Publications on this veteran colonia, founded by Trajan in the province of Dacia, are most welcome. The site and its monuments, both epigraphic and archaeological, are of singular interest in themselves and merit consideration for the information they provide about Roman urbanism in the Western provinces in general. The epigraphic riches of the site are well known and have been published (I. Russu et al., Inscripfiile Daciei Romane III (2 edn, 1980)). Conspicuous amongst almost 600 inscriptions is one which commemorates the foundation of the city by the first consular governor of Dacia, less than four years after the Trajanic conquest (IDRIII/2,1, A.D. 108/110) and another which openly acknowledges that the rebuilding of a temple was undertaken because it had been damaged a vi hostium (IDR HI/2, 11). Less well known are the excavations and the city's buildings. In their monograph on Town-planning and Population Alicu and Paki wrote two separate contributions. A. provides a general review of town-planning, a discussion of the origins of the city, and a history of research, followed by a list of building inscriptions, then chapters on individual structures, materials, and architectural finds, the latter provided with a catalogue. The second part is by P. who considers the inscriptions, particularly the nomenclature of the inhabitants. He appends a brief review of the 'ethnic origins' of the citizens and the evidence for social and civic organization. A. argues (4-5) that the site was first occupied by a Roman fortress built for legio IVFlavia Felix after the First Dacian War c. 102. Cassius Dio (Lxvm.9.7) does mention a fort at 'Sarmizegetusa', but, in context, this surely refers to the native capital, not to the site of the future Roman city. The force left behind need not have been a legion and, whatever its size, it is improbable that the garrison survived until the outbreak of the Second Dacian War in 105. It would be curious indeed if a legion was based (on the site of the future city) so far into the Dacian heartland until after the final conquest of Dacia in 106. The tile-stamps of legio IV Flavia from the city may well date to the Antonine period when official buildings were constructed for the use of the governor and his staff. Even so, turf and timber defences have been identified and a legionary base on the site of the city immediately after the conquest in 106 is possible. However, no excavations have yet found barracks or any other demonstrably military structures. The primary timber buildings which have been excavated are described as houses (24). Despite the obvious parallels for coloniae founded on the sites of legionary fortresses-which A. cites for Roman Britainit remains uncertain whether the early defences at Sarmizegetusa are military or whether they postdate the foundation of the city. A. next describes the history of excavations at Sarmizegetusa and then reviews the evidence for the colonial territory. This section is not very helpful, contains errors, and the English is confusing: the canaba...
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.