all the medieval and modern appears in Ptolemy’s Geography, where there are
period. In the map, Napoca is indeed positioned where recorded two settlements with the same name and
Gherla is today. Why is Gherla/Szamosujvar considered different geographical coordinates. Then, Tapae is
the modern correspondent for Napoca? Maybe because indicated close to Aquincum, while this settlement
here a Roman military fortress was known in the XIXth must be located along the Bistra valley, in the narrow
century. It was recorded in the Austro‐Hungarian maps corridor created by this river connecting Banat with
from the second and third military survey. Porolissum is Southern Transylvania.
located at Nagy Banja (Baia Mare!, outside Roman Besides the settlements mentioned in Tabula,
Dacia). others which appear in the map are toponyms taken
An interesting situation is related to the from Ptolemy’s Geography. In the western part of the
mentioning of the toponym Marcodava. This is not
472
Nemeti, Bărbulescu 2006 ‐ 2007, 107‐118; Nemeti,
471
Bărbulescu 1987; Bărbulescu 1991, 22‐30; Bărbulescu 1994. Bărbulescu 2010, 446‐455.

73
province, also west of the Vallum Romanorum, the Cotensii; Albocensii; Potulatensii; Sinsii; Saldensii;
cartographer represented Docirana (Docidava at Ciasigi; Piephigi. – Städte in Dacia waren, nach der
Ptolemy). In the Eastern part, corresponding today with westlichsten oder ersten: Ad Pontes, Apus, Arcidava,
Moldavia, he mentioned other four settlements, taken Centum Pudea, Bersovia oder Berzobis, Azizis, Caput
from Ptolemy’s list: Comidava (Cumidava in Ptolemy), Bubali, Tibiscum; nach der zweiten: Tierna (Colonia
Ziridava (positioned along the river Ararus sive Hierasus Zernensium), Ad Mediam, Praetorium, Ad Pannonias,
F. – modern Siret river), again Docirana (Docidava) and Gagana, Mascliana. Hier endigte diese Strasse in der
Petrodava. Inside the province, Rhatacensii are Vereinigung mit der ersten, und führte dann zu den
mentioned and the settlements Rhuconium and Utidava. nördlichen Orten: Agnava, Pons Augusti, Agmonia,
In the North, other two toponyms are indicated: Sarmizegethusa Regia (Sarmategte, Sarmizegethusa,
Bormanum and Uscenum. All these data appear on Zermizegethusa, Colonia Ulpia Trajana Augusta) war
sheet (map) 2. On maps two and three Lapie indicated die älteste und feste Hauptst. des Landes, und
the name BACPETOP (map 2) ORIANI (map 3), so Aufenthaltsort des Königs Decebalus, die auch
Bacpetoporiani, which are the Daci Petoporiani Trajanus zur Hauptst. der Provinz erhob, worauf sie
mentioned in Tabula.473 Then, south of these, also on durch öffentliche prächtige Gebäude verschönert
map 3, Dagae? is indicated.474 On map 5, other names ward. Die andere Residenzst des Decebalus hiess:
from Ptolemy appear: BURREDEENSII (Buridavenses), Sargetia Regia, am Sargetia – Fl. Von Sarmigethusa
POTULATENSSI (Potulatenses), PIEPHIGI. Another aspect gelangte man nach: Germizera, Petra, Ad Aquas,
which deserves noted is the name of Germizera in the Blandiana, Apulum (oder Apula, Auch Alba Julia
map: Zerni Zerga, a perfect example to understand how Colonia). Die dritte östlichste Strasse nahm die zweite
easy the toponyms became corrupt. The most auf, und führte eine einzige Strasse durch
interesting case is the settlement Vardaeorum Caput, Siebenbürgen über Brucla, Marcodava, Salinum,
positioned in the western part, between the meridians Patavissum, Napuca Colonia, Optatiana, Cargiana,
of 19° and 20° and right up to the parallel of 47°. Cersia, Parolissum (Paralissum Colonia, und: Civitas
Paralissentium). Zwischen dem Fluss Tysia und der
4. 15. 6. Sources for Lapie’s maps. “Die westlichsten Strasse lagen von Süden genen Norden:
Alterthumwissenschaft” of S. F. W. Hoffmann (1835) Doricava, Ulpianum, Vardaeorum Caput, Rucconium.
Zwischen eben dieser Strasse und dem Hierasus‐Fl.
In 1835, in Leipzig, at the “Verlag der J.C. Lagen in derselben Richtung: Arcina, Tiriscum, Sornum,
Hinrichs schen Buchhandlund” S. F. W. Hoffmann Pinum, Utidava, Tiasum, Pirum, Patridava, Nentidava,
published a manual entitled “Die Zusidava, Ziridava, Augustia. An der Strasse zwischen
Alterthumswissenschaft. Ein Lehr‐ und Handbuch für Pontes und Nicopolis am Danubius lagen: Drubetis, (p.
Schüler höherer Gymnasialclassen und für Studirende”. 213), Amutrium, Castra Nova, Pelendova, Phrateria.
A description of Dacia is provided at page 212: „ F. Zwischen dem Hierasus und Poras, wobin sich die Daci,
DACIA. 1) Umfang. Die Bewohner hiessen Daci, und nachdem Trajanus ihr Land erobert hatte, unter dem
wurden von den Griechen den Getae beigezählt. Früher Namen: Tyrangetae zurückgezogen, lagen von Süden
wurden sie Δαοι gennant. Als römische Provinz theilte gegen Norden; Piroboridava, Zarigadava, Rhamidava,
man Dacia ein in: Dacia Ripensis, in: Dacia Alpensis, und Triphulum (vielleicht Jassiorum Dacorum Municipium),
in: Dacia Mediterranea. Es grentze nördlich an die: Comidava. In der Solitudo Getarum, bin zur
Carpates Montes, bis zur Wendung des Tyras gegen den Vereinigung des Poras mit dem Ister, lagen:
Hierasus, der dann bis zu seinem Einfluss in den Transmarisca oder Trasmarisca, oder auch:
Danubius die östliche Grenze bildet; südlich wird es von Tρομάρισχα, Peristhlaba, und Tamasidava“.
dem Danubius begrenzt, der Ister hier gennant wird; This text, practically, provides all the
westlich bestimmt die Grenze der Tibiscus, oder Tysia‐ information contained in Lapie’s map, even more.
Fluss.‐2) Gebirge waren die: Carpates M. Oder: Alpes Some of the settlements mentioned here are parts of
Bastarnicae.‐3) Flüsse: Danubius oder: Ister, in den sich the work of the Anonymous geographer from
ergiessen: Tisianus oder: Tysia oder: Pathisus oder: Ravenna. Others are taken from the Ptolemy’s
Parthiscus oder: Tibiscus, der die: Grissia und Marisia Geography and some of the settlements from Tabula
aufnimmt; Apus; Giffil oder Gilpit oder Rhabon oder Peutingeriana.
Sargetia; Aluta oder Alvata; Tausis; Naparis; Hierasus
oder: Gerasus. – 4) Völkerschaften waren: Anarti oder: 4. 15. 7. Pierre lapie, Louis Bonnefort, August
Anartes (Caes. B. G. IV. 25); Teurisci; Cistoboci; Treboniu Laurian and Roman Dacia
Prendavesii; Rhatacensii; Cacoensii; Biephi; Burideensii;
In 1868, in Paris, a geographical atlas was
published by the publishing house E. Donnaud. The
473
See http://www.cambridge.org/us/talbert/talbertdatabase complete title of the atlas is: ‘Atlante Geograficu după
/TPPlace3076.html. L. Bonnefont, Professor la Lyceulu Bonaparte. Membru
474
http://www.cambridge.org/us/talbert/talbertdatabase allu Societăței Geografice din Parisu, etc. Adaptatu
/TPPlace3089.html.

74
pentru scolele române din ordinea M. S. Carolu I, The map has no scale. It provides the main
Domnulu Româniloru, și adaussu de A. Tr. Laurianu, river network, Roman settlements, and the main
Decanu allu Facultăței de Litere din Bucureșci, etc.’ The roads. The terrain is represented by hachure. All the
title, written in a Romanian language according to the main rivers are marked.
customs and orthography used in the XIXth century, can The roads and the toponyms are the most
be translated this way: ’Geographical Atlas after L. important for our analysis and comparison. The first
Bonnefont, professor at the Bonaparte Highschool. road, starting from West, is the road Lederata‐
Member of the Geographical Society in Paris etc. Tibiscum, with the intermediate stops known from
Adapted for the Romanian Schools from the command Tabula: Arcidava, Centum Putea, Bersobis, Azizis,
and commisioned by his majesty Carol I, the king of the Caput Bubali. Close to this road, more exact, almost
Romanians, and added (completed) by August Treboniu overlapped, the Roman valla from Banat are marked.
Laurian, dean of the Faculty of Letters in Bucharest etc.’ The second road starts from Dierna, as usual (also
So, the atlas is the work of the French cartographer written Tierna), and continues to north, reaching Ad
Louis Bonnefont,475 and it was commisioned by the king Mediam, Praetorio, Ad Pannonios, Gaganis,
of Romania, Carol I. The work was adapted for the Masclianis, and, again, Tiviscum. Once again, Tibiscum
Romanian schools by August Trebobiu Laurian.476 appears twice. Once, as caput viae of the western
The map we want to present and describe road, spelled ‘Tibiscum’. Then, as a normal stop, as in
presents the territory of Roman Dacia. Its full title, the Peutinger map, along the second, eastern road,
marked in the right upper corner, is: Dacia romana a spelled as ‘Tiviscum (Tiriscum)’. This is the same, old,
Traiano Aug. Usquead Aureliani Aug. Tempus secundum so repeated mistake, taken from Tabula by Ptolemy479
A. Tr. Lauriani Tabulam Ab Lud; Bonnefort descripta. The and then used, I would say, generalised, from antiquity
map is located between the meridians of 39° and 48° until the modern era. The first Dacian itineraries were
(Eastern longitude) and the parallels of 43° and 49° created during the two military campaigns of Trajan
(Northern latitude). The values of the meridians are (101 A.D. – 106 A.D.).480 Then, continuing to north, the
high. The territory of modern Romania is located main imperial road is marked, with the following
between the meridians of 20°15'E and 29°41'E and the settlements: Agnaviae, Pons Augusti, Sarmizegethus
parallels of 43°37'N and 48°15'N.477 The values of the Metropolis Daciae (Ζαρμιζεγέθουσα βασίλειον), Ad
meridians are measured starting from the Ferro Aquas, Petris, Germizera (Zermizerga!), Blandiana,
meridian (Canare Islands). This meridian was until 1884 Apulum Col. Ulp., Brucla, Marcodava, Salinae,
used as the null meridian in the German and Austro‐ Batavissa, Napoca Col. Ulp., Optatiana, Largiana,
Hungarian cartography. It was then replaced by the Cersiae, and Porolissum. The topographic order of the
meridian of Paris and then with that from Greenwich.478 settlements is correct, if we compare it with the
Peutinger Map. Though, as in Lapie’s map, Marcodava
475
Bonnefont is the author of many other atlases. We mention is mentioned again, in the same location, between
here two of them: Bonnefont 1885; Bonnefont 1890. Brucla and Salinae. Using the river network as a ’grid’,
476
A. T. Laurian (his real name was Augustin Trifan) was one of the cartographer made almost the same errors as
the most famous philologist, historian, publicist and politic Lapie did. Agnaviae and Pons Augusti are located not
character of the XIXth century in Transylvania. He was born in in their right place, along the Bistra valley. Then,
17 July 1810 in a small village called Fofeldea (Sibiu county). He Salinae is located where Potaissa should be. Potaissa
died on 25 February, in Bucharest. He was one of the leaders (spelled in this map Batavissa) is somewhere close to
of the 1848 revolution. He was on of the co‐founders of the
the modern village Tureni (Cluj County). Napoca is
Romanian Academy (2 June 1867), general secretary and
president of the Romanian Academical Society and president marked where Gherla should be. To the end of the
of its Literary Section (1867‐1876). He studied physics, road, as Lapie did, the last four settlements,
mathematics and astronomy at the University of Wien and in Optatiana, Largiana, Cersiae and Porolissum are
Göttingen. He was known also for his didactic activities (writing
and editing school manuals). See Teiuşan, Netea 1970; Roşu
2006, 197‐204.
477
That is why Roman Dacia is represented in Tabula Imperii the Paris meridian. In 1724 the French astronomer Louis
Romani in the sections L 34, 35. Feuillée made measurement in the Canary Islands and
478
Forstner 2005 (online as pdf at ub.unibw‐muenchen.de). calculated that the meridian is positioned exactly at 20° 23′
The meridian took its name from the most western island from 9″ west from the Paris meridian. In 1884, in October, in
the Canaries, El Hierro. Starting from Antiquity, this was used Washington, an International Meridian Conference was held.
as the zero meridian. Ptolemy measured the longitudes from it Here, it was decided that all the measurements of longitudes
towards East. It was used like this all the medieval and modern must start from Greenwich. France opposed to this measure
period, since it offered only positive longitudes for the and only in 1911 adopted it. In the same way, in the German
territories of Europe. On 1 July 1634 the king of France, and Austro‐Hungarian cartography, the old fundamental
Ludovic XIII, decided, after a meeting with specialists in meridian continued to be used, until the beginning of the
astronomy and mathematics, that this meridian should be XXth century.
479
used as the zero meridian for all the maps. It is positioned Nemeti 2006, 271‐288.
480
exactly at 17° 39′ 46″ West of Greenwich and at 20º West of Fodorean 2011, 9‐19.

75
located, practically, outside the territory of the province. the Middle Ages.’ To continue the idea, this
An interesting detail is the mentioning of Ala phenomenon continued until the Modern era.
Frontoniana, almost exactly where is should be, in Lapie’s maps from the book of Fortia,
modern Ilişua (Bistriţa Năsăud), the Roman Arcobadara. rediscovered and capitalized by Richard Talbert,
In deed, at Ilişua was garrisoned ala I Tungrorum represent a valuable source for the study of the
Frontoniana. The intellectuals from that period knew the Roman roads. The manual published by S. F. W.
existence of a Roman military fortress here. It was first Hoffmann in 1835 uses the same information. The
signalled in the second half of the XIXth century by Karol map from the atlas published in 1868 includes, as we
Torma.481 saw, almost the same data.
The third road marked in the map starts from Of course, many improvements can be made
Drobeta and ends at Apulum Col. Once again, the regarding the location of the antique settlements. But,
topographic order of the settlement is correct, but there as it is written in the Préface: "M. le colonel Lapie, qui
is a mixture of toponyms taken from Tabula and a été chargé seul de la synonymie moderne, a rempli
Ptolemy. Romula is totally wrong positioned south of the cette tâche délicate avec une patience admirable et
Carpathian Mountains. This road should have a route avec un rare talent de combinaison. Il ne faut
along the Olt valley, while in this map two roads are cependant pas considérer son travail comme le
indicated. All the stations from the ancient sources are dernier mot de la science. Si l'on réfléchit aux
marked along the second, eastern road, and because of difficultés d'une pareille entreprise, à la contradiction
that all of them are positioned entirely wrong. The road des renseignements fournis par les auteurs anciens et
heads towards the south‐eastern part of Transylvania modernes, on conviendra qu'il était bien difficile, sinon
and then along the valley of Târnava Mare ends at impossible, de ne pas commettre plusieurs erreurs, et
Apulum. de rencontrer toujours juste dans la combinaison des
And the last observation: Transylvania, Banat, noms et des mesures. Loin donc de reprocher à M.
Crişana and Maramureş form all together, according to Lapie les imperfections que la critique et le temps
this map, the province of Dacia Superior. In the South feront découvrir, on devra lui savoir gré d'avoir formé
and East, Oltenia, Muntenia and the entire Moldavia un vaste tableau de géographie comparée, où chacun
form Dacia Inferior. In reality, three provinces were pourra facilement consigner les découvertes qui
attested (including Dacia Porolissensis) starting with s'effectueront, à l'avenir, dans le domaine des sciences
Hadrian’s reign. These provinces included only Banat, géographiques. Telle a été la tâche de M. Lapie; la
Transylvania and Oltenia. nôtre était de nous appliquer de préférence à l'étude
du texte, afin de l'amener à la plus grande correction
4. 15. 8. Concluding remarks possible.”

