Evidence of the Roman army in Slovenia / Sledovi rimske vojske na Slovenskem

Istenič Janka; BOŠTJAN  LAHARNAR

This contribution opens with an overview of sites in the area of Šmartno near Cerklje. The focus, however, is the prehistoric hilltop settlements on Straža above Šmartno and on Gobavica above Mengeš, which revealed parts of Early Roman military equipment. The material could be divided into two chronological groups. The early finds date from the mid-1st century BC to the Early Augustan period, while the late finds date from the Middle Augustan to the Late Augustan / Early Tiberian periods. They indicate an occasional presence of the Roman army or the existence of small military posts on locations previously settled by the indigenous population. The two sites were no longer permanently settled at least from the Middle Augustan period onwards, and the centre of habitation had been transferred to the plain.

The several important aspects of the Roman army presented in this contribution reflect the altered military doctrine as implemented in the area of the south-eastern Alps follow¬ing the reforms of Diocletian and Constantine. The Late Roman period in this area thus boasts numerous military installations consisting of fortifications and barrier walls functioning as part of the Claustra Alpium Iuliarum defence system, as well as less readily identifiable forts behind and in front of the defence zone. The contribution also provides a more detailed discussion on the genesis of the defence system and highlights several problems encountered during the colourful history of its research, but also proposes sever¬al conclusions. Of those, the initial construction of the forts of the barrier system can reliably be dated to the 270s, their gradual expansion to the 4th and the abandonment of a large part of the barrier walls to the beginning of the 5th century. The chronology of individual sections of the barrier walls is, on the other hand, poorly known. What is certain is that the wider area of the south-eastern Alps was additionally fortified by posts, some of which can be identified as forts (for example Velike Malence and Gradišče near Zalog). Others, located along communications of either strategic or defence importance, only revealed various militaria in their interior, but no fortification features that would allow them to be positively identified as military posts (for exam¬ple Ančnikovo gradišče and Gradišče near Dunaj).

A hoard of Roman weapons was discovered around 1890 at the prehistoric settlement of Grad near Šmihel under Nanos Mt. The circumstances of the find, all of the material, and the typology of the weapons are presented in the article. Weapons for fighting at a distance predominated: heavy and light pila, incendiary pila, javelins, catapult bolts, and arrowheads. Many of them were deformed – evidently previously used in battle. Considering the pila with flat hafts, the hoard could be dated to the end of the 3 rd and the first half of the 2 nd cent. BC, while the historical circumstances would indicate a burial in the first half of the 2 nd cent. BC. The late La Tène and Roman chance finds from Grad are analyzed at the end, as is the question of the settlement in the La Tène and Roman periods

K ATA L O GI I N MONO GR A F I J E / C ATA L O GI E T MONO GR A PH I A E 4 1 EVIDENCE OF THE ROMAN ARMY IN SLOVENIA SLEDOVI RIMSKE VOJSKE NA SLOVENSKEM JANKA ISTENIČ, BOŠTJAN LAHARNAR, JANA HORVAT Uredniki / Editors 2015 EVIDENCE OF THE ROMAN ARMY IN SLOVENIA • SLEDOVI RIMSKE VOJSKE NA SLOVENSKEM KATALOGI IN MONOGRAFIJE 41 2015 K ATA L O GI I N MONO GR A F I J E / C ATA L O GI E T MONO GR A PH I A E 4 1 EVIDENCE OF THE ROMAN ARMY IN SLOVENIA • SLEDOVI RIMSKE VOJSKE NA SLOVENSKEM Uredniki / Editors JANKA ISTENIČ, BOŠTJAN LAHARNAR, JANA HORVAT Ljubljana 2015 Katalogi in monograije / Catalogi et monographiae 41 EVIDENCE OF THE ROMAN ARMY IN SLOVENIA SLEDOVI RIMSKE VOJSKE NA SLOVENSKEM Janka Istenič, Boštjan Laharnar, Jana Horvat (uredniki / editors) Jezikovni pregled slovenskih besedil / Slovenian language editing Glavni in odgovorni urednik serije / Editor-in-chief of the series Alenka Božič in Marjeta Humar Peter Turk Recenzenti / Reviewed by Technical editor / Tehnična urednica Jana Horvat, Janka Istenič, Peter Kos, Boštjan Laharnar Barbara Jerin Oblikovanje / Design Urejanje slikovnega gradiva / Figures editing Barbara Predan Ida Murgelj Založnik / Publisher Uredniški odbor / Editorial board Narodni muzej Slovenije Dragan Božič, Janez Dular, Janka Istenič, Timotej Kniic, Biba Teržan Zanj / Publishing executive Barbara Ravnik, direktorica Narodnega muzeja Slovenije Tisk / Print Present d. o. o. Naklada / Print run 400 Cena / Price 56 € © 2015 Narodni muzej Slovenije, Ljubljana Tiskano s inančno pomočjo Ministrstva za kulturo Republike Slovenije in Javne agencije za raziskovalno dejavnost Republike Slovenije. he publication was made possible with funding from the Ministry of Culture of the Republic of Slovenia and the Slovenian Research Agency. CIP - Kataložni zapis o publikaciji Narodna in univerzitetna knjižnica, Ljubljana 355(497.4)"652"(082) 94(37) EVIDENCE of the Roman army in Slovenia = Sledovi rimske vojske na Slovenskem / uredniki, editors Janka Istenič, Boštjan Laharnar, Jana Horvat. - Ljubljana : Narodni muzej Slovenije, 2015. - (Katalogi in monograije = Catalogi et monographiae / Narodni muzej Slovenije ; 41) ISBN 978-961-6169-97-4 1. Vzp. stv. nasl. 2. Istenič, Janka 280118528 Vse pravice pridržane. Noben del te izdaje ne sme biti reproduciran, shranjen ali prepisan v kateri koli obliki oz. na kateri koli način, bodisi elektronsko, mehansko, s fotokopiranjem, snemanjem ali kako drugače, brez predhodnega pisnega dovoljenja izdajatelja (copyright). All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the prior writtrn permission of the publisher. CONTENTS KAZALO Preface 7 Predgovor Boštjan Laharnar he Roman army in the Notranjska region 9 Boštjan Laharnar Rimska vojska na Notranjskem Janka Istenič with a contribution by Alenka Miškec (the coin catalogue) Traces of Octavian's military activities at Gradišče in Cerkno and Vrh gradu near Pečine Danilo Breščak Graves with weapons from Verdun near Stopiče 43 75 Janka Istenič s prispevkom Alenke Miškec (katalog novcev) Sledovi Oktavijanovega vojaškega delovanja na Gradišču v Cerknem in Vrh gradu pri Pečinah Danilo Breščak Grobovi z orožjem z Verduna pri Stopičah Andrej Gaspari, Iris Bekljanov Zidanšek, Andrej Gaspari, Iris Bekljanov Zidanšek, Rene Masaryk, Matjaž Novšak Rene Masaryk, Matjaž Novšak Augustan military graves from the area 125 Avgustejska vojaška grobova s Kongresnega trga of Kongresni trg in Ljubljana v Ljubljani Jana Horvat Jana Horvat Early Roman military inds from prehistoric 171 Zgodnjerimske vojaške najdbe s prazgodovinskih settlements in the Gorenjska region naselbin na Gorenjskem Milan Sagadin Milan Sagadin Evidence of the Roman army in Early Roman Kranj 209 Sledovi rimske vojske v zgodnjeantičnem Kranju Mitja Guštin Mitja Guštin Roman camps following the route to Segestica 221 Rimski vojaški tabori v smeri proti Segestiki and the western Balkans in zahodnemu delu Balkanskega polotoka Alenka Miškec Alenka Miškec he role of Roman Republican denarii of Mark Antony 235 Vloga rimskih republikanskih denarijev Marka Antonija in the monetary circulation of the Late Republic v denarnem obtoku pozne republike Boštjan Laharnar, Benjamin Štular, Miha Mlinar Boštjan Laharnar, Benjamin Štular, Miha Mlinar Gradič above Kobarid – a Late Republican fortiied emporium? 