ALBA REGIA ANNALES MUSEI STEPHANI REGIS

XV

1976

SZÉKESFEHÉRVÁR

SZERKESZTŐ - RÉDACTEUR

FITZ JENŐ

SEGÉDSZERKESZTO-RËDACTEUR ADJOINT

FARKAS ZOLTÁN LUKACS LÁSZLÓ

Kiadja A FEJÉR MEGYEI MÚZEUMOK IGAZGATÓSÁGA

A kiadásért felel Dr. Fitz Jenő megyei múzeumigazgató Készült 900 példányban

INDEX

TANULMÁNYOK—ABHANDLUNGEN

A. Mozsol ics : Ein Achtkantgriffschwert von Dunaújváros 9 SZABÓ MIKLÓS: A ,,magyar kardstílus" kialakulása — The Development of the

„Hungarian Sword Style" 25 D. GÁSPÁR: Griechischer Eid der Ratsherren gefunden in der Széchényi

Nationalbibliothek, Budapest 39 D. G A B L E R — É . KOCZTUR: Terra sigillata Depotfund von Gorsium 65 I. TÓTH : Two misinterpreted Juppiter Dolichenus Relics from Pannónia Inferior 89 B. LŐRINCZ: Die Duces Provinz Valeria unter Valentinian I. (364—375) . . . . 99 E. T Ó T H : La survivance de la population romaine en Pannonié 107

KÖZLEMÉNYEK—MITTEILUNGEN

FITZ J e n ő — L Á N Y I Vera—BÁNKI Zsuzsanna: Kutatások Gorsiumban 1974-ben —Forschungen in Gorsium im Jahre 1974 121

В. LőitiNCz: Die Stempelziegel von Gorsium-Herculia 175 K. SZABÓ : Cabochons décorés de Kálóz 193 В. LŐRINCZ—Zs. V I S Y : Neuere Inschriften aus Intercisa 199 B. SERGŐ ERZSÉBET: Pentelei női viselet 217 LUKÁCS László : A népi építkezés emlékei a zámolyi szőlőhegyen — Denkmäler

der Volksarchitektur auf dem Weinberg von Zámoly 237 SOLYMOSI P É T E R : Az alcsuti arborétum epiphyton vegetációja 249

5

IRODALOM—BESPRECHUNGEN

M. SZABÓ: W. O r t h m a n n , Untersuchungen zur späthethitischen Kunst 253 Zs. V I S Y : L . B a k k e r — B . G a l s t e r e r - K r ö l l , Grafitti auf römi­

scher Keramik im Rheinischen Landesmuseum Bonn 254 L. LUKÁCS : V. F г о 1 е с, Tradicni vinafství na Moravë 255 L. LUKÁCS : Бобруджа 257

Notices bibliographiques J . F . : I. T ó t h, A rómaiak Magyarországon 259 J. F . : G. E r d é l y i , A római kőfaragás és kőszobrászat Magyaror­

szágon 259 J. F I T Z : K., PÓCZY, Pannóniai városok 259 J . F ITZ : Zs. V i s y , Intercisa 260

SZEMLE—RUNDSCHAU

B. LŐEINCZ: Zur Datierung der Stempelziegel von Vindobona 261 B. LORINCZ: Bemerkungen zu zwei Inschriften aus Aquincum 263 J . F I T Z : Epigraphica VIII 265 J . F I T Z : Notes 269

ÉVI J E L E N T É S 1974—JÄHRE SBERICHT 1974

F I T Z Jenő : Jelentés a Fejér megyei múzeumok helyzetéről, 1974 — Jahresbe­richt über die Lage der Museum im Komitat Fejér 1974 271

F. ANTONI Jud i t : Régészeti kutatások — Archäologische Forschungen 273 PESOVÁR Ferenc : Néprajzi gyűjtőutak — Ethnographische Exkursionen . . . 276 Gyűjtemények, új szerzemények — Sammlungen, Neuerwerbungen 277 Kiadványok — Publikationen 277 Időszaki kiállítások — Sonderausstellungen 278

F. P E T R E S É v a : Keleti kelta művészet 278 K. KOVALOVSZKY Márta: Schaár Erzsébet kiállítása 279

Konferencia — Konferenzen 280 F . P E T R E S É v a : Előadások — Vorträge 280 A múzeumi kutatók irodalmi munkássága az 1974. évben — Wissenschaftliche

Tätigkeit 282 Személyi hírek — Personalnachrichten 283 A Fejér megyei Múzeumok létszáma az 1974. évben —Personalstand 284 JAKAB Is tvánné: Az 1974, évi zárszámadás — Budget 285

(i

FÜGGELÉK — APPENDIX

VAS Ágnes : Alba Regia I—XV 287

Rövidítések — Abkürzungen 287 A kötet munkatársai — Die Mitarbeiter dieses Bandes 287

7

TWO MISINTERPRETED JUPPITER DOLICHENUS RELICS FROM PANNÓNIA INFERIOR

1. The fragment of a cultic triangle from the Doli-chenum in Brigetio

Among the extremely rich bronze plastics of the Brigetio Dolichenum there is a small fragment of a bronze plate(1). Tha t has not been described or ana­lysed so far in any of its publications(2) bu t t h a t de­finitely invites further investigation. The fragment is altogether 5,5 cm. wide and 3,9 cm. high (Fig. 1.), and was the lower r ighthand corner of a large, deco­rat ive embossed plate. I t s lower edge and the one to the right are relatively well preserved; the corner formed by these two edges in a slightly acute angle is broken off. The rim of the plate is folded back along both edges; the right edge has a 2 mm. split in it with the round countour of a nailhole. This nail-hole is si tuated 1,5 cm. from the lower edge of the plate .