To sum up, we have analysed four sources: 1.

Pierre Lapie’s map (1845); 2. the text concerning Dacia
from the manual published by S. F. W. Hoffmann in
1835; 3. the map from the atlas realized by Louis
Bonnefont, completed by August Treboniu Laurian and
published in 1868; 4. the Peutinger map. As we saw, all
these modern sources contain, in general, the same
geographical data. They were collected, copied and used
like this the whole modern period, after the
recapitalization of the Peutinger map and Ptolemy’s
Geography in the Middle Ages. This state of facts
remained unchanged until the beginning of the XXth
century, when the researchers and historians stated to
investigate on scientific bases the geography of Roman
Dacia. This mechanism was well described in 1999 by
Evelyn Edson: ‘Since the Roman Empire did not
disappear all at once, but dwindled and declined
unevenly from place to place, even then continuing its
existence for another millennium in Constantinople, it is
likely that, whatever world maps the Romans made,
some must have survived to influence the mapmakers of

481
Torma 1864‐1865, 10‐67; Protase, Gaiu, Marinescu 1996‐
1997, 27‐110.

76
 BIBLIOGRAPHY AND REFERENCES

Adams 2001 C. Adams, “There and back again”: getting around in Roman Egypt, in C. Adams, R.
Laurence (ed.), Travel and Geography in the Roman Empire, Routledge Ed., London ‐ New
York, 2001, 138‐166.
Adams 2007 C. Adams, Land Transport in Roman Egypt. A Study of Economics and Administration in a
Roman Province, Oxford (Oxford University Press), 2007.
Adameşteanu 1962 D. Adameşteanu, Note su alcune vie siceliote di penetrazione, in Kokalos 8, 1962, 199‐209.
Adameşteanu 1963 D. Adameşteanu, Note di topografia siceliota, in Kokalos 9, 1963, 19‐48.
Adams, Laurence 2001 C. Adams, R. Laurence (ed.), Travel and Geography in the Roman Empire, Routledge Ed.,
London ‐ New York, 2001.
Albu 2005 E. Albu, Imperial Geography and the Medieval Peutinger Map, in Imago Mundi 57, 2005,
136‐148.
Albu 2008 E. Albu, Rethinking the Peutinger Map, in R. J. A. Talbert, R. W. Unger (eds.), Cartography in
Antiquity and Middle Ages: Fresh Perspectives, New Methods, Leiden, 2008, 111‐119.
Alexandrowicz, G. T. Alexandrowicz, R. Bedon, Itineraires romains en France, d' après la Table de
Bedon 1996 Peutinger et l'Itineraire Antonin, Dijon, Faton, 1996.
Alicu 1980 D. Alicu, Le camp legionaire de Sarmizegetusa’ in Potaissa. Studii şi comunicări, II, 1980, 23‐
28.
Alicu, Paki 1985‐1986 D. Alicu, A. Paki, O inscripţie inedită din amfiteatrul roman de la Ulpia Traiana
Sarmizegetusa, in Acta Musei Napocensis 22‐23, 1985‐1986, 469‐479.
Alicu et alii 1995 D. Alicu, Cercetări arheologice la Cluj‐Napoca. Villa rustica din valea Chintăului. Campania
1988, in Acta Musei Napocensis 32/1, 1995, 619‐633.
Allen 2003 T. J. Allen, Roman Healing Spas in Italy: The Peutinger Map Revisited, in Athenaeum 91,
2003, 403‐415.
André, M.‐Francoise 1993 J.‐M. André, B. Marie‐Francoise (eds.), Voyager dans l’antiquité. Paris, Fayard, 1993.
Andreau, Virlouvet 2002 J. Andreau, C. Virlouvet (eds.), L'information et la mer dans le monde antique, Collection de
l'Ecole francaise de Rome, 297, Rome, 2002.
Antonescu 1910 T. Antonescu, Columna Traiană studiată din punct de vedere archeologic, geografic și
artistic, Iași, 1910.
Ardevan 2007 R. Ardevan, The Ala II Pannoniorum in Dacia, in Apulum 44, 2007, 139‐155.
Aricescu 1977 A. Aricescu, Armata în Dobrogea romană, Bucharest, 1977.
Arnaud 1988 P. Arnaud, L’origine, la date de rédaction et la difussion de l’archetype de la Table de
Peutinger, in Bulletin de la Société Nationale des Antiquaires de France, 1988, 302‐321.
Arnaud 1993 P. Arnaud, L’Itinéraire d’Antonin: un témoin de la literature itinéraire du Bas‐Empire, in
Geographia Antiqua II, 1993, 33‐49.
Aston 2002 M. Aston, Interpreting the landscape. Landscape archaeology and local history, London ‐
New York, 2002.
ATTA 1, 1992 Atlante Tematico di Topografia Antica 1 (ed. by L. Quilici and Stefania Quilici Gigli): Tecnica
stradale romana (Atti dell’Incontro di studio Bologna 1991), Rome, 1992.
ATTA 2, 1993 Atlante Tematico di Topografia Antica 2 (ed. by L. Quilici and Stefania Quilici Gigli): Strade
romane, percorsi e infrastrutture, Rome, 1993.
ATTA 5, 1996 Atlante Tematico di Topografia Antica 5 (ed. by L. Quilici and Stefania Quilici Gigli): Strade
romane, ponti e viadotti, Rome, 1996.
ATTA 11, 2002 Atlante Tematico di Topografia Antica 11 (ed. by L. Quilici e S. Quilici Gigli): La Via Appia.
Iniziative e interventi per la conoscenza e la valorizzazione da Roma a Capua, Rome, 2002.
ATTA 13, 2004 Atlante Tematico di Topografia Antica 13 (ed. by L. Quilici e Stefania Quilici Gigli): Viabilità e
insediamenti nell’Italia antica, Roma, 2004.
Aujac 1987 G. Aujac, The Foundation of Theoretical Cartography in Archaic and Classical Greece, in B.
Harley, D. Woodward (ed.), The History of Cartography. Vol. I. Cartography in Prehistoric,
Ancient and Medieval Europe and the Mediterranean, The University of Chicago Press,
Chicago and London, 1987, 130‐147.
Aujac 1987a G. Aujac, The Growth of an Empirical Cartography in Hellenistic Greece, in B. Harley, D.
Woodward (ed.), The History of Cartography. Vol. I. Cartography in Prehistoric, Ancient and
Medieval Europe and the Mediterranean, The University of Chicago Press, Chicago and
London, 1987, 148‐160.

77
Aujac 1987b G. Aujac, Greek Cartography in the Early Roman World, in B. Harley, D. Woodward (ed.), The
History of Cartography. Vol. I. Cartography in Prehistoric, Ancient and Medieval Europe and
the Mediterranean, The University of Chicago Press, Chicago and London, 1987, 161‐176.
Austin, Rankov 1995 N. J. E. Austin, N. B. Rankov, Exploratio: Military and political intelligence in the Roman
world from the Second Punic War to the battle of Adrianople, Routledge, London and New
York, 1995.
Avril 1996 M. F. Avril, Itineraires d’Hannibal en Gaule, Paris (éditions de Paris‐Max Chaleil), 1996.
Baatz 1984 D. Baatz, Quellen zur Bauplanung römischer Militärlager, Bauplanung unde Bautheorie der
Antike’ in Disskussionen zur archäologischen Bauforschung, 4, 1984, 315‐325.
Bagshawe 2000 R. W. Bagshawe, Roman Roads, Shire Publications, 2000.
Bajusz 2005 I. Bajusz, Téglás István jegyzetei. Régészeti feljegyzések. I/1. Kötet, Kolozsvár, 2005.
Balázs 1863‐1871 O. Balázs, A szekelyföld leilasa Töttenelmi Regeszety termeszetraiz os ne pismer
szentpontbal, I‐IV, Budapest, 1863‐1871.
Balázs 1889 O. Balázs, Torda város és környéke, Budapest, 1889, ch. XI: Apeducte romane în Turda, 51‐
53.
Baltag 2000 Gh. Baltag, Sighişoara înainte de Sighişoara, Bucharest, 2000.
Bauer 2007 H. Bauer, Die römischen Fernstraßen zwischen Iller und Salzach nach dem Itinerarium
Antonini und der Tabula Peutingeriana. Neue Forschungsergebnisse zu den
Routenführungen, München, 2007.
Băeştean 2007 G. Băeştean, Aprovizionarea cu apă în Dacia romană, Cluj‐Napoca, 2007, 89‐144.
Băeştean, Tutilă 2010 G. Băeştean, O. Tutilă, Construcţia de tip villa de la Ostrovu Mic, în Sargetia 37 (I, New
Series), 2010, 173‐183.
Băncilă, Teodorescu 1998 R. Băncilă, D. Teodorescu, Die römischen Brücken am unteren Lauf der Donau’ in K. Zilch, G.
Albrecht, A. Swaczyna et al. (ed.), Entwurf, Bau und Unterhaltung von Brücken im
Donauraum, 3. Internationale Donaubrückenkonferenz, 29‐30 October, Regensburg, 1998,
401‐409.
Bărbulescu 1980 M. Bărbulescu, Evoluţia cercetărilor privind Potaissa romană, in Potaissa. Studii şi
comunicări, 2, 1980, 283‐296.
Bărbulescu 1987 M. Bărbulescu, Din istoria militară a Daciei romane. Legiunea V Macedonica și castrul de la
Potaissa, Cluj‐Napoca, 1987.
Bărbulescu 1991 M. Bărbulescu, Das römische Lager von Potaissa (Rumänien), in Antike Welt 22, I, 1991, 22‐
30.
Bărbulescu 1994 M. Bărbulescu, Potaissa. Studiu monografic, Turda, 1994.
Bărbulescu 1997 M. Bărbulescu, Das Legionslager von Potaissa (Turda). Castrul legionar de la Potaissa
(Turda). (Führer zu den archäologischen Denkmälern aus Dacia Porolissensis, 7), Zalău,
1997.
Bărbulescu 1999 M. Bărbulescu, Traian și descoperirea Daciei, in Napoca. 1880 de ani de la începutul vieții
urbane, ed. by D. Protase and D. Brudașcu, Cluj‐Napoca, 1999, 32‐38.
Bărbulescu 2001 M. Bărbulescu, Istoria politică, in Istoria Românilor, vol. II: Daco‐romani, romanici, alogeni,
coord. by D. Protase and Al. Suceveanu, Bucharest, 2001, 73‐98.
Bărbulescu et alii 2005 M. Bărbulescu, C. Bărbulescu, I. Fodorean, F. Fodorean, A. Husar, C. Mihăilă, E. Nemeth, I.
Nemeti, S. Nemeti, M. Pîslaru, M. Sălăşan, V. Zotic, Atlas‐dicționar al Daciei romane
(Dictionary‐Atlas of Roman Dacia), Cluj‐Napoca, 2005.
Becatti 1982 G. Becatti, La Colonna Traiana, espressione somma del rilievo storico romano, in ANRW II,
12, 1, 1982, 536‐578.
Bender 1975 H. Bender, Römische Straßen und Straßenstationen, Stuttgart, 1975.
Benea 1999 D. Benea, Dacia sud‐vestică în secolele III‐IV. Interferenţe spirituale, Timişoara, 1999.
Benea 2000 D. Benea, On the Praetorium Toponyms in Roman Dacia, in Daker und Römer am anfang des
2 Jh. N. Chr. Im norden der Donau (Daci şi romani la începutul secolului al II‐lea d. Hr. la
nordul Dunării), Timişoara, 2000, 117‐123.
Benea 2001 D. Benea, Dacia pe Tabula Peutingeriana, in D. Benea (ed.), In memoriam Dumitru Tudor,
Timişoara, 2001, p. 135‐149.
Benea 2001a D. Benea, Câteva observaţii privind aşezările din Dacia amintite pe Tabula Peutingeriana, in
Studia archaeologica et historica Nicolao Gudea dicata. Omagiu profesorului Nicolae Gudea
la 60 de ani, Zalău, 2001, 285‐300.
Blackman, Trevor 2001 D. R. Blackman, A. H. Trevor, Frontinus' Legacy: Essays on Frontinus' De aquis urbis Romae,
Univ. of Michigan Press, 2001.

78
Blăjan, Cerghi 1978 M. Blăjan, T. Cerghi, Descoperiri romane şi postromane la Aiton (jud. Cluj), in Potaissa. Studii
şi comunicări 1, 1978, 21‐27.
Blăjan, Theiss 2000 M. Blăjan, W. Theiss, Beiträge zur rekonstruktion des strassennetzes von Apulum, in Army
and Urban Development in the Danubian Provinces of the Roman Empire (proceedings of
the International Symposium, Alba Iulia, 8th‐10th October 1999) (edited by H. Ciugudean and
V. Moga), Alba Iulia, 2000, 215‐260.
Blăjan, Theiss 2000a M. Blăjan, W. Theiss, Contribuţii la reconstituirea tramei stradale din Apulum, in Marisia 26,
2000, 85‐122.
Blăjan, Theiss, Preda 1994 M. Blăjan, W. Theiss, P. V. Preda, Studiul geologic, arheologic şi tehnic al “Drumului lui
Traian”. Tronsonul Războieni‐Bogata (Turda), in Apulum 31, 1994, 167‐198.
Bödöcs 2008 A. Bödöcs, A study of the Roman road network in Hungary using GIS, Ph.D. manuscript,
2008.
Bonnefont 1885 L. Bonnefont, Atlas de Géographie historique et contemporaine à l'usage des lycées,
collèges et pensions. Classe de Rhétorique (fourth edition), 1885;
Bonnefont 1890 L. Bonnefont, Atlas universel de géographie physique, historique & contemporaine à l'usage
des lycées, collèges et écoles, Paris, Lanée/Ch. Fouraut & Fils, 1890.
Braund 1996 D. Braund, River frontiers in the environmental psychology of the Roman world’ in The
Roman Army in the East (ed. by David L. Kennedy), in the series Journal of Roman
Archaeology. Supplementary series number 18, Oxford, 1996, 43‐47.
Brentchaloff, D. Brentchaloff, J. Gascou, Milliaires des cités de Vence, Castellane, Fréjus, in Zeitschrift
Gascou 1995 für Papyrologie und Epigraphik 109, 1995, 245‐254.
Bennett 1997 J. Bennett, Trajan, Optimus Princeps: A Life and Times, Bloomington, London/New York,
Routledge, 1997.
Bosio 1983 L. Bosio, La Tabula Peutingeriana: una descrizione pittorica del mondo antico, Rimini
Maggioli, 1983.
Bošković 1978 D. Bošković, Aperçu sommaire sur les recherches archéologiques du Limes romain et
paléobyzantin des Portes de Fer, in Mélanges de l’Ecole française de Rome, Antiquité, 90, 1,
1978, 425‐463.
Bozu 1979 O. Bozu, Cercetările arheologice din punctul “Cetate”, comuna Lăpuşnicel (judeţul Caraş‐
Severin), in Banatica 5, 1979, 197‐199.
Bozu, Micli 2005 O. Bozu, V. Micli, Edificii publice si amenajări termale romane pe un plan al staţiunii Băile
Herculane din 1774, in Patrimonium Banaticum 4, 2005, 123‐142.
Breeze 1988 D. J. Breeze, Why did the Romans failed to conquer Britain?, in Proceedings of the Society of
Antiquaries of Scotland 118, 1988, 3‐22.
Brodersen 1995 K. Brodersen, Terra Cognita. Studien zur römischen Raumerfassung. Spudasmata 59. Zürich
‐ New York, 1995 (second ed. 2003).
Brodersen 1996 K. Brodersen, Principia geographiae: Antike Texte im Fruehen Erdkunde‐Unterricht,
Anregung 42, 1996, 29‐43.
Brodersen 1997 K. Brodersen, Artemidoros 3, in Der Neue Pauly II, Stuttgart, 1997, 50.
Brodersen 1999 K. Brodersen, Mapping the Ancient World, in Ad Familiares: Journal of the Friends of Classics
17, Autumn 1999, 2‐4.
Brodersen 2001 K. Brodersen, The presentation of the geographical knowledge for travel and transport in
the Roman world: itineraria non tantum adnotata sed etiam picta, in C. Adams, R. Laurence
(ed.), Travel and Geography in the Roman Empire, Routledge Ed., London ‐ New York, 2001,
7‐21.
Brodersen 2001a K. Brodersen, Neue Entdeckungen zu antiken Karten, in Gymnasium 108, 2001, 137‐148.
Brodersen 2003 K. Brodersen, Die Tabula Peutingeriana: Gehalt und Gestalt einem ’alten Karte’ und ihrer
antiken Vorlagen, in D. Unverhau (ed.), Geschichtsdeutung auf alten Karten: Archäologie
und Geschichte, Wiesbaden (Wolfenbütteler Forschungen 101) 2003, 289‐297.
Brodersen 2004 Kai Brodersen, Mapping (in) the ancient world, in Journal of Roman Studies 94, 2004, 183‐
190.
Broise 1974 P. Broise, Gèneve et son territoire dans l’Antiquité‐de la conquête romaine à l’occupation
burgonde, in Latomus 129, 1974, 89‐110.
Bussana 1997 M. S. Busana (ed.), Via per montes excisa: strade in galleria e passaggi sotterranei nell'Italia
romana, Rome, 1997.
Cagnat, Chapot 1917 R. Cagnat, V. Chapot, Manuel d’archéologie romaine, I, Paris, 1917, 41‐47.