243 Gradič nad Kobaridom, poznorepublikanski utrjeni emporij? Maja Janežič, Evgen Lazar Maja Janežič, Evgen Lazar Roman military equipment from the town centre of Poetovio 257 Rimska vojaška oprema iz središča Petovione Irena Lazar Irena Lazar Roman tile workshop at Vransko – archaeology, 269 Rimska opekarna na Vranskem – arheologija, ager of Celeia and Roman history celejski ager in rimska zgodovina Andrej Preložnik, Aleksandra Nestorović Andrej Preložnik, Aleksandra Nestorović Germanic spur from Ptuj 285 Germanska ostroga s Ptuja Veronika Plaum, Judita Lux Veronika Plaum, Judita Lux Hackamore and other parts of equine equipment 297 Hakamora in drugi deli konjske opreme from the Roman villa at Mošnje (Abstract) iz rimske vile pri Mošnjah Julijana Visočnik Julijana Visočnik Soldiers from Roman autonomous towns in Slovenia, 305 Vojaki iz rimskih avtonomnih mest na Slovenskem, active in other parts of the Roman Empire (Summary) ki so službovali drugod po imperiju Anja Ragolič Anja Ragolič Die Zeit des Kaisers Gallienus und 317 Galienovo obdobje in vloga vojske die Rolle des Heeres in Poetovio v Petovioni Drago Svoljšak Drago Svoljšak Roman fort at Hrušica: indings of investigations after 1979 341 Rimska utrdba na Hrušici, izsledki izkopavanj po letu 1979 Janka Istenič Janka Istenič with a contribution by Andrej Šemrov (the coin catalogue) s prispevkom Andreja Šemrova (katalog novcev) Mali Njivč above Novaki 365 Mali Njivč nad Novaki Slavko Ciglenečki Slavko Ciglenečki Late Roman army, Claustra Alpium Iuliarum 385 Poznorimska vojska, Claustra Alpium Iuliarum and the fortiications in the south-eastern Alps in utrjena krajina v jugovzhodnih Alpah Preface Predgovor he Roman army and the numerous inds and phenomena associated with it, is one of the central issues of Roman archaeology and history, as well as being a recurring research topic. Proučevanje najrazličnejših vidikov rimske vojske ter z njo povezanih pojavov je ena od osrednjih tem rimske arheologije in zgodovine. he last two decades of archaeological investigation in Slovenia, much of which was of a rescue nature, have revealed numerous traces of Roman military activities, ranging from forts to small fragments of military equipment. Concurrently with ield investigations, knowledge has also been gained from the study of previously recovered archaeological evidence, all of which sheds new light on events taking place on the territory of Slovenia at the end of prehistory and in the Roman period. As a result, we have a better understanding of the way that Roman conquest proceeded, we have gained additional knowledge of individual aspects of military defence and control in the Late Roman period, and more is known on the architecture and dating of individual forts and fortlets, on the provisioning of the army, on communication and transport lines, as well as on the Roman military equipment. In light of this, the National Museum of Slovenia and the Institute of Archaeology at the Scientiic Research Centre of the Slovenian Academy of Sciences and Arts organised a scientiic gathering dedicated to new discoveries concerning Roman military activity on the territory of Slovenia. It took place on the 17 and 18 November 2011 in Ljubljana. his event led to the idea for a publication that would bring together the results of recent investigations into the subject. Subsequent years have been dedicated to gathering contributions, but also to peer reviewing and editing. he book presents a rich collection of contributions, although it lacks the results of several important rescue excavations, the desktop assessment of which is not yet at a stage that would enable conclusions to be drawn. We nevertheless hope that this represents a valuable addition to our knowledge of the Roman period in Slovenia and will prompt further research. Janka Istenič, Jana Horvat and Boštjan Laharnar Arheološke raziskave, med katerimi je bilo največ zaščitnih, so v zadnjih dveh desetletjih razkrile številne nove sledi delovanja rimske vojske na območju sedanje Slovenije, od utrdb do drobnih odlomkov vojaške opreme. Hkrati je bilo znova proučeno že prej znano arheološko gradivo. Te raziskave so na novo osvetlile dogajanje na ozemlju sedanje Slovenije ob koncu prazgodovine in v rimski dobi. Napredovali smo v razumevanju poteka rimskega osvajanja ozemlja Slovenije v zgodnjerimski dobi ter poglobili poznavanje posameznih vidikov vojaške obrambe in nadzora v poznorimski dobi, več vemo o arhitekturi in datiranju vojaških utrdb, o oskrbi vojske, o poteku prometnih in oskrbovalnih poti ter o rimski vojaški opremi. Narodni muzej Slovenije in Inštitut za arheologijo Znanstvenoraziskovalnega centra Slovenske akademije znanosti in umetnosti sta 17. in 18. novembra 2011 v Ljubljani organizirala znanstveno srečanje, posvečeno novim odkritjem v zvezi z delovanjem rimske vojske na ozemlju Slovenije. Iz srečanja je zrasla zamisel o knjigi, v kateri bi bili na enem mestu predstavljeni najnovejši raziskovalni rezultati. V naslednjih letih smo se posvetili zbiranju prispevkov o izbranih temah, njihovemu recenziranju in urejanju. V knjigi žal manjka obravnava nekaterih pomembnih zaščitnih izkopavanj, pri katerih stopnja obravnave gradiva še ne omogoča objave izsledkov. Kljub vsemu upamo, da bo knjiga dragocen prispevek k razumevanju rimske dobe na Slovenskem in spodbuda za nadaljnje raziskovalno delo. Janka Istenič, Jana Horvat in Boštjan Laharnar 7 THE ROMAN ARMY IN THE NOTRANJSKA REGION RIMSKA VOJSKA NA NOTRANJSKEM Boštjan Laharnar Boštjan Laharnar Abstract Izvleček Recent inds from Grad near Šmihel pod Nanosom, have shed a new light on an assemblage of Roman republican weapons excavated at this site as early as ca. 1890. In the Notranjska region, Roman weapons and parts of military equipment are known from Baba and Ambroževo gradišče near Slavina, Kerin above Pivka, Primož above Raduhova vas, Gradišče at Čepna, Gradišče above Knežak, Stari grad above Unec, Žerovnišček near Bločice, Ulaka above Stari trg pri Ložu, and perhaps Gradišče above Gornja Košana and Ahac. Nadleški hrib in the valley of Loška dolina harbours the remains of a Roman stronghold. his paper examines the materials from these sites and identiies Roman military presence through several periods, from 2nd century BC until the Late Roman period. Nedavno odkrite najdbe z Gradu pri Šmihelu pod Nanosom na novo osvetljujejo sklop rimskega republikanskega orožja, ki so ga na tem najdišču izkopali okrog leta 1890. Na Notranjskem sicer poznamo rimsko orožje in dele vojaške oprave z Babe in Ambroževega gradišča pri Slavini, Kerina nad Pivko, Primoža nad Raduhovo vasjo, Gradišča na Čepni, Gradišča nad Knežakom, Starega gradu nad Uncem, Žerovniščka pri Bločicah, Ulake nad Starim trgom pri Ložu in morda z Gradišča nad Gornjo Košano in Ahaca. Na Nadleškem hribu v Loški dolini ležijo ostanki rimske utrdbe. V prispevku obravnavamo gradivo z naštetih najdišč in ugotavljamo rimsko vojaško navzočnost v več obdobjih, od 2. st. pr. n. št. do pozne rimske dobe. Keywords: Slovenia, Notranjska region, fortiied hilltop settlements, the Roman army, Roman military equipment, 2nd–1st century BC, 1st–3rd century, Late Roman period Ključne besede: Slovenija, Notranjska, utrjene višinske naselbine, rimska vojska, rimske vojaške najdbe, 2.–1. st. pr. n. št., 1.