(1) Invertory number 4. 1933. 117. Mr. S. S o p r o n i and Mr. V. C s e r m é n y i were kind to help me with the examination of the objects. For their help and supporting kindness, I would like to thank them here.

(2) The findings were first published by Á. M i l c h . He also excaveted them. See, the Bulletin of Komá­rom megyei és városi Múzeum Egyesület, 1900. p. 28. For more recent publications, see N. LÁNG, Klebelsberg Emlékkönyv (Klebesberg Memorial Volume) Bp. 1925, p. 93; I D . , LA, I I ; DissPann, 11/11, 1941, p. 165. — For an essential detailed Studies of the finds, see I. PAULOVICS, EPhK, LVI, 1932, p . 183; ID . , AËrt, XLVII, 1934, p. 40; ID . , Pannónia, I, 1935, p. 21. = Pannónia Könyvtár, Pécs, 1935, p. 9. — For the latest publications, See Z. KÁDÁR, Die kleinasiatisch-syrischen Kulte zur Römerzeit in Ungarn. EPRO 2. Leiden 1962, p. 45; I. TÓTH, ACD, VII, 1971, p. 91; IX, 1973, p. 105.

The remainds of a high relief representation can be seen on the fragment : there are the body and forelegs of a capricom, which is jumping to the left with i ts head raised. The end of its tail is broken off. Bo th forelegs are thrus t forward bu t its hooves are missing. The neck and the chest are hair ly: the tail is decorated with arched scores(3). The blurred figure of a four-pointed s tar can be seen in the right lower corner of the plate. The representation is not framed.

This seemingly unimpor tant fragment among the more than fourty bronze objects of the Brigetio Do­lichenum merits special a t tent ion, as it is the only iden­tifiable remain of the cultic triangle t ha t is one of the well-known tr iangular shaped cultic images of the Dolichenus cult and t h a t is thought to have been lost(4).

The key to identifying the fragment lies in its shape. The two undamaged edges (the lower one and the one to the right) do not meet in a right angle bu t in smaller acute angle of 74°. Thus the fragment could not have belonged either to a rectangular or oblong-shaped relief: its original shape could have only been a triangle (or perhaps a trapezoid). Bu t since the fragment occurs among objects t ha t were originally excavated at a Dolichenus sanctuary, this would seem reason enough to consider it the trian­gular shaped cultic object which is so characteristic of the Dolichenus cult(5). (The theoretical possibility of the trapezoid can, in this case, be neglected.) If the

(3) The note in the invertory of the Hungarian Natio­nal Museum by I. P a u l o v i c s hypothetically interprets the figure as a „fish-tailed sea monster".

(4) I. PAULOVICS, O. C , AËrt, XLII, 1934, 46; Z. KÁDÁR, о. с , p. 52.

(5) Merlat Répertoire, 23 (Potaissa — fragment), 50

89

following points are also taken into consideration, the fragment is surely seen as tha t of a cultic t r i ­angle of Dolichenus.

a.) The compositional proportions of the Doli­chenus triangles known so far are homogeneous : they are all acute-angled isosceles triangles but never equilateral. This means tha t the sides of the isosce­les triangle are always longer t han the base; there­fore the angles a t the base are always between 70— 75°(6). On this basis the fragment in question is pre­sumably a Dolichenus triangle since a 74° angle is formed by one of its base.

b.) The way the undamaged rims of the fragment were bent back seems to certify tha t the object had originally been fixed to another, likewise thin sur­face. (The width of the fold is 2,3 mm.) This speci­fic feature precisely corresponds to the technics used for the cultic triangles discovered so far (Kömlőd, Mauer a.d. Url). They all consist of two plates a t tached to each other by folding each of their rims back until they overlap and soldering them with tin(7). The bent back rim of the Brigetio fragment would seem to a t tes t to a similar process.

c.) The nailhole is on the right edge of the Brigetio fragment 1,5 cm. above the lower rim. As regards its position, this nailhole corresponds exactly to those on the small connecting plates soldered on the hori­zontal bronze strip of the signum-holder, a well known find of the Brigetio Dolichenum(8). When the frag­ment t ha t have been examined so far are placed into the slot between the two horizontal strips of the signum-holder, the two nailholes correspond exact ly (Fig. 2.). The distance between the two horizontal strips of the signum-holder is 4,7 mm. This also cor­responds exactly to the width of the two backfolded edges together—each is folded back 2—2,3 mm.— including the thickness of the soldering material. The position of the nailhole of this fragment therefore

(Romulianum), 65—66 (Lussonium), 147—148 (Tri-gisamum), 152—153 (Mauer a. d. Url), 166 (Lentia —fragment), 168 (Aalen—fragment), 321—322 (Heddernheim), 346 (unknown provenance, Sofia, Arch. Mus.) — The reconstruction of two or three cultic triangles from the large Dolichenum exca­vated at adony (Vetus Salina) in 1975 promises sig­nificant results. Zs. B á n k i is preparing the pub­lication of the finds. She was kind enough to let me see her preliminary work on the finds, for which I am grateful.

(6) The only exception is the Heddernheim triangle Merlat Repertoire, 321, for which the angles are 79—80°. But here the top vertex would have stret­ched so far (the upper angle would have had to be 20°), that its creator formed an Smaller triangle with vertex of 72 and placed it on top of the ori­ginal, forming an arrow-head at the top.