79
Calzolari 1996 M. Calzolari, Introduzione allo studio della rete stradale dell’ Italia Romana: L’Itinerarium
Antonini, in Atti della Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei (Classe di Scienze Morali, Storiche e
Filologiche), Memorie Ser. IX vol. VII fasc. 4, 1996, 369‐520.
Camassa, Silvana 1991 G. Camassa, F. Silvana, Idea e realtà del viaggio: il viaggio nel mondo antico, Genova, 1991.
Campbell 1994 B. Campbell, The Roman Army, 31 BC‐AD 337: A Sourcebook, Routledge, London and New
York, 1994.
Campbell 2000 B. Campbell, The Writings of the Roman Land Surveyors: Introduction, Text, Translation and
Commentary (London: Society for the Promotion of Roman Studies, 2000).
Casson 1974 L. Casson, Travel in the Ancient World, Toronto 1974.
Castellvi, Combs, G. Castellvi, J. P. Combs, J. Kotarba, A. Pezin, Les Voies romaines du Rhône à l'Ebre: Via
Kotarba, Pezin 1998 Domitia et Via Augusta, Paris, DAF, 1998).
Cavruc 1998 V. Cavruc, Repertoriul arheologic al judeţului Covasna (Monografii Arheologice I), Sfântu
Gheorghe, 1998.
Cavruc 2000 V. Cavruc (ed.), Repertoriul arheologic al judeţului Harghita (Monografii Arheologice II),
Sfântu Gheorghe, 2000.
Cătăniciu 1987‐1988 I. B. Cătăniciu, Ptolemeu şi provincia Dacia, in ActaMN 24‐25, 1987‐1988, 145‐162.
Chanson 2002 H. Chanson, Some Aspects of the Hydraulic Design of Roman Aqueducts, in La Houille
Blanche, No. 6/7, 2002, 43‐57 (available at http://traianus.rediris.es).
Chanson 2002a H. Chanson, An experimental study of Roman dropshaft hydraulics, in Journal of Hydraulic
Research, vol. 40, No. 1, 2002, 3‐12.
Charlesworth 1961 M. P. Charlesworth, Trade Routes and Commerce in the Roman Empire, Cambridge, 1961.
Chevallier 1971 R. Chevallier, La photographie aérienne, Paris, 1971.
Chevallier 1972 R. Chevallier, Les voies romaines, Paris, 1972.
Chevallier 1975 R. Chevallier, Gallia Narbonensis. Bilan de vingt‐cinq ans de recherches historiques et
archéologiques, in ANRW II, 3, 1975, 716‐718.
Chevallier 1975a R. Chevallier, Idem, Gallia Lugdunensis. Bilan de 25 ans de recherches historiques et
archéologiques, in ANRW II, 3, 1975, p. 874‐884.
Chevallier 1988 R. Chevallier, Voyages et déplacements dans l’Empire Romain, Paris, 1988.
Chevallier 1995 R. Chevallier, Les textes littéraires latins et grecs concernant la voirie romaine, în Rivista di
Topografia Antica (Journal of Ancient Topography), 5, 1995, 7‐30.
Chevallier 1997 R. Chevallier, Les voies romaines, 2nd edition, Paris 1997.
Chevallier, Arceduc, R. Chevallier, A. Clos‐Arceduc, J. Soyer, Essai de reconstitution du réseau routier gallo‐
Soyer 1962 romain: caractères et méthode, in Revue Archéologique 1, 1962, 1‐49.
Christescu 1929 V. Christescu, Istoria economică a Daciei romane, Bucharest, 1929.
Christescu 1937 V. Christescu, Istoria militară a Daciei romane, Bucharest, 1937.
Clement, Peyre 1998 P. Clement, A. Peyre, La voie Domitienne, 2nd edition, Montpellier, 1998.
Cloppet 1994 C. Cloppet, Le droit et l'aménagement des voies publiques sous l'Empire romain, in Ktèma
19, 1994, 309‐318.
Cociş, Fodorean, Ursuţiu, S. Cociş, F. Fodorean, A. Ursuţiu, V. Bârcă, Identităţi culturale locale şi regionale în context
Bârcă 2011 european. Studii de arheologie şi antropologie istorică. In memoriam Alexandri V. Matei
(Bibliotheca Musei Porolissensis XIII), 2011, 565‐574.
Codrington 1903 Th. Codrington, Roman Roads in Britain, London, 1903.
Colinder 1971 P. Collinder, On the Measuring of Roads in Antiquity, in Actes de XIIe Congres internationale
d' Histoire des Sciences, Paris, 1971, VII, 19‐22.
Costea 1996 F. Costea (ed.), Repertoriul arheologic al judeţului Braşov, Braşov, 1996.
Coulon 2007 G. Coulon, Les voies romaines en Gaules, Paris, 2007.
Coulston 2001 J. Coulston, Transport and travel on the Column of Trajan, in C. Adams, R. Laurence (ed.),
Travel and Geography in the Roman Empire, Routledge Ed., London ‐ New York, 2001, 106‐
137.
Crişan, Bărbulescu, Chirilă, I. H. Crişan, M. Bărbulescu, E. Chirilă, V. Vasiliev, I. Winkler, Repertoriul arheologic al
Vasiliev, Winkler 1992 judeţului Cluj, Bibliotheca Musei Napocensis V, Cluj‐Napoca, 1992.
Crișan, Timoc 2004‐2005 D. S. Crișan, C. Timoc, Inginerii împăratului Traian (I). Mensorul Balbus (Die Ingerniuere
Kaisers Trajan (I). Balbus der Mensor), in Analele Banatului 12‐13, 2004‐2005, 157‐170.
Crogiez‐Pétrequin, S. Crogiez‐Pétrequin, J.‐L. Fiches, Les voies romaines autour de la Méditerranée, in Dossiers
Fiches 2011 d’archéologie, no. 343, January‐February 2011, 2‐5.
Cucu 1929 A. Cucu, Drumurile romane în Banat, in Analele Banatului I, 1929, 45‐52.
Culham 1987 P. Culham, Roman Roads, Greek Terms. Translation, Transliteration and Transfer, in Glotta
65, 1987, 161‐170.

80
Cuntz 1929 O. Cuntz, Itineraria Romana I: Itineraria Antonini Augusti et Burdigalense, Leipzig, B. G.
Teubner, 1929.
Daicoviciu 1928‐1932 C. Daicoviciu, Un nou ”miliarium” din Dacia, in Anuarul Institutului de Studii Clasice I, 2,
1928‐1932, 48‐53.
Daicoviciu 1941 C. Daicoviciu, Problema continuităţii în Dacia (Die Kontinuitätsfrage in Dazien), în AISC, III,
(1936‐1940), 1941, 253‐254.
Daicoviciu 1945 C. Daicoviciu, La Transylvanie dans l’antiquité, Bucharest, 1945.
Daicoviciu 1964 C. Daicoviciu, Harta lui Peutinger, in Izvoare privind istoria României, I, Bucharest, 1964,
737.
Daicoviciu 1959 H. Daicoviciu, Osservazioni intorno alla Collona Traiana’ in Dacia N.S. 3, 1959, 317‐319.
Daicoviciu 1970 C. Daicoviciu, Un nou “miliarium” din Dacia, in Dacica. Studii şi articole privind istoria veche
a pământului românesc, Cluj‐Napoca, 1970, 224‐230.
Daicoviciu 1972 H. Daicoviciu, Dacia de la Burebista la cucerirea romană, Cluj‐Napoca, 1972, 278‐335.
Daicoviciu, C. Daicoviciu, H. Daicoviciu, Columna lui Traian, Bucharest, 1966.
Daicoviciu 1966
Davies 1998 Hugh E. H. Davies, Designing Roman Roads, in Britannia 29, 1998, 1‐16.
Deman 2005 E. B. Deman, The Building of the Roman Aqueducts, Carnegie Institution of Washington
Publication, 2005.
Diaconescu 1997 Al. Diaconescu, Dacia under Trajan. Some observations on Roman tactics and strategy, in
ActaMN 34, I, 1997, 13‐52.
Diaconescu 2010 Al. Diaconescu, Urme ale centuriaţiei la Sarmizegetusa şi în teritoriul său (I), în Sargetia 37
(I, New Series) 2010, 133‐162.
Dilke 1971 O. A. W. Dilke, The Roman Land Surveyors: an Introduction to the Agrimensores, Newton
Abbot, David and Charles, 1971.
Dilke 1985 O. A. W. Dilke, Greek and Roman Maps, London, 1985.
Dilke 1987 O. A. W. Dilke, The Culmination of Greek Cartography in Ptolemy, in B. Harley, D. Woodward
(ed.), The History of Cartography. Vol. I. Cartography in Prehistoric, Ancient and Medieval
Europe and the Mediterranean, The University of Chicago Press, Chicago and London, 177‐
200.
Dilke 1987a O. A. W. Dilke, Maps in the Service of State: Roman Cartography to the End of the Augustan
era, in J. B. Harley, D. Woodward (ed.), The History of Cartography. Vol. I. Cartography in
Prehistoric, Ancient and Medieval Europe and the Mediterranean, The University of Chicago
Press, Chicago and London, 1987, 201‐211.
Dilke 1987b O. A. W. Dilke, Roman Large Scale Mapping in the Early Empire, in B. Harley, D. Woodward
(ed.), The History of Cartography. Vol. I. Cartography in Prehistoric, Ancient and Medieval
Europe and the Mediterranean, The University of Chicago Press, Chicago and London, 1987,
212‐233.
Dilke 1987c O. A. W. Dilke, Itineraries and Geograhical Maps in the Early and Late Roman Empires, in J.
B. Harley, D. Woodward (ed.), The History of Cartography. Vol. I. Cartography in Prehistoric,
Ancient and Medieval Europe and the Mediterranean, The University of Chicago Press,
Chicago and London, 1987, 234‐257.
Dilke 1987d O. A. W. Dilke, Cartography in the Byzantine Empire, in J. B. Harley, D. Woodward (ed.), The
History of Cartography. Vol. I. Cartography in Prehistoric, Ancient and Medieval Europe and
the Mediterranean, The University of Chicago Press, Chicago and London, 1987, 258‐275.
Di Paola 1999 Lucietta di Paola, Viaggi, trasporti e istituzioni. Studi sul cursus publicus, Di. Sc. A. M.,
Messina, 1999.
Di Paola 1999a Lucietta di Paola, Le vie di comunicazione, in Origine e incontre di culture nell’antichità.
Magna Grecia e Sicilia. Stato degli studi e prospettive di ricerca (Pelorias 4), Di. Sc. A. M., a
cura di M. Barra Bagnasco, E. De Miro, A. Pinzone, 1999, 459‐469.
Desbordes 1997 J. M. Desbordes, Voies romaines en Limousin, Limoges, 1997.
Diaconescu 2010 Al. Diaconescu, Forurile Sarmizegetusei. O plimbare imaginară prin centrul politico‐
administrativ al micii Rome de la poalele Retezatului, Mega Publishing House, 2010.
Dietmar 1997 D. Greiser, Große historische Straßen: Von der Via Appia bis zur Avus, Frankfurt am Main,
Insel, 1997.
Duchêne 2003 H. Duchêne, Voyageurs et antiquité classique, Dijon, 2003.
Dueck 2000 D. Dueck, Strabo of Amasia: A Greek Man of Letters in Augustan Rome, New York, 2000.
Dumitrescu 1911 Al. T. Dumitrescu, Tradiţii şi mărturii documentare despre drumul roman de la Reşca la
Celei, in Buletinul Comisiunii Monumentelor Istorice (BCMI) IV, 1911, 107‐110.

81
Edney 2005 M. H. Edney, ’Putting “Cartography” into the History of Cartography: Arthur H. Robinson,
David Woodward, and the Creation of a Discipline, in Cartographic Perspectives 51, 2005,
14‐29.
Edson 2008 E. Edson, Maps in Context: Isidore, Orosius, and the Medieval Image of the World, in R.
Talbert, R. Unger (eds.), Cartography in Antiquity and the Middle Ages. Fresh perspectives,
new methods (series Technology and Change in History, vol. 10), Leiden, Boston, 2008, 219‐
236.
Elliot 2008 T. Elliot, Constructing a Digital Edition for the Peutinger Map, in R. J. A. Talbert, R. W. Unger
(eds.), Cartography in Antiquity and Middle Ages: Fresh Perspectives, New Methods, Leiden,
2008, 99‐110.
Endre 1977 T. Endre, A Savaria‐Bassiana útszakasz, in Archaeologiai Értesitö, 104, 1977, 65‐75.
Esch 1997 A. Esch, Römische Straßen in ihrer Landschaft, Mainz.
Fanaud 1966 L. Fanaud, Voies romaines et vieux chemins en Bourbonnais, 2nd ed., Moulins, 1966.
Ferenczi 1974 I. Ferenczi, Opinii vechi şi noi în legătură cu drumurile între Dacia, Pannonia şi Moesia
Superior prin „barbaricum”, in Tibiscus 3, 1974, 111‐127.
Figueras 1999 P. Figueras, The Road Linking Palestine and Egypt along the Sinai Coast, in The Madaba Map
Centenary 1897‐ 1997: http://198.62.75.1/www1/ofm/mad/articles/FiguerasSinai.html,
Ierusalim, 1999, 121‐124.
Fink 1971 R. O. Fink, Roman Military Records on Papyrus, Cleveland, 1971.
Finály 1902 G. Finály, Római út keresztmetszete, in Archaeologiai Értesítő 22, 1902, 380‐383.
Finley 1973 M. Finley, The Ancient Economy, London, 1973.
Florescu 1985 R. Florescu, Drumurile lui Traian la sud de Carpaţi în războaiele dacice. O nouă interpretare
a imaginilor Columnei lui Traian, in Drobeta 6, 1985, 51‐58.
Fodorean 2001 F. Fodorean, Observaţii în legătură cu infrastructura şi suprastructura drumurilor romane
din Dacia Porolissensis, in Revista Bistriţei 15, 2001, 60‐76.
Fodorean 2002 F. Fodorean, Izvoare epigrafice privind drumurile din Dacia romană, in Revista Bistriţei 16,
2002, 55‐95.
Fodorean 2002a F. Fodorean, The Roman road Gilău‐Bologa. The sector between Căpuşu Mare‐Izvoru
Crişului, in Revista Bistriţei 16, 2002, 97‐102.
Fodorean 2002b F. Fodorean, Importanţa utilizării materialului cartografic în cadrul cercetării drumurilor
romane, in Studia Universitatis Petru Maior. Historia, Târgu Mureş 2, 2002, 15‐32.
Fodorean 2002c F. Fodorean, Precizări privind metodologia de cercetare a drumurilor romane, in Analele
Banatului 9, 2002, 613‐631.
Fodorean 2003 Review: Travel and Geography in the Roman Empire, edited by Colin Adams and Ray
Laurence, Routledge Ed., London and New York, 2001, pp. X + 202, 48 figures, ISBN 0‐415‐
23034‐9, in Acta Musei Napocensis 39‐40/1, Cluj‐Napoca, 297‐302.
Fodorean 2003a F. Fodorean, Infrastructura, suprastructura şi principalele caracteristici tehnice ale
drumurilor romane din Dacia Superior, in Apulum 40, 2003, 155‐177.
Fodorean 2003b F. Fodorean, Aplicaţii ale geomorfologiei şi cartografiei digitale în cercetarea drumurilor
romane: tronsonul Cluj‐Napoca ‐ Gilău, in Cum scriem istoria? Apelul la ştiinţe şi dezvoltările
metodologice contemporane. Actele simpozionului „Tinerii Istorici”, ediţia a IV‐a, Alba Iulia,
28‐30 noiembrie 2002 (Applications of geomorphology and digital cartopgraphy in the
research of Roman roads: the route Cluj‐Napoca – Gilău. How we write history? The call for
sciences and contemporary methodological developments. The symposium “Young
Historians”, IVth edition, Alba Iulia, 28‐30 of Nov. 2002), Alba Iulia, 2003, 59‐80.
Fodorean 2003c F. Fodorean, Contribuţii la reconstituirea reţelei rutiere din Dacia romană. Rolul şi
importanţa toponimiei în cercetarea drumurilor antice, in Revista Bistriţei 17, 2003, 323‐
330.
Fodorean 2003d F. Fodorean, Evoluţia cercetărilor privind drumurile din Dacia romană, in Revista Bistriţei 17,
2003, 55‐68.
Fodorean 2003e F. Fodorean, Provincia Dacia în Geographia lui Claudius Ptolemaios, in Studia Universitatis
Petru Maior. Historia 3, 2003, 7‐20.
Fodorean 2004 F. Fodorean, Tabula Peutingeriana and the province of Dacia, in ActaMN 39‐40, 1, 2002‐
2003 (2004), 51‐58.
Fodorean 2004a F. Fodorean, Road‐repairs in the Danubian provinces during military anarchy (A.D. 235‐271),
in Orbis Antiquus. Studia in honorem Ioannis Pisonis (ed. by L. Ruscu, C. Ciongradi, R.
Ardevan, C. Roman, C. Găzdac), Cluj‐Napoca, 2004, 523‐530.