–3. st., pozna rimska doba 1 Uvod 1 Introduction he majority of items associated with the Roman army in the topographic region of Postojna1 come from fortiied hilltop settlements (hillforts) or their surroundings. Most inds were discovered during pre-WW2 excavations with scant information about the circumstances of these discoveries, or by treasure hunters using metal detectors. In the previous two decades, the latter inds have been, at least in part, acquired by the National Museum of Slovenia, the Notranjska Museum in Postojna and the Park of Military History in Pivka, and are studied or taken into account in this paper. he inds presented are also part of a study of prehistoric and Roman metal detector small inds from the Notranjska region, which are studied in full elsewhere.2 Some acquired metal detector inds (including Roman military equipment) from the Notranjska region are also kept by the War Museum in Logatec. 1 2 ANSl 1975, 148–161. Laharnar 2012. Na območju postojnske topografske regije1 predmeti, ki jih povezujemo z rimsko vojsko, večinoma izvirajo z utrjenih višinskih naselbin (gradišč) ali njihove okolice. Glavnina najdb izvira z izkopavanj pred 2. sv. vojno, z nezadostnimi podatki o okoliščinah odkritij in iz nestrokovnih kopanj iskalcev z detektorji kovin. Vsaj del slednjih so v zadnjih dveh desetletjih pridobili Narodni muzej Slovenije, Notranjski muzej v Postojni in Park vojaške zgodovine v Pivki ter jih obravnavamo ali upoštevamo v tem članku. Predstavljene najdbe so bile vključene v študij sklopov prazgodovinskih in antičnih detektorskih najdb z Notranjskega, ki so v celoti predstavljene na drugem mestu.2 Nestrokovno pridobljene detektorske najdbe (med njimi rimske vojaške najdbe) z Notranjskega hrani tudi Vojni muzej v Logatcu. 1 2 ANSl 1975, 148–161. Laharnar 2012. 9 Figure 1. Grad near Šmihel pod Nanosom. A hoard of Roman weapons (ater Istenič 2006, 43, ig. 35; photo T. Lauko). Slika 1. Grad pri Šmihelu pod Nanosom. Zaklad rimskega orožja (po Istenič 2006, 43, sl. 35; foto T. Lauko). Due to a lack of proper documentation and stratigraphic data, the interpretation of detector inds proves challenging. Finders were interviewed to obtain as much as possible of the data regarding the circumstances of the discoveries, and the inds were then typologically and chronologically categorised. he Roman military inds were placed into a wider historical and geopolitical context. By analysing the data, we have attempted to establish whether the military inds at individual sites point to a battle, indicate a military outpost, or can be explained in some other way. 10 Interpretacija detektorskih najdb je zaradi pomanjkanja ustreznih postopkov dokumentiranja in stratigrafskih podatkov zelo otežena. S poizvedovanjem pri najditeljih smo pridobili čim natančnejše podatke o okoliščinah izkopa predmetov, ki smo jih tipološko in kronološko opredelili. Rimske vojaške najdbe smo skušali umestiti v širši zgodovinski in geopolitični okvir. Na podlagi zbranih podatkov smo želeli ugotoviti, ali vojaške najdbe na posameznih najdiščih predstavljajo sled spopada, nakazujejo obstoj vojaške postojanke, ali pa jih lahko razložimo kako drugače. 2 The Roman army in in the Notranjska region: 2nd century BC 2 Rimska vojska na Notranjskem: 2. stoletje pr. n. št. 2.1 Grad near Šmihel pod Nanosom 2.1 Grad pri Šmihelu pod Nanosom 2.1.1 An assemblage (hoard) of Roman republican weapons 2.1.1 Sklop (zaklad) rimskega republikanskega orožja Grad near Šmihel pod Nanosom is a fortiied settlement, which was inhabited from at least the Early Iron Age until the Late La Tène.3 Around 1890, an assemblage (hoard) of at least 473 iron objects was excavated in the NW part of the rampart (ig. 1). hey were predominantly Roman assault weapons: pila, javelins, catapult-bolts, arrowheads and plain rods with asymmetrical tips.4 By drawing parallels with rare examples of pila with lat hafts with inverted edges and triangular tips with two barbs, Jana Horvat dated the Šmihel hoard to the late 3rd century and irst half of the 2nd century BC.5 Taking into account the historical circumstances, the most probable date would seem to be sometime after the founding of Aquileia (181 BC) and before the existence of the Roman merchant post on Mandrga near Razdrto from the turn of the 1st century BC.6 By taking Grad, a strategically important central settlement of this region, the Romans took control over the segment of the Amber Road corridor around Ocra and the Postojna Gate. he Roman conquest probably spelled the decline for the Grad settlement, judging by sporadic inds from 2nd–1st century BC, which are far scarcer than at other fortiied settlements in the region, and by the lack of Late La Tène and Roman graves at the relevant cemeteries.7 Grad pri Šmihelu pod Nanosom je utrjena naselbina, ki je živela najpozneje od starejše železne do pozne latenske dobe.3 Na območju severozahodnega dela okopa so okrog leta 1890 izkopali zaključen sklop (zaklad) vsaj 473 železnih predmetov (sl. 1). Med njimi prevladuje rimsko napadalno orožje: pilumi, kopja, osti katapultnih izstrelkov, osti puščic in preproste konice z nesimetrično konico.4 Glede na primerjave redkih oblik pilumov s ploščatim nasadiščem z zavihanimi robovi in trikotno konico z zalustmi je Jana Horvat šmihelski zaklad orožja datirala v konec 3. in prvo polovico 2. st. pr. n. št.5 Z upoštevanjem zgodovinskih okoliščin se nam zdi najverjetnejša datacija v obdobje po ustanovitvi Akvileje (181 pr. n. št.) in pred obstojem rimske trgovske postojanke na Mandrgi pri Razdrtem, datirane v konec 2. in začetek 1. st. pr. n. št.6 Z osvojitvijo Gradu, strateško pomembne središčne naselbine na tem območju, so Rimljani vzpostavili nadzor nad odsekom koridorja jantarske poti na območju Okre in Postojnskih vrat. Po rimski osvojitvi je najverjetneje sledil zaton naselbine na Gradu. To nakazujejo posamične najdbe 2. do 1. st pr. n. št., ki jih je precej manj kot na drugih utrjenih naselbinah na Notranjskem, ter dejstvo, da na pripadajočih grobiščih ni poznolatenskih in rimskih grobov.7 2.1.2 New inds of Roman weaponry 2.1.2 Nove najdbe rimskega orožja In 2007 or 2008, a treasure hunter using a metal detector discovered catapult-bolts and arrowheads (pl. 1: 1, 3–13) on the slope of the NW part of the rampart (ig. 2: A). Typologically, they correspond to the examples from the hoard of Roman republican weapons.8 A number of amateurs combed the northern half of the settlement with metal detectors, while the southern half was avoided because of the nearby village. hey found a catapult-bolt (pl. 1: 2), lead slingshot (pl. 1: 14–28; ig. 12) of various shapes and weights, which is representative of Roman lead slingshot predating Caesar’s Gallic War.9 Among them, examples of a rare double-pyramid shaped Völling Type III (pl. 1: 15; ig. 12: 1–2, 5–6, 9–12, 17–18, 31–32), typical of the irst third of the 1st Leta 2007 ali 2008 je iskalec z detektorjem kovin na pobočju severozahodnega dela okopa naselbine (sl. 2: A) našel osti katapultnih izstrelkov in puščic (t. 1: 1, 3–13), ki so enakih oblik kot primerki iz zaklada rimskega republikanskega orožja.8 Razni iskalci so z detektorji prečesavali severno polovico naselbine, njeni južni polovici pa so se zaradi bližine vasi izogibali. Našli so katapultni izstrelek (t. 1: 2), svinčene izstrelke (želode) za pračo (t. 1: 14–28; sl. 12) različnih oblik in širokih razponov tež, kar je značilnost rimskih svinčenih izstrelkov za pračo, ki so starejši od obdobja Cezarjeve galske vojne.9 Pojavlja se tudi sicer redka dvojnopiramidasta oblika III po Völlingu (t. 1: 15; sl. 12: 1–2, 5–6, 9–12, 17–18, 31–23), značilna za prvo tretjino 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Gabrovec 1975; Horvat 2002, 150, 160–162: with the suggestion that the settlement was abandoned in Middle La Tène. Horvat 1997; Horvat 2002. Horvat 2002, 154-155. Horvat, Bavdek 2009; Laharnar 2011, 369, 372. Horvat 2002, 160–161. Hrovat 2002, pl. 14. 