(7) I. PATJLOVICS, О. C, AÉrt, XLVII, 1934, p. 45; cf. Merlat Essai, 171.

(8) I. PATJLOVICS, O. C, XLVII, 1934; Merlat Répertoire, p. 98; Z. KÁDÁR, о. с , 51—52; с. f. I. TÓTH, AArch-Hung, XXVIII, 1976. p. 96.

helps justify the s ta tement of I. P a u l o v i c s made fourty years ago according to which, ,,Two pairs of holes must have been on each of the Bri­getio cultic plates t ha t are lost"(9).

These three aspects point to the same conclusion: the fragment originates from the one of the plates of a cultic triangle in the Brigetio Dolichenum. Fur thermore the nailhole found on the right edge of the fragment most probably indicates t ha t this tri­angle was identical with the cultic image placed on the signum-holder (X(i) t h a t belonged to the same group of finds.

If this hypothesis true—which, on the basis of the relationship in form and content of the two ob­jects, it undoubtedly is—the original dimensions of the plate can be fairly accurately calculated. The distance between the two nailholes on the hori­zontal strips of the s ^ m m - h o l d e r is 18,3 cm. Accor­dingly then, and with regard to the fact t ha t the preserved nailhole 5—6 mm. further in from the lower vertex of the plate , the base of the triangle can be considered to have been about 19,5—to 20 cm. long. On the basis of this and with the help of the measurable angle (74°), the length of the two sides and the hight of the triangle can be easily calculat­ed^ 1 ) . The results of the calculations (height appro­ximately 34 cm., with further calculations found in note 11) are natural ly only as valuable as the hy­pothesis itself ; they do however, help in theoretically reconstructing the lost plate according to its original proportions (Fig. 3.).

To be able to fully reconstruct the object the small, well-known statue of Victoria, also found in the Brigetio Dolichenum(12) has to be taken into consi­deration. As far as is known, it is almost certain tha t on the top vertex of each Dolichenus triangle stood a small s ta tue of Victoria(13), as can be seen on the intact piece found a t Mauer a.d. Url(14); there also exists a Victoria figure tha t belongs to the vertex of

(9) I. PAULOVICS, O. C, AÉrt, XLVII, 1934, 46. (10) Ibid. ; Merlat Répertoire, 98.; Merlat Essai, 171;

Z. KÁDÁR о. с , 51—52. (11) P. Sz. T u г с s á n y i, an employee of the Compu­

ter Institute of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences helped me with the geometrical calculations. For this help, I like to thank her here. The dimension of the triangle were calculated as follows : The base of the isosceles triangle is a, one of its sides is b, the angle between the two is a, and the angle formed by the two sides is ß If a = 20 cm., a = 74°, and ß = 32°, then : b = a x sin a sin ß = 20 X 0,9613 0,5299 = 36,28 cm

a x t g « _ 20X3,487 = u

2 ~ 2 m = b x s i n a = 36,28x0,9613 = 34,87 cm. (12) Hungarian National Museum, invertory Number

4 1933.99.; Merlat Repertoire, 88. (13) Merlat Essai, 171. (14) Merlat Répertoire, 152.; cf. ibid. p. 134.

90

Fig. 1: The fragment from the Brigetio Dolichenum

Fig. 2: The signum-holder and the fragment from the Brigetio Dolichenum

91

the triangle found a t Kömlőd (Lussonium)(15). These small Victoria figures were probably a t tached to the top vertex of the triangle by a strong strip of bronze running vertically from the globe under the feet of the s ta tue directly to t he horizontal strip of the signum-holder(16), which also served to brase of the triangle. In this way, the thin, embossed plates did not carry the weight of the s ta tue ; ra ther it was transferred directly to the -sw/rmm-holder made of strong bronze. This brase element was covered on both sides by the two triangular plates overlapping each other(17). Since a verticle fragment of a 1 cm,-wide bronze strip can be seen on the globe under­nea th the Victoria figure of the Brigetio Dolichenum (Fig. 4.) it would seem reasonable to conclude tha t the s ta tue stood on the top vertex of the triangle, as is the case for the above mentioned and as P. Merlat has already suggested(18). Thus the Victoria figure crovning the top vertex of the triangle has to be included for the full reconstruction of the object.

In the group of finds a t the Brigetio Dolichenum there are two completely identical Victoria statues from the very same casting matrix(19). This would seem to suppose there was not only one cultic tr i­angle in the sanctuary bu t a t least two. Other groups of finds (Mauer a.d. Url, Heddernheim, Traismauer) reinforce this supposition(20).

On the basis of the aesthetic value of the execution of the two small Victoria s tatues, no conclusion can be drawn as to the artistic level of the decoration of these triangles. This is so because, for example, in the well-known Kömlőd finds there exists a sharp contrast between the excellenty executed triangles

(15) Merlat Répertoire 65—66. — The Victoria statue p. 67 in the same place had originally been placed on the top vertex of the triangle. This is how it is represen­ted on its first published drawing; see I. HORVÁTH, A Szlavinokról az az kérkedőkről, etc. (On the Sla-vins namely on the boasting), etc. Pest 1844. 202 ff. This drawing, which was made shortly after the statue was found (1815) and which is still in the collection of the original owner, has had a decisive role in determining to what extent the Victoria sta­tue and the triangle are related. Thus the reasoning of I. P a u l o v i c s , who claims that the two pieces are separate, is incorrect from the aesthetical point of view; o. c , AÉrt XLVII, (1934), 47. — cf. F. ROMER — E. D E S JARDINS, The Epigraphed Finds о/ the Hungarian National Museum. Budapest, 1873, 13.; Merlat Répertoire, 67.; Z. KÁDÁR О. е., 33.