82
Fodorean 2004b F. Fodorean, Propunere pentru o clasificare a drumurilor din Dacia romană, in Revista
Bistriţei 18, 2004, 63‐69.
Fodorean 2004c F. Fodorean, Drumul roman de pe valea Mureşului între localităţile Brâncoveneşti şi
Războieni‐Cetate. Studiu topografic şi arheologic, in Revista Bistriţei 18, 2004, 71‐87.
Fodorean 2005 F. Fodorean, Hărţile militare austriece şi antichităţile romane. Studiu cartografic, in C.
Muşeţeanu, M. Bărbulescu, D. Benea (eds.), Corona laurea. Studii în onoarea Luciei Ţeposu
Marinescu, Bucharest, 2005, 185 ‐ 201.
Fodorean 2005a F. Fodorean, La relazione fra le strade romane e le strade moderne in Romania.
Sovrapposizioni e convergenze, in Orizzonti. Rassegna di archeologia 6 (ed. by L. Quilici and
S. Quilici Gigli), 2005, 153‐163.
Fodorean 2005b F. Fodorean, Le strade della Dacia romana (I), in Quaderni Catanesi di studi antichi e
medievali, N.S. 3, 2005, 331‐446.
Fodorean 2006 F. Fodorean, Drumurile din Dacia romană, Cluj‐Napoca, 2006.
Fodorean 2006a F. Fodorean, Austrian military maps and Roman roads. A cartographic study, in C. Gaiu, C.
Găzdac (eds.), Fontes Historiae. Studia in honorem Demetrii Protase, Bistriţa, Cluj‐Napoca,
2006, 997 ‐ 1010.
Fodorean 2006b F. Fodorean, Le strade della Dacia romana (II), in Quaderni Catanesi di studi antichi e
medievali, N.S. 4‐5, 2006, 165‐344.
Fodorean 2006c F. Fodorean, Viae militares în timpul lui Traian, in Dacia Augusti Provincia. Crearea
provinciei. Actele simpozionului desfăşurat în 13‐14 octombrie 2006 la Muzeul Naţional de
Istorie a României, ed. by E. Teodor and O. Ţentea, Bucharest, 2006, 135‐152.
Fodorean 2007 F. Fodorean, Drumul roman imperial Sarmizegetusa ‐ Subcetate. Studiu topografic şi
arheologic, in Dacia Felix. Studia Michaeli Bărbulescu oblata (ed. by S. Nemeti, F. Fodorean,
E. Nemeth, S. Cociş, I. Nemeti, M. Pîslaru), Cluj‐Napoca, 2007, 365‐384.
Fodorean 2010 F. Fodorean, Dynamics of a society: geography, space, infrastructure, travel and mobility in
Roman Dacia. State of research and perspectives, in Transylvanian Review XIX, Suppl. 5,
2010, 49‐66.
Fodorean 2010b F. Fodorean, Landscapes of Roman Dacia. Ilișua, in Antiquitas Istro‐Pontica. Mélanges
d’archéologie et d’histoire ancienne offerts à Alexandru Suceveanu (edited by M. V.
Angelescu, I. Achim, A. Bâltâc, V. R. Bolindeț, V. Bottez), Mega Publishing House, Cluj‐
Napoca, 2010, 93‐102.
Fodorean 2011 review to Richard J.A. Talbert: Rome's World. The Peutinger map reconsidered. In
association with Tom Elliott, assisted by Nora Harris, Gannon Hubbard, David O'Brien, and
Grahan Sheperd. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press 2010. 376 pages, 33 b/w, illus., 1
table. $ 50.00. US $ 90.00. ISBN: 978‐0‐521‐76480‐3, in Plekos 13, 2011, 9‐19
http://www.plekos.uni‐muenchen.de/2011/r‐talbert.pdf.
Fodorean 2011a F. Fodorean, The aqueducts of Potaissa, in Frontinus‐Schriftenreihe (Internationale
Gesellschaft für Wasser und Energie zur Förderung der Wissenschaft, Forschung und
Bildung auf dem Gebiet der Geschichte der Rohrleitungs‐, Energie‐ und Wassertechnik
sowie der rohrleitungstechnischen Fachausbildung), 28, 2011, 95‐108.
Fodorean 2011b F. Fodorean, The Bridges of Roman Dacia, in Archäologie der Brücken. Vorgeschichte.
Antike. Mittelalter. Neuzeit (Archaeology of Bridges. Prehistory. Antiquity. Middle Ages.
Modern Era). Bayerische Gesellschaft für Unterwasserarchäologie (Herausgeber), in
Verbindung mit dem Bayerischen landesamt für Denkmalpflege, Verlag Friedrich Pustet,
Regensburg, 2011, 143‐147.
Fodorean 2011c F. Fodorean, Mapping the Orbis Terrarum: the Peutinger Map, the Antonine Itinerary and
the Cartographic Tradition of the Fourth and Fifth Century A.D., in Ephemeris Napocensis 21,
2011, 51‐62.
Fodorean 2011d F. Fodorean, Roman fortresses and roads on Habsburgic and Austro‐Hungarian maps, in
Identităţi culturale locale şi regionale în context european. Studii de arheologie şi
antropologie istorică. In memoriam Alexandri V. Matei (Bibliotheca Musei Porolissensis XIII),
430‐445.
Fodorean 2012 F. Fodorean, Die Strassen des Römischen Dakiens. Forschungsstand, neue Entdeckungen
und Perspektiven der Forschung, in Gymnasium. Zeitschrift für Kultur der Antike und
Humanistische Bildung 119, 2012, 255‐279.
Fodorean 2012a F. Fodorean, Tourism or health necessities? „Spa” vignettes in Tabula Peutingeriana.
Travelling Ad Aquas: thermal water resources in Roman Dacia, in Ephemeris Napocensis 22,
2012 (forthcoming).

83
Fodorean 2012b F. Fodorean, Roads, Fortresses, Settlements and Landscape. The Archaeological Patrimony
and the Twenty First Century, in Studia Universitatis Babes‐Bolyai. Geographia, LVII 2/2012,
145‐152.
Fodorean 2012c F. Fodorean, Communicating in antiquity. Itineraries, geographical space, travel and
infrastructure in Roman Dacia, in Ephemeris Dacoromana (Rome) 14, 2012, 81‐132.
Fodorean 2013 F. Fodorean, Roman Potaissa and its surroundings. A view from above, in the volume
dedicated to: AARG (Aerial Archaeology Research Group) Conference, 2012, Budapest,
Hungary, 13th – 15th September, 2013 (forthcoming).
Fodorean 2013b F. Fodorean, Ricostruendo il paesaggio romano. La strada imperiale di Dacia nella parte
Nord della provincia, in Archeologia Aerea. Studi di Aerotopografia Archeologica V (editor
Giusseppe Ceraudo), 2013 (forthcoming).
Fodorean 2013c F. Fodorean, Ab Histro ad Oceanum...through Roman Dacia. Military explorations,
cartography, geographical knowledge, perception of space and development of road
infrastructure, in a dedicated volume, Peter Lang Publishing House, 2013 (forthcoming).
Fodorean 2013d F. Fodorean, Landscapes of Roman Dacia. Potaissa, in Optimae merito. Studia in honorem
Magistri Radu Ardevan (ed. Ioan Piso, Viorica Rusu‐Bolindeţ, Rada Varga, Gelu Florea,
Eugenia Beu‐Dachin, Silvia Mustaţă), 2013 (forthcoming).
Fodorean 2013e F. Fodorean, Pierre Lapie, Louis Bonnefont, S. F. W. Hoffmann and Roman Dacia, in
Transylvanian Review, 2013 (forthcoming).
Fodorean, Fodorean 2005 F. Fodorean, I. Fodorean, Drumul roman Gherla‐Sic. Studiu geomorfologic, arheologic şi
topografic, in Studia Universitatis Babeş‐Bolyai. Geographia 50/1, 111‐122.
Fodorean, Fodorean 2008 F. Fodorean, I. Fodorean, Valorificarea turistică a unor obiective arheologice din
Transilvania, in Lucrările congresului anual al Societăţii de Geografie din România, Cluj‐
Napoca, 1‐2 iunie 2007. Geografia în contextul dezvoltării europene contemporane.
Turismul şi dezvoltarea durabilă (The tourist’s revaluation of some archaeological objectives
from Transylvania), Cluj‐Napoca, 2008, 103‐112.
Fodorean, Fodorean 2010 F. Fodorean, Ioan Fodorean, The Roman imperial road in the sector Sutoru‐Porolissum.
Topographic and cartographic study, in Studia Universitatis Babes‐Bolyai. Geographia, LV, 1,
2010, 199‐204.
Fodorean, F. Fodorean, I. Fodorean, Topography, digital cartography and GIS in archaeology. Debates
Fodorean 2010a on research methods and perspectives, in Transylvanian Review XIX, Suppl. 5, 2010, 81‐88.
Fodorean, Fodorean 2012 F. Fodorean, I. Fodorean, The Roman Road Network. The Capitalization of an Outstanding
Patrimony, in Studia Universitatis Babes‐Bolyai. Geographia, LVII 1/2012, 175‐180.
Fodorean, Fodorean, F. Fodorean, I. Fodorean, C. Moldovan, Recreating the landscape of the former Roman
Moldovan 2013 Dacia using modern 19th century cartography, digital data and GIS, in e‐Perimetron.
International web journal on sciences and technologies affined to history of cartography and
maps, 2013 (forthcoming).
Fodorean, Irimuş, F. Fodorean, I. A. Irimus, I. Fodorean, C. Moldovan, Culoarul Somesului Mic între Cluj‐
Fodorean, Moldovan 2011 Napoca şi Dej în epoca romană. Valorificarea peisajului arheologic, in Geography in the
context of contemporary development, the conference held between 4th ‐ 6th June, 2009,
Zalău, 2011, 361‐373.

Fodorean, Pătraşcu, F. Fodorean, Cr. Pătrașcu, I. Fodorean, Patrimony, archaeology, tourism: patterns for rural
Fodorean 2012 sustainable tourism, in Journal of Settlement and Spatial Planning 2012 (forthcoming).
Fodorean, Ursuţ 2001 F. Fodorean, D. Ursuţ, The via silica strata Geoagiu‐Băi – Cigmău. Archaeological, geo‐
topographic and technical study, in Acta Musei Napocensis 38, 1, 2001, 203‐220.
Forbes 1964 R. J. Forbes, Studies in Ancient Technology, I, Leiden, 1964.
Forbes 1965 R. J. Forbes, Studies in Ancient Technology, II, Leiden, 1965.
Forstner 2005 G. Forstner, Längenfehler und Ausgangsmeridiane in alten Landkarten und
Positionstabellen. Disseration, Universität der Bundeswehr München, Fakultät für
Bauingenieur‐ und Vermessungswesen, Studiengang Geodäsie und Geoinformation,
Neubiberg 2005 (online as pdf at ub.unibw‐muenchen.de).
French 1980 D. French, The Roman Road System of Asia Minor, în ANRW, II, 7, 2, 1980, p. 698‐727.
Fuentes 2005 M. D. Fuentes, La construcción de puentes romanos en Hispania, 2nd edition, Santiago de
Compostela, 2005.
Fustier 1958 P. Fustier, Notes sur la constitution des voies romaines en Italie. I. Via Flaminia, in Revue des
Études Anciennes 60, 1958, 81‐86.

84
Fustier 1960 P. Fustier, Notes sur la constitution des voies romaines en Italie. II. Via Appia, in Revue des
Études Anciennes 62, 1960, 95‐99.
Fustier 1961 P. Fustier, Notes sur la constitution des voies romaines en Italie. III. Via Aurelia et son
prolongement en Gaule Narbonnaise, in Revue des Études Anciennes 63, 1961, 276‐291.
Fustier 1963 P. Fustier, Étude technique sur un texte de l’empereur Julien relatif à la constitution des
voies romaines, in Revue des Études Anciennes 65, 1963, 114‐121.
Fustier 1968 P. Fustier, La route. Voies antiques. Chemins anciens. Chaussées modernes, Paris, 1968.
Gabričević 1972 M. Gabričević, Strassenbau in der Donja Klisura des Eisernen Tores im Licht der
neuentdeckten Inschrift, in Acta Archaeologica XXIII, Ljubljana, 1972, 408.
Galliazzo 1994 V. Galliazzo, I ponti romani. Catalogo generale, vol. 2, Treviso, 1994.
Gallo 2007 I. M. GALLO, Libratio aquarum. L’art romain de distribuer l’eau, first published in Catalogo
de la Exposición: AQUARIA. Agua, territorio y paisajes en Aragón. Zaragoza, 2007 (available
at http://traianus.rediris.es).
Gautier Dalché 2003 P. Gautier Dalché, La trasmissione medievale e rinascimentale della Tabula Peutingeriana,
in Tabula Peutingeriana. Le antiche vie del mondo (ed. by F. Prontera), Florence, Leo S.
Olschki, 43‐52.
Gautier Dalché 2004 P. Gautier Dalché, Du nouveau sur la transmission et la découverte de la Tabula
Peutingeriana: La 'Çosmographia vetustissima' de Pellegrino Prisciani (+ 1518), in
Geographia Antiqua 13, 2004, 71‐84.
Gayraud 1981 M. Gayraud, Narbonne antique des origines à la fin du IIIème siècle, Paris 1981, 498‐561.
Gendron 2006 S. Gendron, La toponymie des voies romaines et médiévales, Paris, 2006.
Gerasimova and V. T. Gerasimova, L. Hollenstein, Neue Meilensteine aus Bulgarien, in Epigraphica 40,
Hollenstein 1978 1978, 91‐121.
Gerasimova and V. T. Gerasimova, L. Hollenstein, Drei unpublizierte Meilensteine aus Bulgarien, in
Hollenstein 1989 Festschrift für Gerold Walser, Wiesbaden, 1989, 45‐58.
Ghinescu 1998 I. Ghinescu, Cultul nimfelor în Dacia romană, in Ephemeris Napocensis 8, 1998, 123‐144.
Gooss 1874 C. Gooss, Studien zur Geographie und Geschichte des trajanischen Dacien, Hermannstadt,
1874.
Gostar 1956 N. Gostar, Inscripţii romane din judeţul Hunedoara. Contribuţii la cunoaşterea regiunii
Hunedoara, în Sargetia, 3, 1956, 57‐99.
Gozalbes 2003 C. E. Gozalbes, Viajes y viajeros en el mundo antiguo. Cuenca: Ediciones de la Universidad
de Castilla‐La Mancha.
Graf 1999 D. F. Graf, Roman Roads East of the Jordan, in The Madaba Map Centenary 1897‐1997,
http://198.62.75.1/www1/ofm/mad/articles/GrafRoads.html, Ierusalim, 1999, 227‐229.
Graham 2006 Sh. M. Graham, Networks, Agent‐Based Modeling, and the Antonine Itineraries’, in The
Journal of Mediterranean Archaeology, 19, 1, 2006, 45‐64.
Grenier 1934 A. Grenier, Manuel d’archéologie gallo‐romaine, II. L’archéologie du sol, 1. Les routes, Paris,
1934.
Grewe 1986 K. Grewe, Atlas der römischen Wasserleitungen nach Köln, Köln, 1986.
Grewe 2002 K. Grewe, Historische Tunnelbauten im Rheinland. Materialien zur Bodendenkmalpflege im
Rheinland 14, Köln, 2002.
Gros 2010 P. Gros, Les grands travaux comme signe de la puissance de Rome sur les hommes et sur la
nature: l’exemple des routes, in Las técnicas y la construcciones de la Ingeniería Romana. V
Congreso de las Obras Públicas Romanas, 2010, 165‐174 (http: //www.traianvs.net).
Gudea 1980 N. Gudea, Castrul roman de la Breţcu, in Acta Musei Porolissensis 4, 1980, 255‐365.
Gudea 1986 N. Gudea, Res publica municipii Septimii Porolissum, Bucharest, 1986.
Gudea 1996 N. Gudea, Porolissum. Un complex daco‐roman la marginea de nord a Imperiului Roman. II.
Vama romană. Monografie arheologică. Contribuţii la cunoaşterea sistemului vamal din
provinciile dacice, Cluj‐Napoca, 1996.
Gudea 1997 N. Gudea, Der Dakische Limes. Materialen zu seiner Geschichte, Mainz, 1997.
Gudea, Pop 1971 N. Gudea, I. Pop, Das Römerlager von Rîşnov‐Rosenau. Cumidava, Braşov, 1971.
Gušić 1996 S. Gušić, Traian's Bridge. A contribution towards its reconstruction, in P. Petrović (ed.),
Roman Limes on the Middle and Lower Danube, Cahiers des Portes de Fer, 2, 1996,
Belgrade, 259‐261.
Hagen 1978 V. von Hagen, Le grandi strade di Roma nel mondo, Roma, 1978.
Halavats 1896 G. Halavats, A Lederata‐Tibiscum út, în Archaeologiai Értesítő 16, 1896, 12‐14.
Heinz 2003 W. Heinz, Reisewege der Antike. Unterwegs im Römischen Reich, Stuttgart, 2003.
Herz, Garrison 1998 N. Herz, E. G. Garisson, Geological methods for archaeology, Oxford ‐ New York, 1998.