15: 1–21. Laharnar 2011, 369, 372. 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Gabrovec 1975; Horvat 2002, 150, 160–162: z domnevo o koncu naselbine v srednjem latenu. Horvat 1997; Horvat 2002. Horvat 2002, 154–155. Horvat, Bavdek 2009; Laharnar 2011, 369, 372. Horvat 2002, 160–161. Horvat 2002, t. 14, 15: 1–21. Laharnar 2011, 369, 372. 11 Figure 2. A plan of the settlement Grad near Šmihel pod Nanosom. Scale ca. 1 : 6000 (Modiied from Horvat 2002, 121, ig. 5, where is scaled down from Deschmann, Hochstetter 1879, 6–7, pl. 3, with the added location of the hoard (rhomb) from Müllner 1892, pl. 4: 1a and the toponyms of Za Polšno and Pod Kaculjem). Also added are the approximately marked ind-spots of the catapultbolts, arrowheads and lead slingshot from 2007/2008 (A); the indspots of (more than 10) lead slingshot (B, C, D) and the ind-spots, where individual lead slingshot were dug up (dots). Slika 2. Načrt naselbine Grad pri Šmihelu pod Nanosom. M. približno 1 : 6000 (Prirejeno po Horvat 2002, 121, sl. 5, tam: pomanjšano po Deschmann, Hochstetter 1879, 6–7, t. 3 z dodano lego zaklada (romb) po Müllner 1892, t. 4: 1a ter ledinskima imenoma Za Polšno in Pod Kaculjem). Dodana so približno označena območja odkritja katapultnih izstrelkov, puščic in svinčenih želodov za pračo leta 2007/2008 (A); območja (več kot deset primerkov) najdenih svinčenih želodov za pračo (B, C, D) in lokacije izkopa posameznih svinčenih želodov za pračo (pike). century BC or even earlier.10 he best and geographically closest parallels to the slingshot from Šmihel are the examples from the Barda-Roba site in Friuli,11 associated with the skirmishes from the end of the 2nd century and beginning of the 1st century BC.12 1. st. pr. n. št. ali za še starejši čas.10 Najboljše in geografsko najbližje primerjave šmihelskim izstrelkom najdemo v primerkih z najdišča Barda-Roba v Furlaniji,11 kjer jih povezujejo z vojaškimi spopadi ob koncu 2. in v začetku 1. st. pr. n. št.12 2.1.3 The interpretation of the Roman weapons 2.1.3 Interpretacija rimskega orožja Jana Horvat suggested three possible explanations for the deposition of the hoard of Roman weapons from Šmihel: the weapons were remnants from battle (a siege and an attack on the settlement), a votive hoard, or scrap iron for Jana Horvat je postavila tri možne razlage zakopa šmihelskega zaklada rimskega orožja: orožje predstavlja neposredne ostanke bojev (obleganje in napad na naselbino), votivni zaklad ali pa zbirko železja za popravilo in predela- 10 11 12 12 Völling 1990, 34–35; Horvat, Bavdek 2009, 138; Laharnar 2009, 369. Tagliaferri 1986, 125, 132, pl. 27. Chiabà 2007, 54. 10 11 12 Völling 1990, 34–35; Horvat, Bavdek 2009, 138; Laharnar 2009, 369. Tagliaferri 1986, 125, 132, t. 27. Chiabà 2007, 54. repair and reworking.13 Horvat mainly considered the latter two options, while questioning the hypothesis of the weapons being actual remnants from battle.14 However, recent metal detector inds and the analysis of the lead slingshot, which are very likely contemporary to the weapons from the hoard,15 seem to support the irst explanation. he extensive damage on pila, incendiary pila, javelins, catapult-bolts and arrows from the hoard, as well as the damage on the lead slingshot, would suggest that the weapons were used in battle.16 he singed stones from the rampart, where the majority of the hoard was found, together with examples of weapons fused with calciied stones,17 may not suggest metal processing,18 but rather a tumbling of a burning wall, which then buried the weapons, either ired or discarded by the attackers. he exact circumstances of how the weapons from the hoard were found are vague, but judging by the archive sources they were found at the NW corner of the settlement’s rampart (igs. 2 and 3: rhomb). According to the references by Alfons Müllner and Prince Windischgrätz, the weapons were partly lying atop the earthwork, while several hundred pieces of weapons were lying together in a deep pit, and the inder dug several times 3–5 m deep into the rampart to collect the inds.19 Unlike the weapons found clustered (the hoard) inside and on top of the rampart (ruins of the fortiication wall?), the metal detector inds were scattered. he catapult-bolts and arrowheads lay around the slope of the NW part of the settlement’s rampart (ig. 2: A), and individual lead slingshot were found around the northern half of the settlement (ig. 2: B, C, D and dots; ig. 3: C, D and dots). After the attack on Grad, the weapons seemed to have been partly collected (the hoard) and partly left scat- vo.13 Horvatova je pretehtala predvsem drugi dve možnosti, medtem ko je prvo, da gre za neposredne ostanke bojev, postavila pod vprašaj.14 Vendar zadnje detektorske najdbe in analiza svinčenih izstrelkov za pračo, ki so zelo verjetno sočasni z orožjem iz zaklada,15 govorijo v prid prvi razlagi. Številne poškodbe na pilumih, zažigalnih pilumih, kopjih, katapultnih izstrelkih in puščicah iz zaklada ter svinčenih izstrelkih nakazujejo, da je bilo orožje uporabljeno v boju.16 Prežgano kamenje iz nasipa, v katerem je bil najden večji del zaklada ter primerki orožja, sprijeti z zažlindranim kamenjem,17 morda prej kot na metalurško dejavnost,18 kažejo na zrušitev gorečega obzidja, ki je zasulo izstreljeno in odvrženo orožje napadalcev. Natančne okoliščine odkritja orožja iz zaklada so nejasne, kljub temu pa je iz arhivskih virov mogoče razbrati, da so ga našli na severozahodnem vogalu okopa naselbine (sl. 2 in 3: romb). Glede na navedbe Alfonsa Müllnerja in kneza Windischgrätza je del orožja ležal na vrhu nasipa, več sto kosov orožja pa je ležalo skupaj v globoki luknji in iskalec je večkrat kopal 3–5 m globoko v nasip, da bi zbral najdbe.19 V nasprotju s koncentracijami (zaklad) najdb orožja na in v nasipu (ruševini obzidja ?) pa so bile najdbe, ki so jih odkrili z detektorjem kovin razpršene. Katapultni in puščični izstrelki so ležali po pobočju severozahodnega dela okopa naselbine (sl. 2: A), prav tako svinčeni izstrelki za pračo, ki so jih posamič našli po severni polovici naselbine (sl. 2: B, C, D in pike; sl. 3: C, D in pike). Kaže, da so orožje po napadu na Grad delno zbrali (zaklad), delno pa je obležalo raztreseno (detektorske najdbe). Mesto koncentracij najdb orožja in njihovo nepojavljanje na drugih delih naselbine nista naključna. Upoštevaje topograijo najdišča se zdi najprimernejše mesto za glavni napad na utrjeno naselbino ravno njen severozahodni vogal, kjer se ji okoliški višji svet z Žlovberskim vrhom in Mačkovcem najbolj približa (sl. 2–3), primerki svinčenih želodov z območja severnega dela vzhodnega roba (okopa ?) naselbine (sl. 2 in 3: D in pike) pa nakazujejo obstreljevanje pračarjev tudi z območja severovzhodnega vznožja naselbine. Menimo, da je bilo šmihelsko orožje uporabljeno pri rimskem napadu na Grad, po bitki pa so orožje večinoma zbrali. Zakaj je zbrano orožje ostalo na najdišču, ostaja nejasno. Poleg možnosti, da gre za pobiranje in zbiranje železja za predelavo in popravilo, tudi možnosti votivnega dejanja po bitki ne moremo povsem izključiti. Na primerjavo z najdiščem Döttenbichl na Bavarskem, ki naj bi predstavljalo kultno mesto domačinov, na katerem so darovali rimsko orožje,20 je opozorila že Horvatova.21 Obstoj 13 14 15 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Horvat 2002, 158–159. Horvat 2002, 158. Laharnar 2011, 369–372. Horvat 2002, 156; Lanarnar 2011, 369. Horvat 2002, igs. 7–8, 18–23, 25, pls. 7: 3, 8: 3, 9: 3, 7, 10: 12, 11: 7. Horvat 2002, 159. About the archive sources: Horvat 2002, 151-153. Figure 3. Grad near Šmihel pod Nanosom. Viewed from the east. Marked are the hills of Žlovberski vrh and Mačkovc, the Pod Kaculjem fallow and the approximate locations of the hoard (rhomb), the ind-spots of (more than 10) lead slingshot (C, D) and the ind-spots, where individual lead slingshot were dug up (dots) (photo J. Hanc). Slika 3. Grad pri Šmihelu pod Nanosom. Pogled z vzhoda. Označeni vzpetini Žlovberski vrh in Mačkovc, ledina Pod Kaculjem ter približne lege zaklada (romb), območje (več kot deset primerkov) najdenih svinčenih želodov za pračo (C, D) in lokacij izkopa posameznih svinčenih želodov za pračo (pike) (foto J. Hanc). 