(16) An illustrative example of this is the Mauer a.d. Url triangle: Merlat Répertoire, 152, 153, mainly p. 140.

(17) Cf. with a good photograph of the quoted triangle from Mauer a.d. Url on which this can be well seen. For this, see Die Römer an der Donau. Petronell, 1973, p. 18.

(18) Merlat Repertoire, 67.; Merlat Essai, 171. (19) Merlat Répertoire, 89.; cf. I. PAULOVICS, О. C , Pan­

nónia, I, 1935, 23. — Here he mentions the Victoria statues as parts of a supposed sculptural group and not as parts of the triangle.

(20) Merlat Essai, 171.

and the very primitively executed Victoria s ta tue which crowns them. However, the relatedness of the two is beyond a doubt (21). Most likely, then, in the case of the Brigetio Victoria statues(22), the plates represent a high level of artistic achievement, as do other similar objects.

*

As for the missing figurai representation of the plate, or the pair of plates it certainly encompassed the same iconographical programme as the cultic tr i­angles tha t are preserved intact(23). I t therefore prob­ably presented on the one side the god standing on the back of the bull accompanied by Victoria(24) placing a crown on his head, and the meeting of the divine pair on the other side(25). The other usual accompaining figures were probably not missing ei ther: the Castores Dolicheni(26), Sol, Luna and the eagle(27), the figure of Victoria(28), and the represen­ta t ion of the aedicula or sacrifice^9). The iconographi­cal programme could have also depicted other gods occasionally involved with the cult(30). Natural ly the present s ta te of the fragment does not allow further, more detailed conclusions as to the original figurai representations of the plate other t h a n the general motifs mentioned above. On the other hand the re­presentat ion preserved on the plate must be dealth with. This is the figure of a Capricorn, which is not characteristic of the iconography of the Dolichenus cult. I t s presence on the cultic triangle, therefore may well be regarded as exceptional.

The figure of a Capricorn became well known in the whole of the Hellenistic world under the influence of Near Eastern astronomy as one of the configurational symbols for the stars(31). I t is used in this same way in the Roman symbolic system(32). As one of the hypsomata(xi) (i.e. one of the par ts of the system of zodiacal „houses" for the planets created by the Hellenistic astronomers) Capricorn was directly con­nected with the planet Mars(^). Among the fixed

(21) cf. Note 15. (22) I. PAULOVICS, O. C, Pannónia, 1, 1935, 21; In,,

EPhK, LVI, 1932, 183. (23) Cf. Note 5. (24) Merlat Essai 1 75. (25) Ibid. (26) Merlat Répertoire, 50, 66, 147, 152, 153?, 168 322,

346. (27) Ibid. 23, 65, 66, 152, 153, 166? (28) Ibid., 65, 153, 322, 346. (29) Ibid. (30) Mars: Ibid., 65, 168, 148.; Minerva: Ibid., 168.

Hercules: Ibid, 65. (31) A. JEREMIÁS, Sterne. Roscher's Lexikon, IV, 1909—

1915, 1481. (32) G. GUNDEL, De Stellarum apellatione et religione

Romana (ROW III. 2.), GieSsen, 1907, s. v. (33) A. JEREMIÁS, О. С, 1481. (34) Firm, mat., astr. 2., 3—4 — quoted by A. J e r e-

m i a S, l. c. cf. Plin., n.h. II, 13.

92

2. ábra: 1 = forgatott föld ; 2 = szürke föld; 3 = vályogtégla ; 4 = szürke homok; 5 = fekete föld; 6 = barna homok; 7 = átégett agyag ; 8 = homok; 9 = humusz Abb. 2: 1 = gemischte Erde; 2 = graue Erde; 3 = Lehmziegel; 4 = grauer Sand; 5 = schwarze Erde; 6 = brauner Sand; 7 = durchgebrannter Lehm; 8 = Sand; 9 = Humus

•и -1 iJi'iiTtiîfitf

Fig. 3: The reconstruction of the Brigetio triangle. Fie. 4: The Victoria from the Brigetio Dolichenum

9:}

stars, the Aquiîa was connected to this configura­tion (35). Both of astronomical references made the Cap­ricorn clearly suitable for the system of symbols of the Roman army, as it truely was : this zodiacal sym­bol was used as an emblem for several legions(36).

Among the legions in Pannónia, legio XIIII Gemina stat ioned at Carnuntum used this symbol, as seen on the emblem of this legio on a number of minor stone and bronze findings(37). Also the t ympanum relief of sanctuary of the military encampment a t Carnuntum tha t was identified not long ago(38) and tha t does not leave any doubt as to its official use contains the figure of a capricorne).

With regard to the above it would seem reasonable tha t the Capricorn on the cultic triangle at the Brige-tio Dolichenum was connected with the legio XIIII Gemina a t Carnuntum. This can be done by suppos­ing tha t one of the soldiers of the Carnuntum le-gion(40) set up the triangle at the Dolichenum in Brigetio; or simply by supposing tha t the cultic tr i­angle was executed at a workshop in Carnuntum. In any case before A.D. 214 Brigetio was par t of Pan­nónia Superior(41), making it quite possible t ha t the town had many contacts with the legion stationed in the province's chief town.