85
Herzig 1974 H. E. Herzig, Probleme des römischen Straßenwesens: Untersuchungen zu Geschichte und
Recht, in ANRW II, 1, 1974, 593‐648.
Hollenstein 1975 L. Hollenstein, Zu den Meilensteinen der römischen Provinzen Thracia und Moesia Inferior,
in Studia Balcanica 10, 1975, 23‐44.
Hollenstein 1995 L. Hollenstein, Neue Meilensteininschriften aus Bulgarien, in Festschrift für Hans Lieb, 1995,
179‐189.
Holliday 2004 V. Holliday, Soils in archaeological research, Oxford ‐ New York, 2004.
Hortopan 2006 D. Hortopan, Consideraţii privind reţeaua rutieră romană din Dacia meridională în secolele
II‐III p. Chr., in Drobeta 16, 2006, 47‐54.
Husar 2002 A. Husar, Din istoria Daciei romane. I. Structuri de civilizație, Cluj‐Napoca, 2002.
Hügel 1999 P. Hügel (ed.), Repertoriul arheologic al Mureşului Inferior. Judeţul Arad (Bibliotheca historica
et archaeological Banatica), Timişoara, 1999.
Hügel 2003 P. Hügel, Ultimele decenii ale stăpânirii romane în Dacia (Traianus Decius‐Aurelian), Cluj‐
Napoca, 2003.
Irimuş 1997 I. A. Irimuş, La corrélation des glissements de terrain avec les types de dômes périphériques
dans le Bassin de Transylvanie, in Geografia Fisica e Dinamica Quaternaria 19, Torino 1997,
245‐248.
Irimuş 1998 I. A. Irimuş, Relieful pe domuri şi cute diapire din Depresiunea Transilvaniei, Cluj‐Napoca,
1998.
Irimuş 2006 I. A. Irimuş, Hazarde şi riscuri asociate proceselor geomorfologice în aria cutelor diapire din
Depresiunea Transilvaniei, Cluj‐Napoca, 2006.
Irimuş, Petrea, Surdeanu, I. A. Irimuş, D. Petrea, V. Surdeanu, F. Fodorean, O. Pop, La reconstruction des
Fodorean, Pop 2009 paleopaysages transylvains à partir des routes et des camps romaines de Dacia
Porolissensis, in Ol’Man River. Geo‐archaeological aspects of rivers and river plains, Ghent,
2009, 493‐505.
Irimuş, Fodorean, Petrea, I. A. Irimus, F. Fodorean, D. Petrea, I. Fodorean, Porolissum geosite. Morphology,
Fodorean 2011 archaeology and topography, in Studia UBB. Geographia, 56, 1, 2011, 23‐28.
Irimuş, Fodorean, Petrea, I. A. Irimuş, F. Fodorean, D. Petrea, I. Rus, P. Cocean, O. Pop, Role of the relief in the
Rus, Cocean, Pop 2009 projection of roads and in the arrangement of the Roman military camps in Dacia
Porolissensis, in Studia Universitatis Babeş‐Bolyai. Geographia LIV, 2, 2009, 39‐48.
Jaubert 1980 J. M. Jaubert, Bornes milliaires de Numidie, in Antiquités africaines 16, 1980, 161‐184.
Jehasse, Nucci 2000 O. Jehasse, F. Nucci, Les voies romaines de Corse, Labiana / Idim de L’Université de Corse,
2000: http://www.univ‐corse.fr/labiana/documents/voies_romaines.PDF.
Johnson 2007 M. Johnson, Ideas of landscape, Blackwell Publishing, Oxford, 2007.
Jones 1992 B. W. Jones, The Emperor Domitian, Routledge, London and New York, 1992.
Kennedy 1995 D. Kennedy, The Via Nova Traiana in Northern Jordan: a cultural resource under threat, in
Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 39, 1995, 221‐227.
Kennedy 1996 D. Kennedy, New milestones from northern Jordan: 1992‐1995, in ZPE 113, 1996, 257‐262.
Kennedy 1997 D. Kennedy, Roman Roads and Routes in North‐east Jordan, in Levant 29, 1997, 71‐93.
Kennedy 1998 D. Kennedy, La Jordanie antique vue dans le ciel, in Archéologia 346, 1998, 56‐65.
Kennedy 1998a D. Kennedy, Aerial Archaeology in Jordan, in Levant 30, 1998, 91‐96.
Kennedy 1998b D. Kennedy, Gharandal Survey 1997: Air photo interpretation and ground verification, in
Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 42, 1998, 573‐585.
Klee 2010 M. Klee, Lebensadern des Imperiums. Straßen im Römischen Weltreich, Stuttgart 2010.
Koeppel 1980 G. Koeppel, A military itinerarium on the Column of Trajan: scene L, in Milleilungen des
Deutschen Archaeologisches Institute, Römische Abteilungen, 87, 1980, 301‐306.
Kolb 2000 A. Kolb, Transport und Nachrichtentransfer im Römischen Reich. Berlin, 2000.
Kolb 2001 A. Kolb, Transport and communication in the Roman state: the cursus publicus, in C. Adams,
R. Laurence (ed.), Travel and Geography in the Roman Empire, Routledge Ed., London ‐ New
York, 2001, 95‐105.
Kolb 2002 A. Kolb, Impact and Interaction of State Transport in the Roman Empire, in The
Transformation of the economic life under the Roman Empire. Proceedings of the second
workshop of the International network Impact of Empire (Roman Empire, c. 200 B.C. ‐ A.D.
476), Nottingham, July 4 – 7, 2001, ed. by L. de Blois, J. Rich, Amsterdam, 2002.
König 1970 I. König, Die Meilensteine der Gallia Narbonensis. Studien zum Straßenwesen der Provincia
Narbonensis, Bern 1970.
Koschik 2004 H. Koschik (ed.), Alle Wege führen nach Rom. Internationales Römerstraßenkolloquium
Bonn. Materialien zur Bodendenkmalpflege im Rheinland Band 16. Eine Veröffentlichung

86
 des Landschaftsverbandes Rheinland, Rheinisches Amt für Bodendenkmalpflege, Bonn,
2004.
Kramer 2001 B. Kramer, The earliest known map of Spain (?) and the Geography of Artemidorus of
Ephesus on papyrus, Imago Mundi 53, 2001, 115‐120.
Landels 2000 G. J. Landels, Engineering in the Ancient World, University of California Press, 2000.
Lascu 1986 N. Lascu, Călători şi exploratori în antichitate, Bucureşti, 1986.
Laurence 1999 R. Laurence, The Roads of Roman Italy. Mobility and Cultural Change, Routledge Ed.,
London‐New York, 1999.
Laurence 2001 R. Laurence, The creation of geography: an interpretation of Roman Britain, in C. Adams, R.
Laurence (ed.), Travel and Geography in the Roman Empire, Routledge Ed., London ‐ New
York, 2001, 67‐94.
Le Bohec 1989 Y. Le Bohec, L’armée romaine sous le Haut‐Empire, Paris, 1989
Le Roux 1998 P. Le Roux, Le Haut‐Empire romain en Occident d’Auguste aux Sévères: 31 av. J.‐C.‐235 apr.
J.‐C., Paris, 1998.
Levi A. and M. 1967 A. Levi, M. Levi, Itineraria picta. Contributo allo studio della Tabula Peutingeriana, Rome,
1967.
Leylek 1993 H. Leylek, La vignetta di Antiochia e la datazione della Tabula Peutingeriana, in Journal of
Ancient Topography III, 1993, 203‐206.
Lozovski 2008 N. Lozovsky, Maps and Panegyrics: Roman Geo‐Ethnographical Rhetoric in Late Antiquity
and the Middle Ages, in R. Talbert, R. Unger (eds.), Cartography in Antiquity and the Middle
Ages. Fresh perspectives, new methods (series Technology and Change in History, vol. 10),
Leiden, Boston, 2008, 169‐188.
Litaudon 2004 J. Cl. Litaudon, Les aqueducs antiques conduire l’eau (aquae ductus), in Elementos de
Ingenería Romana. Congreso europeo Las Obras Públicas Romanas, Tarragona, 3‐6
noviembre 2004, 71‐85.
Litaudon 2007 J. Cl. LITAUDON, Dictionnaire hydraulique, 2007 (http://traianus.rediris.es).
Luca 2004 S. A. Luca, Repertoriul arheologic al judeţului Caraş‐Severin (Bibliotheca Septemcastrensis
6), Sibiu, 2004.
Luca 2004a S. A. Luca, Arheologie şi istorie (I). Descoperiri din judeţul Caraş‐Severin (Bibliotheca
Septemcastrensis), Sibiu, 2004.
Luca 2005 S. A. Luca, Arheologie şi istorie (II). Descoperiri din Banat (Bibliotheca Septemcastrensis 10),
Sibiu, 2005.
Luca 2005a S. A. Luca, Repertoriul arheologic al judeţului Hunedoara (Bibliotheca Septemcastrensis XIV),
Alba Iulia, 2005.
Luca 2005b S. A. Luca, Arheologie şi istorie (III). Descoperiri din judeţul Hunedoara (Bibliotheca
Septemcastrensis XI), Sibiu, 2005.
Luca 2006 S. A. Luca, Descoperiri arheologice din Banatul românesc. Repertoriu (Bibliotheca
Septemcastrensis XVIII), Sibiu, 2006.
Luca, Gudea 2010 S. A. Luca, N. Gudea, Repertoriul arheologic al judeţului Sălaj (Bibliotheca Brukenthal XLV),
Sibiu, 2010.

Luca, Pinter, S. A. Luca, Z. K. Pinter, A. Georgescu, Repertoriul arheologic al judeţului Sibiu (Bibliotheca
Georgescu 2003 Septemcastrensis III), Sibiu, 2003.
Luttwak 1976 E. Luttwak, The grand strategy of the Roman Empire from the first century A.D. to the third,
Baltimore, John Hopkins University Press, 1976.
Lázaro, Gonzales 2010 A. L. P. Lázaro, M. G. M. Gonzales, Tratamiento arqueológico de las vías romanas, in Las
técnicas y la construcciones de la Ingeniería Romana. V Congreso de las Obras Públicas
Romanas, 2010, 47‐73 (http: //www.traianvs.net).
Lazăr 1995 V. Lazăr, Repertoriul arheologic al judeţului Mureş, Târgu Mureş, 1995.
Löhberg 2006 B. Löhberg, Das Itinerarium provinciarum Antonini Augusti: ein kaiserzeitliches
Straßenverzeichnis des Römischen Reiches; Überlieferung, Strecken, Kommentare, Karten,
vol. 1 and 2, Berlin, Frank & Timme, 2006.
Mac 1987 I. Mac, Geografia României III. Câmpia Transilvaniei, Bucharest, 1987, 566‐578.
Mackay 1999 C. S. Mackay, Expressions of motion to set goals in the colloquial Latin of the Empire,
Zeitschrift für Papyrologie und Epigraphic 126, 1999, 229‐239.
Macrea, Protase 1959 M. Macrea, D. Protase, Şantierul arheologic Alba Iulia şi împrejurimile lui, in Materiale şi
cercetări arheologice 5, 1959, 442‐448.