16 17 18 19 20 21 Horvat 2002, 158–159. Horvat 2002, 158. Laharnar 2011, 369–372. Horvat 2002, 156; Laharnar 2011, 369. Horvat 2002, sl. 7–8, 18–23, 25, t. 7: 3, 8: 3, 9: 3, 7, 10: 12, 11: 7. Horvat 2002, 159. O arhivskih virih: Horvat 2002, 151–153. O najdišču nazadnje: Zanier 2009, 91–93; Martin-Kilchler 2011, 51–52. Horvat 2002, 158, op. 152. 13 Figure 4. Baba near Slavina. Lead slingshot (photo T. Lauko). Slika 4. Baba pri Slavini. Svinčeni izstrelki za pračo (foto T. Lauko). tered (metal detector inds). he concentrations of weapons and their absence from other parts of the settlement are not coincidental. Considering the topography of the site, the NW corner, which is closest to the neighbouring high-grounds, i.e. Žlovberski vrh and Mačkovec (igs. 2–3), seemed the most suitable point to carry out the main attack on the fortiied settlement; and the individual lead slingshot from the northern part of the eastern edge (rampart?) of the settlement (igs. 2 and 3: D and dots) would suggest that the slingers were also targeting the settlement from its NE side. We believe that the Šmihel weapons were employed in the Roman attack on Grad and that most of them were gathered up after the battle. Why the assembled weapons were left on the site remains unclear. Alongside the possibility that they were intended as scrap iron for reworking and repairs, the idea of votive ofering after the battle cannot be completely ruled out. Horvat herself20 made the comparison to the site of Döttenbichl in Bavaria, believed to have been a cult place, where the locals had made oferings of Roman weapons.21 A local cult place also could have existed at Grad near Šmihel: individual inds of broken, singed brooches and other parts of attire and weaponry (their exact location within the sites of Šmihel is not known22) bear close resemblance to the artefacts from the nearby presumed Iron Age cult places.23 he assembled weapons (the hoard) could be a remnant of a trophy of victory; the Roman republican army was in the habit of ofering weapons and raising memorials with displayed weapons at the sites of decisive battles.24 3 The Roman Army in the Notranjska region: from second third of the 1st century BC to 1st century AD 3.1 Baba near Slavina he inds from the fortiied settlement at Baba suggest the site was inhabited from the Late Bronze Age to the Late Iron Age.25 Among the inds were an iron hobnail and lead slingshot (ig. 4). he iron hobnail was part of Roman military footwear (pl. 2: 1). Its head has a cruciform pattern of ribs and four protuberances on its underside, which probably made the nail more secure in the sole. Such hobnails were in use from Caesar’s Gallic War to the Early Augustan period. hey were replaced in the Middle Augustan period by nails with mostly smaller head diameters with no pattern or a diferent pattern on their underside.26 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 14 Horvat 2002, 158, n. 152 Most recent: Zanier 2009, 91–93; Martin-Kilchler 2011, 51–52. Guštin 1979, e.g. pls. 64, 68, 84. Cf. Božič 2011, 260–269. Fischer 2012, 207–211. Horvat 1995, 189–190, pl. 14: 8–26; Horvat 2005, 227. Istenič 2005a, 81; Poux 2008, 380, ig. 56; Laharnar 2009, 132–133; Martin-Kilcher 2011, 35. kultnega mesta domačinov je verjeten tudi na Gradu pri Šmihelu, saj posamezne najdbe odlomljenih, ožganih ibul in drugih delov noše ter orožja, katerih točno najdišče v okviru šmihelskih najdišč ni znano,22 zelo spominjajo na gradivo z domnevnih železnodobnih kultnih mest v soseščini.23 Zbrano orožje (zaklad) je morda ostanek označitve zmage. Rimska republikanska vojska je namreč poznala običaj darovanja orožja in postavljanja obeležij z izobešenim orožjem na prizoriščih odločilnih bitk.24 3 Rimska vojska na Notranjskem: od druge tretjine 1. stoletja pr. n. št. do 1. stoletja n. št. 3.1 Baba pri Slavini Najdbe z utrjene naselbine na Babi nakazujejo poselitev od pozne bronaste do mlajše železne dobe.25 Med najdenimi predmeti so železni okovni žebljiček in svinčeni izstrelki za pračo (sl. 4). Železni okovni žebljiček je pripadal rimskemu vojaškemu obuvalu (t. 2: 1). Na spodnji strani kapice ima značilen vzorec iz križnega rebra in štirih bunčic, ki je verjetno pripomogel k večji stabilnosti žebljička v podplatu. Take žebljičke so uporabljali od Cezarjevih galskih vojn do zgodnjeavgustejske dobe. V srednjeavgustejski dobi so jih nadomestili žebljički z večinoma manjšim premerom 22 23 24 25 Guštin 1979, npr. t. 64, 68, 84. Prim. Božič 2011, 260–269. Fischer 2012, 207–211. Horvat 1995, 189–190, t. 14: 8–26; Horvat 2005, 227. Figure 5. Baba near Slavina. A hoard of Roman and Celtic coins (ater Horvat 1999, 190; photo T. Lauko). Slika 5. Baba pri Slavini. Zaklad rimskih in keltskih novcev (po Horvat 1999, 190; foto T. Lauko). Figure 6. Stari grad above Unec. Lead slingshot (ater Laharnar 2011, 347, ig. 6; photo T. Lauko). Slika 6. Stari grad nad Uncem. Svinčeni izstrelki za pračo (po Laharnar 2011, 347, sl. 6; foto T. Lauko). he lead slingshot (ig. 4) were found mainly on the SE slope, inside and outside the settlement.27 Some have damage characteristic of used projectiles. We have interpreted a group of ten slingshot (very likely found in a heap) as a likely slinger’s set of projectiles of three calibres.28 We assume that the abandonment of the settlement at Baba was due to a Roman military attack between the time of Caesar’s administration of the Cisalpine Gaul and Illyricum and the Early Augustan period at the latest. Beside the hobnail, the latest inds from the site are important indicators of the time-frame of the attack: a fragment of a conchoidal brooch pl. 2: 2 (LT D1b, 100–70/60 BC), a fragment of the Idrija type cup pl. 2: 3 (LT D1, 120/110– 70/60 BC) and a coin hoard (i.e. depot Baba 2) with the latest of the coins minted in 74 BC (ig. 5).29 3.2 Stari Grad above Unec he inds from the fortiied settlement of Stari grad above Unec come from the Bronze, Iron and Roman Ages. he central part of the hill harbours the ruins of a 12th century castle (abandoned in the 16th century)30 he inds include hobnails from Roman military footwear (pl. 2: 10–12)31 and a large number of lead slingshot (ig. 6).32 A bronze but27 28 29 30 31 32 Hrovat 1995, pl. 14: 11-22. Laharnar 2011, 364, 371, pl. 2: 4–13. Horvat 1999, 190–191; FMRSl IV, 126–127, no. 46/3. Gaspari 2009; Laharnar 2011, 365-366. Gaspari 2009, 323, ig. 7: 5–7. Laharnar 2011, 365–366, ig. 6, pl. 1: 1–2, 9, 12, 15–16, 19. kapic in brez vzorca ali z drugačnim vzorcem na njihovi spodnji strani.26 Svinčene izstrelke za pračo (sl. 4) so našli večinoma na jugovzhodnem pobočju znotraj in zunaj naselbine.27 Nekateri so imeli značilne poškodbe uporabljenih izstrelkov. Skupino desetih želodov (zelo verjetno skupna najdba) smo interpretirali kot verjetni pračarjev komplet izstrelkov s tremi kalibri.28 Domnevamo, da je konec poselitve na Babi povezan z rimskim vojaškim napadom v obdobju od Cezarjeve uprave Cisalpinske Galije in Ilirika do vključno zgodnjeavgustejske dobe. Za datacijo napada so poleg omenjenega žebljička pomembne najmlajše najdbe z najdišča: odlomek školjčne ibule t. 2: 2 (LT D1b, 100–70/60 pr. n. št.), odlomek čaše vrste Idrija t. 2: 3 (LT D1, 120/110–70/60 pr. n. št.) in novčni zaklad (t. i. depo Baba 2) z najmlajšim novcem, kovanim leta 74 pr. n. št. (sl. 5).29 3.2 Stari grad nad Uncem Na utrjeni naselbini Stari grad nad Uncem so našli najdbe iz pozne bronaste, železne in rimske dobe. Na osrednjem delu vzpetine so ruševine gradu iz od druge polovice 12. 