There exists still another representation of a Cap­ricorn among the findings of the Dolichenus cult. This one is pa r t of the decorations of two al tars , which have almost the very same inscriptions, t ha t were excavated at Obernburg in Upper Germany(42). There, too, it is the emblem of a legion : the figure of

(35) A. JEREMIÁS, О. С , 1485. (36) E. DiEZ, in Corolla Memoriae Erich Swoboda dedi­

cate (Römische Forschungen in Nieder-Österreich, V, 1966, 105.)

(37) Cf. S. SOPRONI, FolArch, XVII, 1965, 119 and fur­ther literature.

(38) Cf. CSIR, I. 3. (Wien 1970) S. 11, Nr. 153. — From the literature see mainly E. DIEZ, О. C, 105.

(39) On the basis of the above mentioned works we must reject the doubts of B. KUZSINSZKY, AÉrt, XXIII , 1903, 63., and I. PAULOVICS, LA, IL, Diss Pann, 11/11, 1941, 142. — concerning the originality of the Stone finds representing two capricoms and bearing the name of the legio XIIII Gemina. Nei­ther elements of form nor of content give any reason to doubt the authenticity of the two stone finds. Cf. J. CESKA — R. HO§EK, Inscriptiones Pannóniáé Superioris in Slovacia Transdanubiana asservatae. Brno, 1967; L. BARKÓCZI, RIU, II . 505.

(40) The Dolichenus cult was widespread among the soldiers of the legio XIIII Gemina: Merlat Répertoire, 74 (Municipium Latobicorum) : bf. cos. leg. XIIII G.; ibid., 108 (Carnuntum); mil. leg. XIIII G.libra-rius numeris, eus. arm., signif(er), optio o(cta)u(i) pr.pr., candidatus.; ibid., 114: (centurio) leg. XIIII G.

(41) A. MÓCSY, Pannónia, RE, Suppl. IX, 1962, col. 587. Cf. recently J. FITZ, Donaugrenze von Pannónia Superier und Inferior. Alba Regia XIV, 1975, 351—355.

(42) E. SCHWERTHEIM, Die Denkmäler orientalistischer Gottheiten im römischen Deutschland. EPRO, XL, 1974, Nr. 133/a—b. — For the first altar, cf. GIL, XIII, 6623 = Merlat Répertoire, 300.

a Capricorn appears with the eagle and lightning tha t refer to Juppi te r on the abacus and sides of the altars set up corporately by the uexillatio of the legio XXII Primigeniai^). The group of symbols used here refer­ring to the god's Juppiter-l ike character expresses t ha t the god was closely connected with the legion. This circumstance perfectly correspond to the refer­ence to Mars of the Capricorn as an astronomical sym­bol, and so also with its reference to the god tha t is connected with both Juppi te r Dolichenus and the official military religion.

According to all probabil i ty the Capricorn represen­ted on the Brigetio fragment has a similar meaning. Here, the four pointed star beside the figure only reinforces the symbol 's astronomical meaning, i.e. its connection with Mars. Besides it is reasonable in its instance also to suppose tha t the Capricorn appears on the cultic triangle as an emblem of a legio having a definite symbolic reference.

As far as the dat ing of the fragment in question is concurd, it would seem to fit well into the chronolo­gical limits of the total group of finds from the Brige­tio Dolichenum. Though there is no da ta relating exactly when the sanctuary was built, it was certa­inly in use by the second half of the second century(44). I t was probably destroyed—as were most of the Dolichenus sanctuaries along the Rhine and the Danube(45)—after Alexander Severus and Iulia Ma-maea were murdered (A.D. 253) during the reign of Maximinus Thrax. Within these t ime limits and with regard to the connection of the Capricorn with the legio XIIII Gemina a t Carnuntum, the cultic triangle would seem to have been produced and then placd in the Brigetio sanctuary before A.D. 214, i.e. when Brigetio was still a pa r t of Pannónia Superior admi­nistratively. In this way the date of the cultic tri­angle of the Brigetio Dolichenum—regarding to the analogies too—can be the last third pa r t of the second century and the first decade of the third century, i.e. the age of Com modus, and tha t of Septimius Seve-rus(46).

(43) For the pictures of the altars, cf. E. SCHWERTHEIM о. с , Taf. 113., Merlat Répertoire, 293. Fig. 59.

(44) Merlat Essai, 133. — The three coins found at the sanctuary were the coins of Hadrian, Antoninus Pius and Iulia Mamaea. N. LÁNG, О. С, DissPann, 11(11, 1941, 166). — The Hadrian coin itself cannot— in want of some other proof of this dating — signify when the sanctuary began functioning. It Seems to be more acceptable to date the building of the sanctuary after the Markomann Wars. All of the epigraphed finds can be dated from the end of the Second or from the beginning of the third century.

(45) I. TÓTH, AArchllung, XXV, 1973, 109. (46) For the particular pieces, cf. Merlat Répertoire, pas­

sim (cf. note 1. and 5.); in general, see Merlat Essai, 168.

94

2. The misinterpreted base of Juppiter Dolichenus from Aquincum and the question of the Aquincum Doliche-num

The well-known(47) epigraphic base(48) for which I want to propose a new interpretat ion is to be found in the collection of stones at the Hungar ian National Museum (Fig. 5.).

The inscription up to now has been read as follows : [- - -] Harta filius Su\rus ex regioné Do\lica vico | Arfuaris | Silua(no) u(otum) s(oluit) \ Modesto \ et Probo | cofn)s(ulibus). The da te : A.D. 228.