87
Madzharov 2009 M. Madzharov, Roman roads in Bulgaria. Contribution to the development of Roman road
system in the provinces of Moesia and Thrace, Veliko Tarnovo, 2009.
Macrea 1969 M. Macrea, Viaţa în Dacia romană, Bucharest, 1969.
Manni 1949 E. Manni, L’impero di Gallieno, Rome, 1949.
Marcu, Cupcea 2011 F. Marcu, G. Cupcea, The topography of Colonia Ulpia Traiana Augusta Dacica
Sarmizegetusa and the first centuriation in Dacia, in Archäologishes Korespondenzblatt 41,
4, 2011, 543‐560.
Margary 1955, 1957 I. D. Margary, Roman Roads in Britain, I, London, 1955; II, London, 1957.
Marţian 1920 I. Marţian, Repertoriu arheologic pentru Ardeal, Bistriţa, 1920.
Marţian 1921 I. Marţian, Urme ale războaielor dintre romani şi daci, Cluj‐Napoca, 1921.
Mânzatu 1926 G. Mânzatu, Monografia oraşului Dej, Bistriţa, 1926.
Matei 2006 D. Matei, Trupe fără castre, castre fără trupe în Dacia, in Buletinul Cercurilor Științifice
Studențesti, Arheologie ‐ Istorie ‐ Muzeologie (Alba‐Iulia, Universitatea 1 Decembrie 1918),
12, 2006, 55‐70.
Mattern 1999 S. Mattern, Rome and the Enemy: Imperial Strategy in the Principate, University of
California, 1999.
McQuiggan 2006‐2007 R. McQuiggan, Roman Geography and Spatial Perception in the Republic, in Hirundo. The
McGill Journal of Classical Studies, V, 2006‐2007, 77‐98.
Mehrer, Wescott 2006 M. Mehrer, K. Wescott (eds.), GIS and Archaeological Site Location Modeling, London ‐ New
York, 2006.
Meloni 1988 P. Meloni, La provincia romana di Sardegna, 1. I secoli I‐III, in ANRW II, 11/1, 1988, 451‐
490.
Mertens 2008 D. Mertens (ed.), Stadtverkehr in der antiken Welt: Internationales Kolloquium zur 175‐
Jahrfeier des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts Rom, 21. bis 23. April 2004, Publication
Wiesbaden, 2008.
Miclea, Florescu 1980 I. Miclea, R. Florescu, Decebal şi Traian, Bucharest, 1980.
Miller 1887 K. Miller, Die Weltkarte des Castorius gennant die Peutingerische Tafel, Ravensburg, 1887.
Miller 1888 K. Miller, Die Peutingerische Tafel, Ravensburg, 1888 (expanded edition 1916; reissued 1929
and 1962 – all from Stuttgart).
Miller 1916 K. Miller, Itineraria romana. Römische reisewege an der hand der Tabula Peutingeriana
dargestellt, Stuttgart, 1916.
Mirković 1960 M. Mirković, The Roman Road Naissus‐Scupi and the Stages Ad Fines, in Ziva Antica 10,
1960, 249‐257.
Mirković 1996 M. Mirković, The Iron Gates (Djerdap) and the Roman Policy on the Moesian Limes A.D. 33‐
117, in P. Petrović (ed.), Roman Limes on the Middle and Lower Danube, Belgrad (publisher:
Archaeological Institute), 1996, 27‐40.
Mirković 2007 M. Mirković, Moesia Superior: Eine Provinz An Der Mittleren Donau (Zaberns Bildbände zur
Archäologie. Sonderbände der antiken Welt), Mainz, Philipp von Zabern, 2007.
Mitford 1980 T. B. Mitford, Roman Rough Cilicia, in ANRW II, 7, 2, 1980, 1230‐1261.
Mitford 1980a T. B. Mitford, Cappadocia and Armenia Minor: Historical Setting of the Limes, in ANRW II, 7,
2, 1980, 1170‐1223.
Mitrofan 1997 I. Mitrofan, Concernant la structure des voies romaines en Dacie, in ActaMN 34, 1, 1997, 613‐
619.
Mitrofan 1997a I. Mitrofan, Cercetări arheologice în aşezarea romană de la Micăsasa (jud. Sibiu) (campania
1995), in ActaMN 34, 1, 1997, 717‐723.
Moatti 2006 C. Moatti, Translation, Migration, and Communication in the Roman Empire: Three Aspects
of Movement in History, in Classical Antiquity 25, 1, April 2006, 109‐140.
Moreno Gallo 2004 I. Moreno Gallo (ed.), Elementos de ingeniería romana. Congreso Europeo „Las Obras
Públicas Romanas”, 3‐6 noviembre 2004, Tarragona, 2004.
Galliazzo 1994 V. Galliazzo, I ponti romani. Catalogo generale, vol. 2, Treviso, 1994.
Moreno Gallo 2006 I. Moreno Gallo, Vías Romanas. Ingeniería y técnica constructiva, Monterreina, 2006.
Mócsy 1974 A. Mócsy, Pannonia and Upper Moesia. A History of the Middle Danube Provinces of the
Roman Empire, London‐Boston, 1974.
Moga, Ciugudean 1995 V. Moga, H. Ciugudean (eds.), Repertoriul arheologic al judeţului Alba, Alba Iulia, 1995.
Molnár, Timár 2009 G. Molnár, G. Timár, Mosaicking of the 1:75 000 sheets of the third military survey of the
Habsburgic Empire, in Acta Geodaetica et Geophysica Hungarica 44/1, Budapest, 2009, 115‐
120.

88
Morales 2010 J. R. Morales, Las vías romanas en la erudición moderna. Reivindicación de Nicolás Bergier,
in Las técnicas y la construcciones de la Ingeniería Romana. V Congreso de las Obras
Públicas Romanas, 2010, 119‐134 (http: //www.traianvs.net).
Moreno Gallo 2010 I. Moreno Gallo, Vías romanas e infraestructuras modernas, in I Congreso Internacional de
Carreteras, Cultura y Territorio. CICCP de Galicia. La Coruña, 3, 4 y 5 de Marzo de 2010, 1‐22
(http: //www.traianvs.net).
Moreno Gallo 2010 a I. Moreno Gallo, Vías romanas. Las huellas de la ingeniería perdida, in Las técnicas y la
construcciones de la Ingeniería Romana. V Congreso de las Obras Públicas Romanas, 2010,
11‐46 (http: //www.traianvs.net).
Nemeth 2005 E. Nemeth, Armata în sud‐vestul Daciei romane / Die Armee im Südwesten des römischen
Dakien, Timişoara, 2005.
Nemeth 2007 E. Nemeth, Politische und militärische Beziehungen zwischen Pannonien und Dakien in der
Römerzeit (Relaţii politice şi militare între Pannonia şi Dacia în epoca romană), Cluj‐Napoca,
2007.
Nemeth, Fodorean, E. Nemeth, F. Fodorean, D. Matei, D. Blaga, Der südwestliche limes des römischen
Matei, Blaga 2011 Dakien. Strukturen und Landschaft (Speculum Antiquitatis 1), Cluj‐Napoca, 2011.
Nemeth, Fodorean, E. Nemeth, F. Fodorean, D. Matei, D. Blaga, Kastelle und Landschaft an der Südwestgrenze
Matei, Blaga 2011a des römischen Dakien, in Acta Archaeologica Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae 62, 2011,
329‐350.
Nemeti 2004 S. Nemeti, Piese romane de bronz din Dacia, in Revista Bistriţei XVIII, 2004, 89‐100.
Nemeti 2006 S. Nemeti, Dacia... in formam provinciae redacta, in Eugen S. Teodor, Ovidiu Ţentea (ed.),
Dacia Augusti Provincia. Crearea provinciei. Actele simpozionului desfăşurat în 13‐14
octombrie 2006 la Muzeul Naţional de Istorie a României, Bucharest, 2006, 271‐288
Nemeti 2009 S. Nemeti, Scythicum frigus. Repères pour une histoire du climat au Bas‐Danube (Ier siècle
apr. J.‐C.), in Société et climats dans l’Empire romain. Pour une perspective historique et
systémique de la gestion des resources en eau dans l’Empire romain, Napoli, 2009, 411‐427.
Nemeti, Bărbulescu S. Nemeti, M. Bărbulescu, Territorium Arcobadarense, in Ephemeris Napocensis 16‐17,
2006‐2007 2006‐2007, 107‐118.
Nemeti, Bărbulescu 2010 S. Nemeti, M. Bărbulescu, Arcobadara, in Latomus 69, 2010, 446‐455.
Nemeti, Dana 2001 S. Nemeti, D. Dana, La Dacie dans les Res Gestae Divi Saporis, in Acta Musei Napocensis 38,
1, 2001, 239‐257.
Nemeti, Nemeti, S. Nemeti, I. Nemeti, F. Fodorean, Territorium Potaissae, in Revista Bistriţei 17, 2003, 69‐75.
Fodorean 2003
Nicolet 1991 C. Nicolet, Space, Geography, and Politics in the Early Roman Empire, Ann Arbor, University
of Michigan Press, 1991.
O’Connor 1993 C. O’Connor, Roman Bridges, Cambridge University Press, 1993.
Pătraşcu, Fodorean, C. Pătraşcu, F. Fodorean, I. Fodorean, Tourism and Archaeology: Back to Origins, in Journal
Fodorean 2011 of Settlements and Spatial Planning, vol. 2, no. 1 (2011), 57‐64.
Palma 1982 A. Palma, Le strade romane nelle dottrine giuridiche e gromatiche dell’età del principato, in
ANRW II, 14, 1982.
Panaitescu 1936 E. Panaitescu, Provincia şi Imperiul. Extras din volumul omagial pentru fraţii Alexandru şi Ion
I. Lapedatu, Bucharest, 1936, 3‐14.
Panaitescu 1938 E. Panaitescu, Le grandi strade romane in Romania, in the collection Quaderni dell’Impero.
Le grandi strade del mondo romano. X, Rome, 1938.
Pascher 1949 G. Pascher, Römische Siedlungen und Straßen im Limesgebiet zwischen Enns und Leitha,
Wien, 1949 (Der Römische Limes in Österreich, Heft XIX).
Pazarli 2009 M. Pazarli, Mediterranean islands in Tabula Peutingeriana, in e‐Perimetron, vol. 4, No. 2,
2009, 101 ‐ 116 (www.e‐perimetron.org).
Pazarli, Livieratos, M. Pazarli, E. Livieratos, C. Boutoura, Road network of Crete
Boutoura 2007 in Tabula Peutingeriana, in e‐Perimetron, vol. 2, No. 4, 2007, 245 ‐ 260 (www.e‐
perimetron.org).
Pădureanu 1982 E. Pădureanu, O contribuţie la problema drumului roman pe cursul mijlociu al Mureşului, in
Ziridava 14, 1982, 67‐74.
Pănuca 1930 E. Pănuca, Apărarea Banatului în timpurile cele mai vechi până la primul război mondial, in
Analele Banatului 3, fasc. 4, 1930, 41‐48.
Pârvan 1906 V. Pârvan, Câteva cuvinte cu privire la organizaţia provinciei Dacia traiană, Bucharest, 1906.
Pârvan 1923 V. Pârvan, Începuturile vieţii romane la gurile Dunării, Bucharest, 1923.
Pârvan 1926 V. Pârvan, Getica. O protoistorie a Daciei, Bucharest, 1926.

89
Pescaru 1988‐1991 E. Pescaru, Încă o plăcuţă votivă din aur descoperită la Germisara (Geoagiu‐Băi), in Sargetia
21‐24, 1988‐1991, 664‐666.
Pescaru, Pescaru E. Pescaru, A. R. Pescaru, Faze şi etape de amenajare ale complexului termal Germisara
1995‐1996 (Geoagiu‐Băi, judeţul Hunedoara), in Sargetia XXVI/1, 1995‐1996, 325‐339.
Pescaru, Pescaru 2001 A. R. Pescaru, E. Pescaru, Complexul termal roman Germisara. Faze şi etape de amenajare,
in Studii de istorie antică. Omagiu profesorului Ioan Glodariu, Cluj‐Napoca ‐ Deva, 2001,
439‐452.
Petolescu 2000 C.C. Petolescu, Inscriptions de la Dacie romaine. Inscriptions externes concernant l’histoire
de la Dacie (Ier‐IIIème siècles). II. Zones du CIL III et du CIL VIII, Bucharest, 2000.
Petolescu 2000a C. C. Petolescu, Dacia şi Imperiul Roman. De la Burebista până la sfârşitul antichităţii,
Bucharest, 2000.
Petolescu 2007 C. C. Petolescu, C. Statilius Crito, in Contribuţii la istoria Daciei romane. I, Ed. Academiei,
Bucharest, 2007, 143 ‐ 146.
Petolescu 2007a C. C. Petolescu, Imaginea Daciei în spaţiul geografic antic, in Contribuţii la istoria Daciei
romane. I, Ed. Academiei, Bucharest, 2007, 268 ‐ 276.
Petolescu 2007b C. C. Petolescu, Dacia în Tabula Peutingeriana, in Contribuţii la istoria Daciei romane. I, Ed.
Academiei, Bucharest, 2007, 276 ‐ 279.
Petrović 1986 P. Petrović, La voie romaine dans les Portes de Fer, in Starinar 37, Belgrad 1986, 41‐51.
Pippidi, Russu 1977 D. M. Pippidi, I I. Russu, Inscripţiile Daciei romane (IDR), III/1 (Dacia Superior. Zona de sud‐
vest. Teritoriul dintre Dunăre, Tisa şi Mureş) (Inscriptiones Daciae Romanae, volumen III, 1.
Dacia Superior. Pars occidentalis. Agger inter Danuvium, Pathisum et Marisiam), Bucharest,
1977.
Piso 1972 I. Piso, Publius Furius Saturninus, in Acta Musei Napocensis 9, 1972, 463‐471.
Piso 1993 I. Piso, Fasti Provinciae Daciae I. Die senatorischen Amtsträger, Bonn, 1993.
Pop 2007 Gr. P. Pop, Judeţul Cluj, Bucharest, 2007.
Popa‐Lisseanu 2006 G. Popa‐Lisseanu, Dacia în autorii clasici, Bucharest, 2006.
Popescu 1976 E. Popescu, Inscripţiile greceşti şi latine din secolele IV‐XIII descoperite în România,
Bucharest, 1976.
Popescu‐Spineni 1978 M. Popescu‐Spineni, România în izvoarele geografice şi cartografice, Bucharest, 1978.
Popescu, Ţentea 2006 F. M. Popescu, O. Ţentea, Participarea trupelor auxiliare din Moesia Superior şi Moesia
Inferior la cucerirea Daciei, in E. S. Teodor, O. Ţentea (eds.), Dacia Augusti Provincia.
Crearea provinciei. Actele simpozionului desfăşurat în 13‐14 octombrie 2006 la Muzeul
Naţional de Istorie a României, Bucureşti, 2006, 75‐120.
Prieur 1976 J. Prieur, L’histoire des régions alpestres (Alpes Maritimes, Cottiennes, Graies et Pennines)
sous le haut‐empire romain (Ier – IIIe siècle après J. C.), in ANRW II, 5, 1976, 630‐643.
Prontera 2003 F. Prontera (ed.), Tabula Peutingeriana. Le antiche vie del mondo, Florence, 2003.
Protase 2001 D. Protase, Istoria Românilor, vol. II, Bucharest, 2001.
Protase 2003 D. Protase, Descoperiri și date inedite privind castrul roman de la Hoghiz (Découvertes et
dates inédites concernant le castre romain de Hoghiz, in Studia Historica et Theologica.
Omagiu Profesorului Emilian Popescu, Iași, 125‐134.
Protase 2008 D. Protase, Castrul roman de la Orheiul Bistriţei. Das Römische Kastell von Orheiu Bistriţei
(Romanian‐German text), Cluj‐Napoca, 2008.
Protase, Gaiu, D. Protase, C. Gaiu, Gh. Marinescu, Castrul roman şi aşezarea civilă de la Ilişua (jud. Bistriţa
Marinescu 1996‐1997 Năsăud), in Revista Bistriţei 10‐11, 1996‐1997, 27‐110.
Protase, Gudea, D. Protase, N. Gudea, R. Ardevan, Din istoria militară a Daciei romane. Castrul roman de
Ardevan 2008 interior de la Gherla. Aus der Militärgeschichte des römischen Dakien. Das römische
Binnenkastell von Gherla, Timişoara, 2008.
Quilici 1991 L. Quilici, Le strade. Viabilità tra Roma e Lazio, Rome, 1991.
Quilici, Quilici 2004 L. Quilici, S. Quilici Gigli, Introduzione alla topografia antica, Il Mulino, Bologna, 2004.
Pékary 1968 Th. Pékary, Untersuchungen zu den römischen Reichsstrassen, Bonn, 1968.
Radke 1964 G. Radke, Römische Strassen in der Gallia Cisalpina und der Narbonensis, in Klio 42, 1964
299‐318.
Radke 1973 G. Radke, Viae publicae romanae, in Real‐Encyclopädie der Altertumswissenschaft,
Supplement XIII (A. Druckenmüller, München), Stuttgart, 1973, 1417 sqq.
Radke 1981 G. Radke, Viae publicae romanae, Bologna, 1981.
Raepsaet 1999 G. Raepsaet, Landtransport, in Der Neue Pauly VI, 1097‐1106.