26 27 28 29 Istenič 2005a, 81; Poux 2008, 380, sl. 56; Laharnar 2009, 132–133; Martin-Kilcher 2011, 35. Horvat 1995, t. 14: 11–22. Laharnar 2011, 364, 371, t. 2: 4–13. Horvat 1999, 190–191; FMRSl IV, 126–127, št. 46/3. 15 ton-and-loop fastener (pl. 2: 13) and brooches of the Alesia Group (pl. 2: 4–9)33 are also associated with Roman soldiers. Button and loop fasteners (with one or two loops) are common inds on the sites associated with the Roman army from the Augustan period to the end of the 1st century; in Notranjska, they are also known from Ulaka above Stari trg pri Ložu (pl. 3: 2) and from Gradišče at Čepna (pl. 4: 7). We assume they were used for buttoning coats, bags and tents.34 Similar objects were used as holders for metal phalerae and glass lockets.35 Larger button and loop fasteners with two loops were used for fastening a sword or a dagger to a military belt.36 More recent data and research show that brooches of the Alesia Group were closely associated with the Roman army. hey were worn by Caesar’s soldiers during the siege of Alesia, as well as Roman soldiers during the civil wars after Caesar’s death, and, sporadically, up to the Augustan period.37 do 16. st.30 Z najdišča izvirajo tudi žebljički za podkovanje rimskih vojaških obuval (t. 2: 10–12)31 in večje število svinčenih izstrelkov za pračo (sl. 6).32 Z rimskimi vojaki povezujemo najdbe bronastega gumba z enojno zanko (t. 2: 13) in ibule vrste Alezija (t. 2: 4–9).33 Gumbi z enojno ali dvojno zanko so pogosta najdba na najdiščih, povezanih z rimsko vojsko od avgustejske dobe do konca 1. stoletja; na Notranjskem so znane še z Ulake nad Starim trgom pri Ložu (t. 3: 2) in z Gradišča na Čepni (t. 4: 7). Domnevamo, da so jih uporabljali za zapenjanje plaščev, torb in šotorov.34 Podobni predmeti so se uporabljali kot nosilci kovinskih faler in steklenih medaljonov.35 Večji gumbi z dvojnim ušescem so bili namenjeni za obešanje meča ali bodala na vojaški pas.36 Novejši podatki in raziskave kažejo, da so ibule vrste Alezija tesno povezane z rimsko vojsko. Nosili so jih Cezarjevi vojaki pri obleganju Alezije in rimski vojaki v času državljanskih vojn po njegovi smrti ter posamič še do začetka avgustejske dobe.37 Roman military inds from Stari grad might be associated with the Roman military attack on the settlement during Caesar’s administration of the Cisalpine Gaul or during the Early Augustan period at the latest. his is indicated by Roman military inds, particularly the lead slingshot (including examples with damage characteristic of used projectiles), and by the absence of coins minted after 42 BC.38 Scarce inds might indicate a possible presence of people as late as the end of the 1st century,39 but it is unclear whether the inds come from the site of the settlement or from a supposed cult place,40 which could have also existed after the hillfort had been abandoned. Rimske vojaške najdbe s Starega gradu morda lahko povežemo z napadom rimske vojske na naselbino v obdobju od Cezarjeve uprave Galije Cisalpine do najpozneje zgodnje avgustejske dobe. Na to nas navajajo rimske vojaške najdbe, še posebej svinčeni želodi za pračo (med njimi tudi primerki s poškodbami, značilnimi za uporabljene izstrelke) in dejstvo, da ni po letu 42 pr. n. št. kovanih novcev.38 Redke najdbe sicer nakazujejo morebitno navzočnost ljudi do konca 1. st.,39 vendar ni jasno, ali izvirajo z območja naselbine ali z domnevnega kultnega mesta,40 ki bi namreč lahko obstajalo tudi po prenehanju poselitve gradišča. 3.3 Žerovnišček near Bločice 3.3 Žerovnišček pri Bločicah From a fortiied settlement at Žerovnišček on the eastern edge of Cerkniško polje come a number of metal-detector inds, which suggest that it was inhabited from the Late Bronze Age to the beginning of Roman period.41 he inds include a number of hobnails from Roman military footwear, dated to the era of Julius Caesar and up to the beginning of the Middle Augustan period (pl. 2: 17–21),42 with some examples of more lasting shapes (pl. 2: 22–24).43 Also Z utrjene naselbine na Žerovniščku ob vzhodnem obrobju Cerkniškega polja izvirajo številne detektorske najdbe, ki nakazujejo poselitev od pozne bronaste dobe do začetka rimske.41 Med najdbami je več žebljičkov z rimskih vojaških obuval, ki so datirani v obdobje od Cezarja do začetka srednjeavgustejske dobe (t. 2: 17–21),42 vmes pa so tudi primerki dolgotrajnih oblik (t. 2: 22–24).43 Od tod sta 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 16 43 Istenič 2005b, 206, 208, t. 1: 2, 4, 6, 13 Deschler-Erb 1999, 68. Deimel 1987, 306–308, pl. 81:1–14; Vičič 2002, 196. Istenič 2009, 83, ig. 87. Istenič 2005b, 204–205. FMRSl IV, 131–133, no. 48; FMRSl V, 85–86, no. 45; Gaspari 2009, 323. Gaspari 2009, ig. 7, 9–10. Cf. Božič 2011, 266–267. Laharnar 2009. Laharnar 2009, t. 5: 10–14. Laharnar 2009, t. 5: 15–17. 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 Gaspari 2009; Laharnar 2011, 365–366. Gaspari 2009, 323, sl. 7: 5–7. Laharnar 2011, 365–366, sl. 6, t. 1: 1–2, 9, 12, 15–16, 19. Istenič 2005b, 206, 208, t. 1: 2, 4, 6, 13. Deschler-Erb 1999, 68. Deimel 1987, 306–308, t. 81:1–14; Vičič 2002, 196. Istenič 2009, 83, sl. 87. Istenič 2005b, 204–205. FMRSl IV, 131–133, št. 48; FMRSl V, 85–86, št. 45; Gaspari 2009, 323. Gaspari 2009, sl. 7, 9–10. Prim. Božič 2011, 266–267. Laharnar 2009. Laharnar 2009, t. 5: 10–14. Laharnar 2009, t. 5: 15–17. discovered were two lead slingshot (pl. 2: 14–15)44 and a buckle of a lorica segmentata (pl. 2: 16)45 from the Augustan to the Tiberian-Claudian period.46 Judging from the Roman military inds, the inal stages of the settlement at Žerovnišček were associated with the presence of the Roman army. he settlement was perhaps used as an occasional outpost for Roman military garrisons from the time of Julius Caesar’s administration (59–49 BC) to the Tiberian-Claudian period. Žerovnišček, after all, had a very important strategic position along the route leading by the Cerkniško jezero (probably the ancient marshes of Lugeon),47 after which it splits into two directions: towards Kvarner and Lika and towards Dolenjska. Possibly, the garrison could have manufactured lead slingshot. Aside from only two lead slingshot, a number of amorphous lead objects, most likely waste from casting, were discovered at the site (ig. 7).48 Similar artefacts from certain other sites, where the presence of the Roman army was established, are associated with the manufacturing of lead projectiles.49 svinčena izstrelka za pračo (t. 2: 14–15)44 in sponka sestavljenega oklepa (t. 2: 16)45 iz od avgustejske do tiberijskoklavdijske dobe.46 3.4 Ulaka above Stari trg pri Ložu Ulaka is a central fortiied settlement in the valley of Loška dolina. Individual inds suggest it was inhabited in the Late Bronze and Early Iron Ages. A number of inds come from the Late Iron Age. During his excavations, Walter Schmid found evidence of structures, as well as small inds from the irst half of the 1st century and up to the Late Roman period.50 From the settlement on the northern slope of Ulaka come lead slingshot (ig. 8; ig. 13),51 some with lattened sides. he only parallels for these