This reading of the inscription which was comple­mented and remarked on by С u m о n t(49), served as basis for the hypothesis according to which „Har­t a " of Commagene origin dedicated the base in honour of Silvanus because he saw in the figure of Pannonian local god one of the sylvan deities of his homeland. C u m o n t ' s reading of the text and its interpreta­tion based on tha t reading is generally accepted in the l i terature on the religious history of Pannonia(5 0).

Thorough examination of the inscription, howewer, reveals t ha t this reading must be corrected at certain points . Fur thermore the religious historical interpre­ta t ion should be corrected accordingly (Fig. 5.).

First of all, the base in its present-day s tate is damaged, making the epigraph on it incomplete. The top of the base is missing and so is a t least one line of the inscription. Surely, as was commonplace at t ha t t ime, the first line contained the name of the deity invoked. In the second line—which is today the first line—a crack running lenghtwise makes it impossible to read with any clarity all but the first three letters, HAR. Following these three letters is a vertical stroke (perhaps from an F , I, K, P , T?), other wich can be seen the bot tom portion of three of four letters. At present these last few letters cannot be acceptably identified. With the understanding t ha t this is only a hypothesis, I propose t ha t this line may contain the person's name formed from the origo of the person dedicating the base. Wi th this in mind a new inter­preta t ion may be read as Har[fua]riinus.

(47) GIL, III, 3490. On the basis of the inventory diary, all researchers regard the provenance of the find to be Aquincum. J. HAMPEL, AErt, XXVI, 1906, 235 — however is described it as an Intercisa find. G. ERDÉLYI, Intercisa I., AHung, XXXIII , 1954, 145., — though, it is said not to have originated from Intercisa.

(48) Inventory number 78/1903. Dimensions: 77 cm. high, 28 cm. wide, 15 cm. thick.

(49) F . CTJMONT, Études Syriennes. Paris, 1917, 165. (50) E. g. T. NAGY Budapest in antiquity, Bp., 1942,

390.; G. ALFÖLDY, BpR, XX, 1963, 66, 82. ID., AArchHung, XII, 1961, 113. Anm. 82.; A. MÓCSY, о. с , 743.; Z. KÁDÁR, о. с , 2. Anm. 39. —Interna­tional research has aise taken up this idea; See A.H. K A N Juppiter Dolichenus. Leiden, 1943, 32.; Merlat Essai, 106., n. 7. — Only J. HAMPEL, О. C, 235, disaegrees with this mistaken reading of the text, but his reading, Hartius (t) triinus etc., did not have much influence on later research.

The tradit ional reading of „filius" in the thi rd or rather today 's second line can be argued from both linguistic and epigraphic points of view. Linguisti­cally this reading makes no sense because using the word „filius" after a comnomen („Harta") in the nominative without put t ing in the name of the father is completely useless. The tradit ional reading of „Harta" can by no means be interpreted as the geni­tive of the possible father, as would be logical in the case of filiation.

From the epigraphic point of view the examination of the base does not reveal any trace of the word „filius" where it was supposed on the epigraph. Instead the letters TR or R T writ ten into each other, followed by I INUS can be cleary read on the stone. Most likely this is the continuation of the name of the person t ha t was s tar ted on the previous line. I t s interpretat ion can be approached in two different ways. First the letters TR writ ten into each other can be considered a ligature, giving the reading of TRI INUS. Contrary to this, though, the ligation of the letters T and R in this way seems rather unusual, and besides this would be the only awkwardly carved and bearly legible in an epigraph consisting of pro­perly shaped, distinct letters. Rather , it would seem more probable tha t the stone-cutter had failed to carve the proper letter have and tried to correct his mistake after having carved the whole line, or a t least the letter I. Thus the R, which is narrower and not shaped quite so well as the other letters of the inscription, was cut into the mistakenly carved T by trying to make use of the already existing strokes. The two letters I, which are in the middle of the word and which also seem to be a mistake, help to reinforce the hypothesis t ha t the stone-cutter made an error when carving. To reconstruct his error, let us suppose first t ha t he carved the letters T I at the head of the line. After realizing his error he made the correction from the letter T to R. According to the handwri t ten tex t he must have held in his hand, he now had to carve an I after the R for the second time. This hypothesis is far from being impossible. Rather , it is reinforced by the fact t ha t there was not enough space left for the letter V at the end of the line: this letter is much narrower than all the other V's of the inscription, having been pushed to t he frame.

Thus the corrected reading of the tex t in the first lines of the inscription after the above linguistic and epigraphic emendations is as follows : Har[fua ?] ri{i}-nus Sur us . . . etc.

The reading of the other lines does not need epi­graphic correction. However, the current explanation of the expression Silua(no) in the eighth, or ra ther today the seventh, line must be examined. This is so because the deity 's name did not need to be abbreviat­ed for there was plenty of space left a t the bot tom of the base to spelled it out in full. Also, if the base was really dedicated in the honour of Silvanus, the name of the deity would hardly have been placed at the very end of the inscription, after the name and place of origin of the person who dedicated it. The

95

Fig. 5: The base from Aquincum.

only way such an unusual position of the dedication can be accepted would be if the top of the base was completely intact . Since the first portion of the inscrip­tion is missing, though, the invocation was surely included in the first line, not the last. The interpreta­tion of the Silua as Silua(no) is therefore rejected.