90
Rankov 1990 N. B. Rankov, Singulares legati legionis: a problem in the interpretation of the Ti. Claudius
Maximus inscription from Philippi, in Zeitschrift für Papyrologie und Epigraphik 80, 1990,
165‐175.
Rathmann 2003 M. Rathmann, Untersuchungen zu den Reichsstraßen in den westlichen Provinzen des
Imperium Romanum (Beihefte der Bonner Jahrbϋcher. Landschaftsverband Rheinland.
Rheinisches Landesmuseum Bonn und verein von Altertumsfreunden im Rheinlande), Band
55, Verlag Philipp von Zabern, Mainz 2003.
Rădeanu, Fodorean 2010 V. Rădeanu, F. Fodorean, Archaeological structures in Dacia identified on aerial photographs,
in Archeologia Aerea (100 anni di archeologia aerea in Italia. Atti del Convegno
Internazionale Roma, 15‐15 Aprile 2009, a cura di Giuseppe Ceraudo) 4‐5, 2010‐2011, 329‐
332.
Rădulescu, Bărbulescu A. Rădulescu, M. Bărbulescu, De nouveau sur les légats de Trajan en Mésie Inférieure entre
1981 103 et 108 de n.è., in Dacia N.S. 25, 1981, 353‐358.
Răuţ, Bozu, O. Răuţ, O. Bozu, R. Petrovszky, Drumurile romane în Banat, in Banatica 4, 1977, 135‐159.
Petrovszky 1977
Reverdy 1995 G. Reverdy, Histoire des routes de France, Paris 1995.
Roll 1999 I. Roll, The Roads in Roman‐Byzantine Palestina and Arabia, in The Madaba Map Centenary
1897‐1997, //198.62.75.1/www1/ofm/mad/articles/RollRoads.html, Ierusalim, 1999, 109‐
113.
Rossi 1968 L. Rossi, The Representation on Trajan’s Column of Trajan’s Rock‐cut Road in Upper Moesia,
in The Antiquaries Journal 68, 1968, 41‐46.
Roşu 2006 T. Roşu, Diploma de doctorat a lui August Treboniu Laurian. O revizuire sumativă, in Annales
Universitatis Apulensis, Series Historica, 10/I, 2006, 197‐204.
Rösch, Rösch 2010 G. Rösch, H. E. Rösch, Römerstraßen zwischen Mosel und Rhein. Unterwegs zu sehenswerten
Römerfunden, Mainz 2010.
Rusu 1988‐1991 A. Rusu, Marcus Statius Priscus la Germisara, in Sargetia 21‐24, 1988‐1991, 653‐656.
Rusu 1996 A. A. Rusu, Pons Augusti nel medioevo, in M. Porumb (ed.), Omaggio a Dinu Adameşteanu,
Cluj‐Napoca, 1996, 249–252.
Rusu, Pescaru 1996 A. Rusu, E. Pescaru, Călan Băi ‐ Aquae, jud. Hunedoara, in Cronica Cercetărilor Arheologice ‐
campania 1995, Bucharest, 1996, 23‐24.
Russu 1972 I. I. Russu, Getica lui Statilius Crito, in Studii Clasice 14, 1972, 111‐127.
Russu 1968 I. I. Russu, Inscripţii romane din judeţul Hunedoara, in Sargetia 5, 1968, 87‐107.
Russu 1970 I. I. Russu, Note epigrafice, in Acta MN 7, 1970, 517‐528.
Salama 1951 P. A. Salama, Les voies romaines de l’Afrique du Nord, Alger, 1951.
Salama 1980 P. A. Salama, Les voies romaines de Sitifis à Igilgili. Un exemple de politique routière
approfondie, in Antiquités africaines 16, 1980, 101‐133.
Salama 1985 P. A. Salama, L’apport des inscriptions routières à l’histoire politique de l’Afrique Romaine, in
L’Africa Romana. Atti del III convegno di studio Sassari, 13‐15 dicembre 1985, 219‐231.
Salway 2001 B. Salway, Travel, itineraria and tabellaria, in Travel and Geography in the Roman Empire,
(C. Adams, R. Laurence ed.), London/New York, Routledge, 2001, 22‐66.
Salway 2004 B. Salway, Sea and river travel in the Roman itinerary literature, in R. Talbert, K. Brodersen
(eds.), Space in the Roman World: its Perception and Presentation, Münster (LIT, 2004), 43‐
96.
Salway 2005 B. Salway, The Nature and Genesis of the Peutinger Map, in Imago Mundi 57, 2005, 119‐
135.
Šašel 1963 J. Šašel, Inscriptiones latinae quae in Iugoslavia inter annos MCMXL et MCMLX repertae et
editae sunt, Situla 5, Ljubljana, 1963.
Šašel 1973 J. Šašel, Trajan’s Canal at the Iron Gate, in The Journal of Roman Studies 6, 1973, 80‐85.
Šašel 1977 J. Šašel, Viae militares, in Limes X. Studien zu den militar grenzen, Xanten, 1977, 235‐244.
Sechi 1990 M. Sechi, La costruzione della scienza geografica nei pensatori dell’antichità classica
(Memorie della Società Geografica Italiana 44). Rome, 1990.
Sherk 1974 R. K. Sherk, Roman Geographical Exploration and Military Maps’ in ANRW II, 1, 1974, 534‐
562.
Sillières 1990 P. Sillières, Les voies de communication de l’Hispanie méridionale, Paris, 1990.
Simu 1924 T. Simu, Drumuri şi cetăţi romane în Banat, Lugoj, 1924.
Schreiber 1960 H. Schreiber, Le vie della civiltà, Rome, 1960.
Sitwell 1981 N. H. H. Sitwell, Roman Roads of Europe, London, 1981.

91
Speidel 1983 M. P. Speidel, Exploratores. Mobile elit units of Roman Germany, in Epigraphische Studien
13, 1983, 63‐78.
Speidel 1984 M. P. Speidel, The captor of Decebalus, in M. P. Speidel, Roman Army Studies I. Mavors I,
Amsterdam, 1984, 173‐187.
Speidel 1987 M. P. Speidel, A building inscription from the fort of numerus Germanicianorum at
Orăştioara de Sus in Upper Dacia, in Apulum 24, 1987, 143‐144.
Staccioli 2003 R. A. Staccioli, The Roads of the Romans, Los Angeles, 2003.
Stefan 2005 A. S. Stefan, Les guerres daciques de Domitien et de Trajan: architecture militaire,
topographie, images et histoire, Rome, 2005.
Stefulescu 1983 Al. Stefulescu, Un drum roman descoperit în Gorj, in Revista Nouă, no. 1, year IV, Bucharest,
1893, 340‐342.
Strobel 1984 K. Strobel, Untersuchungen zu den Dakerkriegen Trajans: Studien zur Geschichte des
mittleren und unteren Donauraumes in der hohen Kaiserzeit (Antiquitas, ser. 1, fasc. 33),
Bonn, 1984.
Strobel 1989 K. Strobel, Die Donaukriege Domitian, Bonn, 1989.
Suceveanu, Barnea 1993 Al. Suceveanu, Iuliana Barnea, Contributions à l’histoire des villes romaines de la Dobroudja,
in Dacia N.S. 37, 1993, 159‐179.
Susini 1992 G. Susini, Per una clasificazione delle iscrizioni itinerarie, in L. Quilici and S. Quilici Gigli (eds.)
Tecnica stradale romana. ATTA 1, 1992, 119‐121.
Syme 1988 R. Syme, Military geography at Rome, Classical Antiquity 7, 1988, 227‐251.
Talbert 2000 R. J. A. Talbert (ed.), Barrington Atlas of the Greek and Roman World (with Map‐by‐Map
Directory on CD‐ROM), Princeton University Press, 2000.
Talbert 2003 R. J. A. Talbert, Atlas of Classical History, Routledge, London and New York, 2003.
Talbert 2004 R. J. A. Talbert, Cartography and Taste in Peutinger’s Roman Map, in R. J. A. Talbert, K.
Brodersen (eds.), Space in the Roman World: its Perception and Presentation, Münster,
2004, 113‐141.
Talbert 2005 R. J. A. Talbert, Rome’s Marble Plan and Peutinger’s Map: Continuity in Cartographic Design,
in F. Beutler, W. Hameter (eds.), Festschrift Ekkehard Weber, Althistorisch‐Epigraphische
Studien 5, Vienna, 2005, 627‐634.
Talbert 2007 R. J. A. Talbert, Konrad Miller, Roman Cartography, and the Lost Western End of the
Peutinger Map, in U. Fellmeth et al. (eds.), Historische Geographie der Alten Welt:
Grundlagen, Erträge, Perspektiven, Festschrift Olshausen, Hildesheim, 2007, 353‐366.
Talbert 2007a R. J. A. Talbert, Peutinger’s Roman Map: The Physical Landscape Framework, in M.
Rathmann (ed.), Wahrnehmung und Erfassung geographischer Räume in der Antike, Mainz,
2007, 221‐230.
Talbert 2007b R. Talbert, Author, Audience and the Roman Empire in the Antonine Itinerary, in Herrschen
und Verwalten. Der Alltag der Römischen Administration in der Hohen Kaiserzeit
(herausgegeben von Rudolf Haensch und Johannes Heinrichs), 2007, 256‐270.
Talbert 2008 R. J. A. Talbert, A Forgotten Masterpiece of Cartography for Roman Historians: Pierre Lapie’s
Orbis Romanus ad Illustranda Itineraria (1845), in H. M. Schellenberg et al. (eds.), A Roman
Miscellany: Essays in Honour of Anthony R. Birley on His Seventieth Birthday, Gdansk, 2008,
149‐156.
Talbert 2008a R. J. A. Talbert, Greek and Roman Mapping: Twenty‐First Century Perspectives, in R. J. A.
Talbert, R. W. Unger (eds.), Cartography in Antiquity and Middle Ages: Fresh Perspectives,
New Methods, Leiden, 2008, 9‐27.
Talbert 2010 R. J. A. Talbert, Rome’s World: the Peutinger map reconsidered, Cambridge University Press,
2010.
Talbert, Brodersen 2004 R. Talbert, K. Brodersen (ed.), Space in the Roman World: Its Perception and Presentation.
Münster, 2004.
Talbert, Elliot 2008 R. J. A. Talbert, T. Elliot, New Windows on the Peutinger Map of the Roman World, in A. K.
Knowles (ed.), Placing history: how maps, spatial data, and GIS are changing historical
scholarship, Redlands, CA, 2008, 199‐218.
Talbert, Unger 2008 R. J. A. Talbert, R. W. Unger (ed.), Cartography in Antiquity and the Middle Ages. Fresh
perspectives, new methods (the series Technology and Change in History, volume 10),
Leiden, Boston, 2008.
Tănase 1980 M. Tănase, L’homme et la route en Europe occidentale au Moyen Age et aux temps
modernes. Centre culturel de l’abbaye de Flaran. Deuxiemès journées internationales
d’histoire, 20‐22 septembre 1980, Auch, 1980, 289‐294.

92
Tănase 1995 M. Tănase, Contribuţie la studiul evoluţiei drumurilor în Transilvania. Continuitate şi
substituiri în partea meridională, in Historia Urbana 1‐2, 1995, 79‐104.
Téglás 1913 I. Téglás, A Liskakúti romai telepröl, in Archaeologiai Értesítő 33, 1913, 58‐60.
Teiuşan, Netea 1970 I. P. Teiuşan, V. Netea, August Treboniu Laurian, Bucharest, 1970.
Thérèse, Raepsaet M. Thérèse, G. Raepsaet‐Charlier, Gallia Belgica et Germania Inferior. Vingt‐cinq années
‐Charlier 1975 de recherches historiques et archéologiques, in ANRW II, 4, 1975, 61‐73.
Thévenot 1969 E. Thévenot, E., Les voies romaines de la cité des Éduens, Bruxelles 1969.
Thiollier, G. Thiollier‐Alexandrowicz, Itinéraires romains en France, Ed. Faton, 2000.
Alexandrowicz 2000
Tilburg 2007 C. R. van Tilburg, Traffic and congestion in the Roman Empire, London ‐ New York,
Routledge, 2007.
Timár et alii 2007 G. Timár, G. Molnár, Z. Imecs, C. Păunescu, Datum and projection parameters for the
Transylvanian sheets of the 2nd and 3rd military surveys, in Geographia Technica 1, Cluj‐
Napoca, 2007, 83‐88.
Timár et alii 2008 G. Timár, B. Kovács, Zs. Bartos‐Elekes, C. Păunescu, The Dealul Sibiului base point of the
Transylvanian surveys, in Geographia Technica 1, Cluj‐Napoca, 2008, 127‐139.
Timoc 2001 C. Timoc, Despre dirijarea navigaţiei fluviale în zona Porţilor de fier ale Dunării în epoca
romană, in In memoriam Dumitru Tudor, Timişoara 2001, 97‐116.
TIR L 35 Tabula Imperii Romani L 35, Romula–Durostorum–Tomis, Bucharest, 1969.
Tocilescu 1896 Grigore Tocilescu, Neue Inschriften aus Rümanien, in Archaeologish ‐ Epigrapshiche
Milleilungen aus Österreich‐Ungarn, Wien, 19, 1896.
Tocilescu 1900 Gr. Tocilescu, Fouilles et recherches archéologiques en Roumanie, Bucharest, 1900.
Tomowski 1961 T. Tomowski, Beitrag zu einer Rekonstruktion der Strecke Scupi‐Stobi auf der Tabula
Peutingeriana, in Ziva Antica 11, 1961, 113‐125.
Torma 1864 K. Torma, Adalék észak‐nyugati Dacia föld‐és helyiratához, Pest, 1864.
Torma 1864‐1865 K. Torma, Az Alsó‐ilosvai romai állótábor és müemlékei, in Erdély‐Muzeum Egylet, III,
Kolozsvár 1864‐1865, 10‐67.
Torma 1880 K. Torma, Idem, A limes dacicus felsö része, Budapest, 1880.
Torma 1880a K. Torma, Adalékok Dácia föld és helyiratához, in Archaeologiai Értesítő 14, 1880, 101‐117.
Trevor 2002 H. A. Trevor, Roman Aqueducts and Water Supply, Duckworth Archaeology, 2005.
Tsontchev 1959 D. Tsontchev, La voie romaine Philippopolis ‐ Sub Radice, in Latomus 18, 1959, 154‐170.
Tudor 1938 D. Tudor, Un “miliarium” de la Constantin cel Mare, descoperit în Dacia, in Arhivele Olteniei,
XVII, 1938, no. 95‐96, 1‐7.
Tudor 1958 D. Tudor 1958, Oltenia romană, 2nd ed., Bucharest, 1958.
Tudor 1968 D. Tudor, Oltenia romană, IIIrd ed., Bucharest, 1968.
Tudor 1971 D. Tudor, Podurile romane de la Dunărea de Jos, Bucharest, 1971.
Tudor 1974 D. Tudor, Le pont de Trajan à Drobeta‐Turnu Severin’ in Les ponts romains du Bas‐Danube,
Bucharest, 1974.
Tudor 1974a D. Tudor, Sucidava, Craiova, 1974.
Uggeri 1982‐1983 G. Uggeri, La viabilità romana in Sicilia con particolare riguardo al III e IV secolo, in Kokalos
28‐29, 1982‐1983, 424‐459.
Urban 1845 A. Fortia d’Urban, Recueil des Itinéraires Anciens comprenant l’Itinéraire d’Antonin, la Table
de Peutinger et un choix des périples grecs, avec dix cartes dressées par M. le Colonel Lapie,
Paris, Imprimerie Royale, 1845.
Urloiu 2010 R. Urloiu, Cavaleri promovaţi în ordinal senatorial în secolul Antoninilor, in Analele
Universităţii Creştine Dimitrie Cantemir, Bucureşti, Seria Istorie ‐ Serie nouă, 1/1, 2010, 53‐
78.
Van Berchem 1982 D. van Berchem, Les routes et l’histoire. Etudes sur les Helvètes et leurs voisins dans l’Empire
Romain, Geneva, 1982.
Van Tilburg 2006 C. van Tilburg, Traffic and Congestion in the Roman Empire, Routledge, London and New
York, 2006.
Velcea, Savu 1982 V. Velcea, Al. Savu, Geografia Carpaţilor şi a Subcarpaţilor româneşti, Bucharest, 1982
Verbrugghe 1976 G. P. Verbrugghe, Sicilia, series Itinera romana. Beiträge zur Strassengeschichte des
Römischen Reiches, Band II, Bern, 1976.
Vitruvius 1964 Vitruvius, Despre arhitectură, Bucharest, 1964 (translated in Romanian by G. M.
Cantacuzino, T.Conta and G. Ionescu).
Vladimirov 1963 V. Vladimirov, Nouvelles données sur la voie romaine Oescus‐Serdica au IVe siècle, in
Archeologija 6, 1963, 33‐34.