can be found in assemblages dated to the period between the second half of the 1st century BC and the Augustan-Tiberian period.52 An iron peg with a globular terminal and a loop with a ring (pl. 3: 3) has parallels in the military contexts of the Late Republican period, i.e. in camps around Numantia, associated with the wars between the Romans and the Celtiberians in 2nd century BC,53 as well as the Cáceres el Viejo camp, which was destroyed during the Sertorian war of 80–72 BC.54 hese pegs are also a common ind on sites 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 Laharnar 2009, t. 5: 5–6. Laharnar 2009, t. 5: 9. Laharnar 2009, 132. See Šašel 1974, 15–16. Laharnar 2009, 109, 134, ig. 11, pls. 7: 2–19, 10: 1–22. Deyber 1994, 268; Contreras Rodrigo et al. 2006, 5; Poux 2008, 369. Šašel 1975; Gaspari 2000. Horvat 1993, 334, ig. 1: 10–13. Horvat 1993, 334, ig. 1: 11, 13; Laharnar 2011, 366–367, 370, pl. 1: 2–3; see also Ambroževo gradišče pl. 4: 3. Luik 2002, 236, 365, igs. 297, 307–309. Ulbert 1984, 227–228, pl. 26: 212–224. Na podlagi rimskih vojaških najdb domnevamo, da je zadnje obdobje poselitve na Žerovniščku povezano z navzočnostjo rimske vojske. V obdobju od Cezarjeve uprave (5949 pr. n. št.) do tiberijsko-klavdijske dobe je bila morda v naselbini občasno rimska vojaška posadka. Žerovnišček ima namreč pomembno strateško lego ob poti, ki je vodila mimo Cerkniškega jezera (verjetno antični Lugeon)47 in se je tam razcepila proti Kvarnerju in Liki ter Dolenjski. Posadka je morda izdelovala svinčene izstrelke za pračo. Poleg zgolj dveh svinčenih želodov so namreč na najdišču našli precej amorfnih predmetov iz svinca, najverjetneje livarskih odpadkov (sl. 7).48 Na nekaterih najdiščih, kjer je bila dokazana navzočnost rimske vojske, podobne predmete povezujejo z izdelavo svinčenih izstrelkov.49 Figure 7. Žerovnišček near Bločice. Amorphous lead and bronze objects, waste from casting (ater Laharnar 2009, 109, ig. 11; photo T. Lauko). Slika 7. Žerovnišček pri Bločicah. Amorfni svinčeni in bronasti predmeti, livarski odpad (po Laharnar 2009, 109, sl. 11; foto T. Lauko). 3.4 Ulaka nad Starim trgom pri Ložu Ulaka je središčna utrjena naselbina v Loški dolini. Posamezne najdbe nakazujejo, da je bila poseljena v pozni bronasti in starejši železni dobi. Veliko najdb je iz mlajše železne dobe. Izkopavanja Walterja Schmida so razkrila ostanke arhitekture in drobne najdbe od prve polovice 1. st. do poznorimskega obdobja.50 Iz naselbine in s severnega pobočja Ulake izvirajo svinčeni izstrelki za pračo (sl. 8; sl. 13).51 Med njimi so primerki s 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 Laharnar 2009, t. 5: 5–6. Laharnar 2009, t. 5: 9. Laharnar 2009, 132. Glej Šašel 1974, 15–16. Laharnar 2009, 109, 134, sl. 11, t. 7: 2–19, 10: 1–22. Deyber 1994, 268; Contreras Rodrigo et al. 2006, 5; Poux 2008, 369. Šašel 1975, 155; Gaspari 2000. Horvat 1993, 334, sl. 1: 10–13. 17 Figure 8. Ulaka above Stari trg pri Ložu. Lead slingshot (ater Laharnar 2011, 348, ig. 7; photo T. Lauko). Slika 8. Ulaka nad Starim trgom pri Ložu. Svinčeni izstrelki za pračo (po Laharnar 2011, 348, sl. 7; foto T. Lauko). associated with the Roman army in the second half of the 1st century BC and the Augustan period (the Dangstetten fortress, 20/15–9/7 BC;55 the sites associated with military campaigns and battles in the gorge of Crap Ses from 40–20 BC to ca. 15 BC;56 the battle-site at Kalkriese in AD 957). he objects are interpreted as tent pegs or, sometimes, animal tethers. As Mike Bishop and John Coulston suggest, a large number of pegs were needed to secure a military tent. herefore, they ind it likely that due to transport convenience wooden pegs were used for tents, while iron pegs were used to tether animals.58 he use of wooden pegs is conirmed by archaeological inds in Roman military outposts.59 Sound parallels to the harness pendants pl. 3: 4–6 can be found among Early Imperial military inds.60 Similar objects from the territory of the present-day Slovenia also appear on sites occupied by Early Imperial Roman soldiers and veterans, e.g. among the inds from Emona61 and Poetovio.62 he Early Imperial military and civilian horse harnesses are diicult to tell apart, so the classiication of the pendants among military equipment is not certain.63 he pendant pl. 3: 4 from Ulaka is Bishop Type 3, which was in use between the middle of the 1st century and the irst few decades of the 2nd century. he type has a typical oval or heart-shaped central part and a peltate terminal with two semi-circular or crescent-shaped penetrations.64 In addition, the pendant from Ulaka also has two semicircular penetrations at the upper side of the heart-shaped central part. A good parallel was found in Viminacium65 and in the pendant from the forum of Emona.66 A Bishop Type 3 is also a pendant with an incised decoration pl. 4: 5. It has a good parallel in two examples from Vindonissa.67 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 18 67 Fingerlin 1986, 4/1–2, 8/1, 164/21. Rageth 2004, 299, ig. 4: 3–4; regarding dating, see MartinKilcher 2011, 43. Harnecker, Tolksdorf-Lienemann 2004, pl. 8: 845. Bishop, Coulston 2006, 69. Bishop, Coulston 2006, 116–117, ig. 67: 5–6; Hvalec et al. 2009, 3. E.g. Bishop 1988; Deschler-Erb et al. 1991, igs. 44, 46; Unz, Deschler-Erb 1997, pls. 49–57; Fingerlin 1998, 56, 243, 788/5–4, 98, 293, 928/1, 128, 328, 1041/1; Müller 2002, pl. 50; Deschler-Erb 2007, 75–88; Harnecker, Franzius 2008, 17, pl. 17: 249–252. Gaspari 2010, 102, ig. 57: a–e. Istenič 1999, 67–68. Mackensen 1987, 158; Istenič 1999, 67–68; Plaum, Lux, in this book. Bishop 1988, 96, 145; Unz, Deschler-Erb 1997, 39, pl. 57: 1590–1600; Unz, Deschler-Erb 1997, 56–57. Golubovič 2008, 74, 77, pl. 49: 26. Plesničar Gec 2006, 162, pl. 48: 3; Gaspari 2010, 102, ig. 57: d. Unz, Deschler-Erb 1997, 39, pl. 57: 1594–1595. sploščenima stranema, ki imajo primerjave le v sklopih, datiranih od druge polovice 1. st. pr. n. št. do avgustejskotiberijske dobe.52 Železni klin z gumbastim zaključkom in vdetim obročem (t. 3: 3) ima dobre primerjave v vojaških kontekstih poznorepublikanske dobe, tj. v taborih v okolici Numancije, povezanih z vojnami med Rimljani in Keltoiberi v 2. st. pr. n. št.53 in v taboru Cáceres el Viejo, ki je bil uničen v času Sertorijeve vojne med letoma 80 in 72 pr. n. št.54 Taki klini so pogosta najdba tudi na najdiščih, povezanih z rimsko vojsko v drugi polovici 1. st. pr. n. št. in v avgustejski dobi (legijski tabor Dangstetten, 20/15–9/7 pr. n. št.;55 prizorišča, povezana z vojaškimi pohodi oz. spopadi na območju tesni Crap Ses, 40–20 do okrog 15 pr. n. št.;56 prostor bitke v Kalkrieseju, 9 n. št.57). Te predmete interpretirajo kot kline za šotore ali redkeje za privez živali. Mike Bishop in John Coulston sta namreč opozorila, da je bilo za pritrditev vojaških šotorov potrebno veliko število klinov. Zato se jima zdi verjetneje, da so zaradi lažjega transporta za šotore večinoma uporabljali lesene, za privez živali pa železne kline.58 Uporaba lesenih klinov je dokazana z arheološkimi najdbami v rimskih vojaških postojankah.59 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 Horvat 1993, 334, sl. 1: 11, 13; Laharnar 2011, 366–367, 370, t. 1: 2–3; glej tudi Ambroževo gradišče t. 4: 3. Luik 2002, 236, 365, sl. 297, 307–309. Ulbert 1984, 227–228, t. 26: 212–224. Fingerlin 1986, 4/1–2, 8/1, 164/21. Rageth 2004, 299, sl. 4: 3–4; o dataciji Martin-Kilcher 2011, 43. Harnecker, Tolksdorf-Lienemann 2004, t. 8: 845. Bishop, Coulston 2006, 69. Bishop, Coulston 2006, 116 –117, sl. 67: 5–6; Hvalec et al. 2009, 3. he damaged pendant pl. 3: 6 belongs to Bishop Type 5: teardrop-shaped pendants with a globular terminal, in use from the rule of Emperor Claudius until the 2nd century.68 he inds suggest that Roman soldiers were present at Ulaka in the Augustan period and in the 1st century. he tent peg, the lead slingshot and the brass brooch of the Alesia Group (pl. 3: 1)69 might point to their presence even in pre-Augustan times. 