Rather , it would natural ly follow tha t the word was the name of a locality. To be more precise, it named the place of origin of Har[fua]rinus as Arfuaris Silua. Thus, in correspondance with the original meaning of the word, Silua designates a given „forest". The consisting of two syllabes of a local name corresponds exactly to the usual form of the ant ique place names formed with the word Silua.(51)

With regard to what has been mentioned above, the following reading of the inscription can be pro­posed :

| Наг[/иаЦ \ ri{i}nus Su\rus ex re\gione Do\lica vico | Arfuaris Silua (abl!) v(otum) s(oluit) \ Modesto | et Probo co(n)s(ulibus).

Thus, according to this interpretation, the a t t rac­tive hypothesis for the syncretistic relationship of (51) I . P a u l o v i c s seems to interpret the name of the

locale similarly, (o. c , DissPann, 11/11, 1941, 141.), where he does not complete the word Silua to read Silvanus.

the Commagene and Pannónia deities must be reject­ed^ 2 ) . At the same t ime, though, the religious histo­rical consequences resulting from this new interpre­ta t ion of the inscription of this base must be exa­mined.

For want of the deity 's name contained in the perished first line of the inscription, the following con­clusions are indirect and, naturally, suppositions. However, it is hoped t ha t these conclusions, will prove accurate and acceptable in the following exa­mination.

(52) Cf. literature referred to in note 50.

96

The person who dedicated the base was of Syrian origin. More exactly, he came to Pannónia from the vicinity of Doliche in nor thern Syria, from the uicus Arfuaris Silua (unfortunately this cannot be identi­fied more precisely). He was not the only person of such origin in Pannónia a t the age of Commodus and Severus. About a dozen persons are known to have come to Brigetio(53), Carnuntum(5 4), Savaria(55), or the vicinity of the so-called Amber Road(56) from this section of nor thern Syria, often from the very nigh-bourhood of Commagene or t ha t of Doliche(57). They were always careful to meticulously inscribe their places of origin: they often even named the small, today unidentifiable uicuses(5H). In addition to always referring to their homeland this group of inhabi tants can be observed to have remained loyal to the cult of their home deity, who appeared in the West as figure of Juppi te r Dolichenus.

(53) Cf. L. BARKÓCZI, Brigetio. DissPann, 11/22, 1951, 38.; Aur Antonius dues Surus ex re[g]. Dolic; Ibid., 96: Aelius Domitius uet. leg. II. Adi. domo Erapuli dues Surus: ibid., 93: M. Aur. Polideucus dec. тип. Breg. (sic) ex region. Dulca, uico Galan.; ibid., 113: Aur Bassus ex regioné Seuma, uico Odia; ibid 122: M. Aur. An[t]o[n]ianus do. ex ciuitate Zeugma; ibid. 209: Domitius Titus dec. Selue(cia) (abl.) Zeugm(ae), — cf. J . ÖE§KA — R. HOSEK, о. c, 42. m; cf. L. BAR­KÓCZI: Komárom Megyei Múzeumok Közleményei, 1968. 78.

(54) GIL, III . 4453.: Sept. Aistomodius reg(ione) Ger-m(anicia). For the debate relating to the epigraph, cf. A. MÓCSY, AAarchHung., XXV, 1973, 395, — where he again rejects the reading . . . reg(i) Germ(anorum) as incorrect from the viewpoint of content and epigraphies.

(5 5). RIU, 110: [Au]rel. Iulio Falado ciu\_i Suro]. . . Aur. Bassus dues [Surus]: RIU, 113: [Aurl] Marianus [Aurl] Zenoni au[u]nculo ciui [Suro] ex regioné Girro uico [—• —• —] BENGALI. For these two epigraphs and for the oriental finds in Savaria in detail cf. L. BALLA, AArchHung, XV, 1963, 228; — Doliche­nus epigraphs of persons from Northern Syria: I. TÓTH, AÉrt, XOVIII, 1971, 80. : Fabi. On[— — —] the dedication contains its place of origin: Genio uici Chanazibo et Genio ciui ciui[t]atis Gaeser. [Ger]m. ; ibid, 81.; [ civ]es [Suri] ex ciuitate [Seleu]cia Ze[u]g(mae). A problem existes in the reading of the inscription RIU 40. complemented by A. M ó c s y . . . [res]tituer[unt] (cf. Die römischen Steindenkmäler von Savaria. Budapest, 1971, Nr. 9.) I think the reading (c)iues is accaptable: lui. [Tu]linus [et] Aruel. [A]ntipa[ter c]iues [Suri], cf. I. TÓTH, AÉrt, С, 1973, 253. — This find — on the basis of the place where it had been found —- can also be hypothetical-ly, connected with the Savaria Dolichenum.

(56) CIL, III, 11701 (Celeia): Aur Maximus ciuis Surus ex regioneZeugmauicoHennia, Aur. BassusBarathe Aur. Sabinus ciuis Surus ex regioné Zeugma uico [— — —] A. —- J. SASEL, Inscriptiones latinae quae in Jugos­lavia inter annos MGMXL et MGMLX repertae et editae sunt. Situla, V, 1963, 132, No. 389. (Celeia): Aur. Gaianus dues Surus. — These two latter fin-digs come from outside Pannónia; however, their connection with the Syrian inhabitants mentioned above is beyond any doubt. Cf. L. BALLA, О. C , 233.

(57) L. BARKÓCZI; О. С, DissPann, XXII, 1951, F . 38, 93.

(58) Cf. the origo-definitions of the inscriptions referred to in notes № 53—57.