93
Vlădescu 1986 Cristian M. Vlădescu, Fortificaţiile romane din Dacia Inferior, Craiova, 1986.
Von Hagen 1978 V. W. Von Hagen, Le grande strade di Roma nel mondo, Rome, 1978.
Vučković, Mihajlović, D. Vučković, D. Mihajlović, G. Karović, Trajan's Bridge on the Danube. The current results
Karović 2007 of underwater archaeological research, in Istros 14, 2007, 119‐130.
Vulpe 1960 R. Vulpe, Muntenia şi Moldova de jos în timpul lui Traian, în lumina unei noi lecturi a
papirusului Hunt, in Studii Clasice II, 1960, 337‐357.
Vulpe 1988 R. Vulpe, Columna lui Traian. Monument al etnogenezei românilor, Bucharest, 1988.
Weathley, Gillings 2002 D. Weathley, M. Gilings, Spatial Technology and Archaeology. The Archaeological
Applications of GIS, London ‐ New York, 2002.
Weber 1976 E. Weber, Tabula Peutingeriana. Codex Vindobonensis 324 (with separate Kommentar
volume), Graz, 1976.
Weber 1989 E. Weber, Zur Datierung der Tabula Peutingeriana, in Labor omnibus unus. Festschrift für
Gerold Walser (edited by H. Herzig and R. Frei‐Stobla), Stuttgart 1989, 113‐117.
Weber 1999 E. Weber, The Tabula Peutingeriana and the Madaba Map, in
http://www.christusrex.org/www1/ofm/mad/articles/WeberPeutingeriana.html (the article
was first published in: The Madaba Map Centenary 1897‐1997, Jerusalem 1999, 41‐46).
Wescott, Brandon 2000 K. Wescott, R. J. Brandon (eds.), Practical Applications of GIS for Archaeologists. A Predictive
Modeling Toolkit, London, 2000.
Whittaker 2004 Ch. Whittaker, Rome and its frontiers: the dynamics of Empire, Routledge, London‐New
York, 2004.
Wilson 1992 R. J. A. Wilson, Sicily under the Roman Empire. The Archaeology of a Roman Province: 36 BC
– AD 535, London, 1992.
Winkler 1982 I. Winkler, Drumul roman Napoca‐Potaissa. II, in Acta Musei Napocensis 19, 1982, 587‐589.
Winkler, Blăjan, I. Winkler, M. Blăjan, T. Cerghi, Drumul roman Napoca‐Potaissa. I, in Potaissa. Studii şi
Cerghi 1980 comunicări 2, 1980, 63‐73.
Wiseman 1970 T. P. Wiseman, Roman Republican Road‐Building, in Papers of British School at Rome 38,
1970, p. 122‐152.
Wollmann 1968 V. Wollmann, Monumente sculpturale din Germisara, in Sargetia 5, 1968, 109‐120.
Wollmann 1996 V. Wollmann, Mineritul metalifer, extragerea sării şi carierele de piatră din Dacia romană.
Der Erzbergbau, die Salzgewinnung und die Steinbrüche im Römischen Dakien, Cluj‐Napoca,
1996.
Yegül 2009 F. Yegül, Bathing in the Roman World, Cambridge University Press, 2009.

94
 Fig. 1. Map of the Roman Empire
(based on M. Bărbulescu et alii, Atlas‐dicţionar al Daciei romane, Cluj‐Napoca, 2005, 16, map I).

Fig. 2. Dacia and the surrounding provinces, with the main Roman roads
(based on M. Bărbulescu et alii, Atlas‐dicţionar al Daciei romane, Cluj‐Napoca, 2005, 17, map II).

95
 Fig. 3. Roman Dacia under Trajan’s reign (based on E. Nemeth).

Fig. 4. Top (a): the Roman fortress at Vărădia ‐ “Chilii” (no. 1 in fig. 5).
Bottom (b): the Roman fortress at Vărădia ‐ “Pustă” (no. 2 in fig. 5).
96
 Fig. 5. The Roman fortress at Surducu Mare (Caraş‐Severin County).

Fig. 6. Sketch of the Roman legionary fortress at Berzovia

(based on A. Flutur, Clădirile comandamentului din castrul de legiune traianic de la Berzobis, in
Analele Banatului S.N., Arheologie‐Istorie, XIX, 2011, 156, Pl. I).

97
 Fig. 7. The northern side of the Roman fortress at Berzovia.

Fig. 8. The Roman fortress at Fârliug.

Fig. 9. The Roman fortress at Jupa, Roman Tibiscum (Caraş‐Severin County).

98
Fig. 10. The Roman fortress at Zăvoi (Caraş‐Severin County).

Fig. 11. The roads of Roman Dacia.

99
 Fig. 12. The imperial Roman road from Potaissa to Napoca.

Fig. 13. Left: copy of the lost milestone from Aiton (based on I. Winkler,
Date noi despre CIL, III, 1627, cea dintâi atestare epigrafică a Potaissei, în Potaissa, 3, 1982, 80‐81).
Right: traces of the Roman road between Ceanu Mic and Aiton (photos F. Fodorean, 2001).

100
Fig. 14. The imperial Roman road close to the village of Ceanu Mic (Cluj County). Photos: F. Fodorean, 2002.

101
Fig. 15. The imperial Roman road from Aiton to Cluj‐Napoca.

102
 Fig. 16. Top: copy of the milestone from Aiton.
Bottom: general view of the village Ceanu Mic with the traces of the Roman road in background.

103
Fig. 17. The infrastructure of the Roman road at the entrance in Ceanu Mic. Photos F. Fodorean, 2005.

104
Fig. 18. The central part of Roman Dacia, depicting the Roman road from Apulum to Potaissa (based on
M. Bărbulescu et alii, Atlas‐dicţionar al Daciei romane, Cluj‐Napoca, 2005, map D6).

105
Fig. 19. The northern part of Roman Dacia, depicting the Roman road from Napoca to Mera and Şardu (based on
M. Bărbulescu et alii, Atlas‐dicţionar al Daciei romane, Cluj‐Napoca, 2005, map C6).

106
 Fig. 20. Top: the milestone from Mera (Cluj County)
(based on C. Daicoviciu, Un nou “miliarium” din Dacia, în AISC I, 2, 1928‐1932, 48‐53). Bottom:
Austrian map indicating the location of Mera.

107
Fig. 21. The northern part of Roman Dacia, depicting the Roman road from Napoca to Mera and Şardu (based on
M. Bărbulescu et alii, Atlas‐dicţionar al Daciei romane, Cluj‐Napoca, 2005, map C5).

108
Fig. 22. Map of Roman Dacia, showing the location on Micia (today Vețel, Hunedoara County).

109
Fig. 23. The south‐western part of Roman Dacia, depicting the road from Lederata to Sasca Montană
(based on M. Bărbulescu et alii, Atlas‐dicţionar al Daciei romane, Cluj‐Napoca, 2005, map F3).

110
Fig. 24. The south‐western part of Roman Dacia, depicting the road from Iablaniţa to Lăpuşnicel and Dalboşeţ
(based on M. Bărbulescu et alii, Atlas‐dicţionar al Daciei romane, Cluj‐Napoca, 2005, map F4).

111
Fig. 25. The valley of the river Olt, indicating the location of the villages Băbiciu and Gostavăţu
(based on M. Bărbulescu et alii, Atlas‐dicţionar al Daciei romane, Cluj‐Napoca, 2005, map G7).

112
 Fig. 26. The valley of the river Olt, indicating the location of Racoviţa‐Copăceni
(based on M. Bărbulescu et alii, Atlas‐dicţionar al Daciei romane, Cluj‐Napoca, 2005, map E7).

113
 Fig. 27. The location of Tibiscum, today Jupa (Caraş‐Severin County)
(based on M. Bărbulescu et alii, Atlas‐dicţionar al Daciei romane, Cluj‐Napoca, 2005, map E4).

114
 Fig. 28. Today’s analogy of the former Danubian road close to Ogradena.

Fig. 29. The Peutinger map depicting the territory of Roman Dacia (segm. VI)
(based on M. Bărbulescu et alii, Atlas‐dicţionar al Daciei romane, Cluj‐Napoca, 2005, fig. 10, 27).

Fig. 30. The Peutinger map depicting the territory of Roman Dacia (segm. VII)
(after M. Bărbulescu et alii, Atlas‐dicţionar al Daciei romane, Cluj‐Napoca, 2005, fig. 10, 27).

115
 Fig. 31. Map of Roman Dacia (based on I. Piso, Fasti provinciae Daciae I, Bonn, 1993, 33).

Fig. 32. Fragment of Austrian map showing the location of the former
capital of Dacia, Ulpia Traiana Sarmizegetusa. The Roman road is depicted as “Trajans Weg”.

116
 Fig 33. Ulpia Traiana Sarmizegetusa. Aerial photograph and plan
(based on M. Bărbulescu et alii, Atlas‐dicţionar al Daciei romane, Cluj‐Napoca, 2005, 40 and 95).

Fig. 34. The imperial Roman road close to the village Bărăştii Haţegului (Hunedoara County).

117
Fig. 35. The imperial road between Bărăștii Hațegului and Sântămăria‐Orlea (Hunedoara County).

Fig. 36. The Hațeg Depression (foto: F. Fodorean, April 2007).

118
Fig. 37. The imperial road identified in the terrain in several points between
Sarmizegetusa and Sântămăria‐Orlea (foto: F. Fodorean, April 2007).

119
 Fig. 38. The Roman road from Sarmizegetusa to Uroi, indicating the location of Ad Aquas, today Călan
(Hunedoara County) (based on M. Bărbulescu et alii, Atlas‐dicţionar al Daciei romane, Cluj‐Napoca, 2005, map E5).

120
 Fig. 39. The Roman road from Uroi to Blandiana, indicating the location of Cigmău
(Hunedoara County) (based on M. Bărbulescu et alii, Atlas‐dicţionar al Daciei romane, Cluj‐Napoca, 2005, map D5).

121
Fig. 40. The legionary fortress at Potaissa (based on M. Bărbulescu).

122
Fig. 41. The topography of Potaissa.

123
Fig. 42. The spring of the aqueducts: ‘Izvorul Copăcenilor’ (photo F. Fodorean, 2007).

Fig. 43. General view with the location of the spring (photo F. Fodorean, 2007).

124
 Fig. 44. Traces of the former Roman stone quarry viewed by I. Téglas at the beginning
of the XXth century, close to the spring of the aqueducts (after I. Bajusz, Téglás István jegyzetei.
Régészeti feljegyzések. I/1. Kötet, Kolozsvár, 2005, s.v. Szind – Sânduleşti, 348, 350‐352).

Fig. 45. The discovery point of the aqueduct supplying the Roman military fortress at Potaissa.
The intersection of the current road Turda‐Petreşti with the road to Sănduleşti.

125
 Fig. 46. The discovery of the aqueduct supplying the fortress at Potaissa (winter 2005‐2006).
Ceramic pipe. Depth: ‐ 0,80 m (photos M. Pîslaru, S. Nemeti).

Fig. 47. Ceramic pipes. The aqueduct supplying the Roman military fortress.
Length: 55 cm and 43 cm. External diameter: 16,5 cm. Internal diameter: 12,5 cm (photographs: F. Fodorean).

126
 Fig. 48. The aqueducts of Potaissa. Digital elevation model (F. Fodorean, I. Fodorean).

Fig. 49. Top: the location of caput aquae. Bottom: the location of the old mill in Copăceni (photographs: F. Fodorean).

127
 Fig. 50. The aqueduct supplying the city of Potaissa.
General view from Copăceni to caput aquae (photograph F. Fodorean).

Fig. 51. Ceramic pipes of different sizes drawn by I. Téglás

(after I. Bajusz, Téglás István jegyzetei. Régészeti feljegyzések. I/1. Kötet, Kolozsvár, 2005, 378, 379).
Bottom left: ceramic pipe possible used for the aqueduct of the city. Right: stone block with orifice.

128
Fig. 52. The site ‘Valea Sărată (Salt Valley)’ (photographs F. Fodorean, 2012).

129
Fig. 53. The site Pataklejáró (Mihai Viteazu, Cluj County) (photo F. Fodorean).

Fig. 54. The site ‘Sajkút’ (Mihai Viteazu, Cluj County) (photo F. Fodorean).

130
Fig. 55. The Roman settlement at Copăceni (Cluj County) (photo F. Fodorean).

Fig. 56. The Roman rural settlement from Luncani (Cluj County).

Fig. 57. The location of the fortress at Ilişua.

131
 Fig. 58. The topography of Ilişua after K. Torma,
Az Alsó‐ilosvai romai állótábor és müemlékei, Erdély‐Muzeum Egylet, III, Kolozsvár 1864–1865, 58.

Fig. 59. The Roman road from Geoagiu‐Băi (Hunedoara County) (sketch and photo: F. Fodorean).

132
Fig. 60. The Roman road from Turda to Călăraşi. Left: sketch after I. Téglás, în Archaeologiai Értesitö, 33, 1913, 57.
Right: fragment of an Austrian map from the 19th century depicting the same road.

Fig. 61. The Roman road from Cluj‐Napoca to Gilău. Sketch and Austrian modern map from the 19th century.

133
Fig. 62. The Roman road from Cluj‐Napoca to Gilău (photos F. Fodorean).

134
Fig. 63. The Roman road from Gherla to Sic (Cluj County).

Fig. 64. Villae rusticae in Roman Dacia.

135
 Fig. 65. The location of the place‐names from the Peutinger map indicating bridges.

Fig. 66. The Trajan’s Column. Scenes depicting Roman bridges (after R. Vulpe, Trajan’s Column, Bucharest, 2000).

136
 Fig. 67. Trajan’s bridge over the Danube depicted on the Trajan’s Column
(based on M. Bărbulescu et alii, Atlas‐dicţionar al Daciei romane, Cluj‐Napoca, 2005, fig. 9).

Fig. 68. Reconstruction of the Trajan’s bridge at Drobeta

(based on M. Bărbulescu et alii, Atlas‐dicţionar al Daciei romane, Cluj‐Napoca, 2005, fig. 8).

Fig. 69. The location of the Roman bridge at Potaissa.

137
Fig. 70. Map from 1956 (scale 1:20.000) indicating: 1. the route of the Roman road from
Silivaş‐Hăşdate‐Gherla‐Băiţa‐Buneşti; 2. the location of the Roman fortress from Gherla
(based on http://earth.unibuc.ro/harti/download‐planuri‐tragere.php, ID 335/3172).

138
Fig. 71. The Roman road from Gherla to Băiţa andBuneşti (photo F. Fodorean, 2005).

139
 Fig. 72. Map from 1956 (scale 1:20.000) indicating the location of the Roman fortress from Hoghiz,
with the name ‘la Cetate’ (‘to the fortress’). Right, bottom: map from 1955 (scale 1:20.000) indicating the location
of the same fortress with the mention ‘Standort des röm. Lagers Pons Vetus’
(based on http://earth.unibuc.ro/harti/download‐planuri‐tragere.php,
Cuciulata, 1956, ID607/3860, Cuciulata, 1955, ID 1331/3860).

140
Fig. 73. Map from 1957 (scale 1:20.000) indicating the location of the Roman fortress from Râşnov (Braşov County)
(based on http://earth.unibuc.ro/harti/download‐planuri‐tragere.php, Râşnov, ID 646/3956).

Fig. 74. Map from 1917 (scale 1:20.000) indicating the location of the Roman fortress from Breţcu (Covasna County)
(based on http://earth.unibuc.ro/harti/download‐planuri‐tragere.php, Breţcu, ID 810/4361).

141
 Fig. 75. Map from 1925 (scale 1:20.000) indicating the location of the Roman road from Gialmar to Binţinţi
(Hunedoara County) (based on http://earth.unibuc.ro/harti/download‐planuri‐tragere.php, Geoagiul de Jos, ID 170/2760).

Fig. 76. The valley of Arieş from Turda to Roşia Montană. Digital elevation model.

142
 Fig. 77. Map from 1957 (scale 1:20.000) indicating the location of the Roman road from Buru
(Cluj County) (based on http://earth.unibuc.ro/harti/download‐planuri‐tragere.php, Rimetea, ID 250/2966).

Fig. 78. The Roman road from Buru (Cluj County) (foto F. Fodorean, July 2003).

143
 Fig. 79. The Roman road from Buru (Cluj County). Detail (foto F. Fodorean, July 2003).

Fig. 80. The location of the Roman tower in Moldoveneşti (Cluj County) (based on
http://earth.unibuc.ro/harti/download‐planuri‐tragere.php, ID 250/2966, 1957, Rimetea and ID 289/3066, 1953, Bădeni).

144
Fig. 81. General view of the valley of Arieş towards Turda (photo taken from the plateau in Moldoveneşti,
where the Roman tower is located). Photo F. Fodorean, 2006.

Fig. 82. General view of the valley of Arieş towards Turda and Câmpia Turzii
(photo taken from the plateau in Moldoveneşti). Photo F. Fodorean, 2006.

145
Fig. 83. The Roman road from Geoagiu‐Băi (photo F. Fodorean, 2003).

146
Fig. 84. The area around Germisara.

147