According to what is known today, this group of Syrians invoked this deity only in their religious inscriptions. Also in the above mentioned towns, they were the initiators and the most influential people in the cult of Juppi te r Dolichenus(59). The inhabi tants from northern Syria probably arrived in Pannónia together, and proceeded to settle in the Pannonian towns either in smaller or larger homogenous groups(60). Their culture and beliefs were directly t ransplanted from their oriental homeland, making them most probably the first significant propagators of oriental religiousness along the Danube(6 1).

The person who dedicated the base in question was also a member of this group of people from Com­magene in northern Syria. For this reason, as in Brigetio and Savaria, there surely existed an oriental populat ion forming homogenous groups in Aquincum too. From the viewpoint of religious history, on the other hand, Har[fua]rinus surely dedicated the in­scribed base in question to the deity of his homeland Doliche.

Today there exist only scattered relics from the Juppi te r Dolichenus cult in Aquincum(6 2). This is not surprising, however, since most of relics of the Jupp i ­ter Dolichenus cult are known from excavated sanc­tuaries demolished after 235, namely closed groups of finds(63). The dispersion of the finds in Pannónia —and outside Pannónia for t ha t matter—seems to indicate in most instances tha t the scattered finds once belonged to the fixtures of a total ly demolished sanctuary or one tha t has not yet been discovered bu t surely has a rich inventory of buried objects(64). This supposition is supported in Pannónia , for exam­ple, by relics found at Carnuntum and Savaria. During the excavations at both towns scattered finds were soon followed by the discovery of the complete group of finds of the sanctuary(6 5).

(59) I. TÓTH, о. с , AÉrt, XCVIII, 1971, 83. (60) L. BALLA,; О. С, 233; L. BARKÓCZI, AArchHung,

XVI, 1964, 29. (61) A. BRELICH, DissPann, 11/10, 1939. 130; I. TÓTH,

о. c, AÉrt, XCVIII, 1971, 83.; ID . , Studium, II , 1971. 23.

(62) Merlat Répertoire, 11:1. o. m. Dulceno Heliopolüan[o] sacru[m] fecit Aureli. Secu[nd.] ueter. leg. I I Ad. p f. pro se et suis posu[it] v. s. I. т.; ibid., 72: / . о. т. Dol. — For the base of a Nemesis statue, cf. N. LÁNG, Berzeviczy Emlékkönyv. (Berzevicy Memo­rial Volume). Budapest, 1934. p . 8. The finds connected with Aquincum in the course of later research (Merlat Répertoire 69—70.) and their true origin were discussed most recently by J. FITZ, AArchHung, XXIV, 1972, 38; I. TÓTH, The Prob­lems of the Dolichenus Altar at Gorsium. Oikumene, II, 1977.

(63) I. TÓTH, о. с, AArchHung, XXV, 1973, 109. (64) Cf. Merlat Répertoire, passim. — This question

will be discussed at full length at a later dote. (65) J. DELL, AEM, XVI, 1893, 176; I. TÓTH, О. С,

AÉrt, XCVIII, 1971, 80.

7 Alba Regia XV. 9 7

As far as Aquincum is concerned both the histori­cal an religious historical circumstances suggest t h a t there mut have been a Dolichenus sanctuary in the town, probably in the military town. The small num­ber of finds—as a special argumentum ex silentio— can be rightly interpreted precisely as proof of this ! The finds a t the Carnuntum, Savaria, and Brigetio sanctuaries and those found along the Rhine provide sufficient proof t ha t the relics of the Dolichenus sanc­tuaries are always found in one group, hidden either the ruined sanctuary itself or in its neighbourhood. Thus a t places where scattered finds have been unco­vered bu t not the sanctuary itself, we may well sup­pose t ha t most of the finds are either not known yet, or have completely perished.

As for the base in question it undoubtedly support­

ed a s ta tue originally and stood in a Dolichenum at Aquincum, which to the present day has not been found. The s ta tue tha t it supported and the first line of the inscription containing the name of t he deity must have perished when the sanctuary was ravag­ed, as were the inscribed finds of the Savaria Doli-chenum(66). Unfortunately the provenance of the base does not provide information as to where exactly the supposed Dolichenum was located in Aquincum(67).

Now in interpreting the inscription of the base, we can be sure t ha t a t the end of the second and at the beginning of the third centuries the elements of a population from northern Syria, discernible in several towns of Pannónia , were to be found among the popu­lation of Aquincum as well. Also this ethnic group certainly played a decisive role in introducting and propagating Syrian cul ts—that of Juppi te r Doli­chenus as well—in Aquincum too.

/ . Tóth

A b r é v i a t i o n s ЕРВО — Études préliminaires aux relagions orientales dans l'Empire Romain. (Leiden, Brill) Merlat Essai — P. MERLAT, Jupiter Dolichenus. Essai

à"'interpretation et de synthèse. Paris, 1960. Merlat Répertoire — P. MERLAT, Répertoire des inscrip­

tions et monuments figurés du culte de Jupiter Dolichenus. Paris—Rennes, 1951.

o. c , (66) I. TÓTH, о. с, AÉrt, XCVIII, 1971, 80,. I D . AArchHung, XXV, 1973. 111.

(67) Cf. literature above in note № 47. The only basis for stating the place of origin of the find is that the Hungarian National Museum bought it from J. S z e n d r e i together with a tomb fragment from Buda (Attila krt. 114.) cf. J. SZENDREI, AÉrt, XXII , 1902, 383.; G. ERDÉLYI, О. С, 145.

98