3.5 Nadleški hrib he remnants of the stronghold with an entrance in the shape of a clavicula at Nadleški hrib have long been known.70 In 2010 and 2011, part of the site was researched with the geoelectric resistivity method and Ground Penetrating Radar. A site plan was made (ig. 9).71 From the site of Nadleški hrib a number of metal-detector inds exist: three lead slingshot (pl. 3: 15–17), two large Tauriscan silver tetradrahmas,72 two halved Roman asses73 and an iron awl (pl. 3: 18).74 Considering its geographical position, historical circumstances and the inds, we assume that the Romans built the stronghold at Nadleški hrib between Caesar’s administration of the Cisalpine Gaul and Illyricum and the Augustan period. he stronghold, therefore, played an important role either during the Roman conquest or in the hinterland of the military conlicts in the Balkans during the Augustan period. Dobre primerjave za obeske konjske opreme t. 3: 4–6 smo našli med zgodnjecesarskimi vojaškimi najdbami.60 Podobni predmeti z območja sedanje Slovenije prav tako izvirajo z najdišč, na katerih so bili v zgodnjecesarskem obdobju rimski vojaki in veterani, npr. med gradivom v Emoni61 ter na Ptuju.62 Težko je razlikovati med zgodnjecesarsko vojaško in civilno konjsko opremo, zato opredelitev obeskov med vojaško konjsko opremo ni zanesljiva.63 Obesek t. 3: 4 z Ulake sodi v 3. vrsto po Bishopu, ki je bila v uporabi od sredine 1. do prvih desetletij 2. st. Zanje je značilen ovalni ali srčasti osrednji del s peltastim zaključkom, ki ima dve polkrožni ali polmesečasti predrtini.64 Obesek z Ulake ima dve polkrožni predrtini tudi na zgornjem delu srčastega osrednjega dela. Dobro primerjavo zanj smo našli v Viminaciju65 in v obesku z emonskega foruma.66 Obeskom 3. vrste po Bishopu pripada tudi obesek z vrezanim okrasom t. 4: 5. Dobro primerjavo ima v dveh primerkih iz Vindonisse.67 Poškodovani obesek t. 3: 6 sodi v 5. vrsto po Bishopovi tipologiji, ki združuje obeske kapljičaste oblike z gumbastim zaključkom in je datirana od vlade cesarja Klavdija do 2. st.68 Te najdbe nas napeljujejo na domnevo, da so bili v avgustejski dobi in v 1. st. na Ulaki rimski vojaki. Klin za šotor, svinčeni izstrelki za pračo in medeninasta ibula vrste Alezija (t. 3: 1)69 sicer lahko nakazujejo njihovo navzočnost že v predavgustejski dobi. 3.6 Ambroževo gradišče near Slavina 3.5 Nadleški hrib With its mighty ramparts, Ambroževo gradišče is a fortiied settlement, only some 600 m (in a straight line) removed from the site of Baba.75 he earliest inds are from the Late Bronze Age, and the inds from the Iron Age are more numerous. he trenching revealed remains of Augustan structures. he inds from between the 1st and 4th century are scarce.76 Ostanki rimske utrdbe z vhodom v obliki ključnice (clavicula) na Nadleškem hribu so že dolgo znani.70 V letih 2010 in 2011 smo del najdišča raziskali z metodo upornosti tal in z georadarjem. Izdelali smo načrt najdišča (sl. 9).71 Z območja Nadleškega hriba izvirajo detektorske najdbe: trije svinčeni izstrelki za pračo (t. 3: 15–17), velika keltska 60 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 Bishop 1988, 96, 98; Deschler-Erb 1999, 57. Istenič 2005b, 207, pl. 1: 10 Saria 1935, 745; Degrassi 1954, 120. Laharnar 2013. I would like to acknowledge Alenka Miškec for providing the information. FMRSl IV, 103, no. 41. Just before the paper went to print, National Museum of Slovenia acquired several inds from the site. Items were collected in early spring 2014 ater a sleet storm causing uprooting of the trees. They include an iron catapult-bolt, two iron spear-butts, lead slingshot, iron hobnails, a bronze fragment of a shield binding, a Roman denarius (90 BC) and two Roman republican asses. Horvat 1995, 189. Horvat 1995, 183–188, 194–197, pl. 7–13, 14: 1–7. 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 Npr. Bishop 1988; Deschler-Erb et al. 1991, sl. 44, 46; Unz, Deschler-Erb 1997, t. 49–57; Fingerlin 1998, 56, 243, 788/5–4, 98, 293, 928/1, 128, 328, 1041/1; Müller 2002, t. 50; Deschler-Erb 2007, 75–88; Harnecker, Franzius 2008, 17, t. 17: 249–252. Gaspari 2010, 102, sl. 57: a–e. Istenič 1999, 67–68. Mackensen 1987, 158; Istenič 1999, 67–68; Plaum, Lux, v tem zborniku. Bishop 1988, 96, 145; Unz, Deschler-Erb 1997, 39, t. 57: 1590– 1600; Unz, Deschler-Erb 1997, 56–57. Golubovič 2008, 74, 77, t. 49: 26. Plesničar Gec 2006, 162, t. 48: 3; Gaspari 2010, 102, sl. 57: d. Unz, Deschler-Erb 1997, 39, t. 57: 1594–1595. Bishop 1988, 96, 98; Deschler-Erb 1999, 57. Istenič 2005b, 207, t. 1: 10. Saria 1935, 745; Degrassi 1954, 120. Laharnar 2013. 19 srebrnika tavriške skupine,72 polovičena rimska republikanska asa73 in železno šilo (t. 3: 18).74 Glede na geografski položaj, zgodovinske okoliščine in najdbe domnevamo, da so Rimljani utrdbo na Nadleškem hribu zgradili v obdobju od Cezarjeve uprave Galije Cisalpine in Ilirika do vključno avgustejske dobe. Utrdba je torej imela pomembno vlogo ob rimskem osvajanju ali pri nadzoru zaledja osrednjih vojnih žarišč na Balkanskem polotoku v avgustejski dobi. 3.6 Ambroževo gradišče pri Slavini Ambroževo gradišče je z mogočnimi okopi utrjena naselbina, od najdišča Baba oddaljena le okrog 600 m zračne črte.75 Najstarejše najdbe so iz pozne bronaste dobe, več najdb je iz železne dobe. S sondiranji so odkrili ostanke stavb iz avgustejske dobe. Najdb iz obdobja med 1. in 4. st. je malo.76 Rimskim vojaškim najdbam z Ambroževega gradišča pripadajo odbojnik gladija vrste Mainz (t. 3: 19), zankasti okov sestavljenega oklepa (t. 3: 20), verjetno odlomek mrežastega okova nožnice (t. 3: 21), suličasto-rombični obesek konjske opreme (t. 3: 22), in svinčeni izstrelki za pračo (sl. 10; sl. 14; t. 4: 1–3). Figure 9. Nadleški hrib. The site plan (ater Laharnar 2013; R. Klasinc). Slika 9. Nadleški hrib. Načrt najdišča (po Laharnar 2013; načrt R. Klasinc). he Roman military inds from Ambroževo gradišče include a handguard plate of the Mainz Type gladius (pl. 3: 19), a lorica segmentata itting (pl. 3: 20), probably a fragment of a net-like scabbard itting (pl. 3: 21), a spear-like lozenge-shaped harness pendant (pl. 3: 22) and lead slingshot (ig. 10; ig. 14; pl. 4: 1–3). he Mainz Type gladius was a typical assault weapon of Roman infantry (legionaries as well as auxiliary troop) from the Augustan period until the middle of the 1st century. he hilt of the Mainz Type gladius consisted of a circular- or octagonal-sectioned guard with four ridges and a lattened spherical pommel. he guard, the grip and the pommel were made of wood or bone, in rare cases (oicers?) of ivory. he metal guard plate protected the lower part of the guard and reinforced the transition of the hilt into the blade.77 Tie loop in the shape of a stylized bird’s head (t. 3: 20) was part of a lorica segmentata cuirass. In the Roman army, such armour was probably only used by legionaries. he various Gladiji vrste Mainz so bili značilno napadalno orožje rimskih pešakov, tako legionarjev kot pripadnikov pomožnih enot, od avgustejskega obdobja do sredine 1. st. Ročaje mečev vrste Mainz so sestavljali branik, štirikratno narebreni držaj okroglega ali oktogonalnega preseka in glavič sploščene jajčaste oblike. Branik, držaj in glavič so bili iz lesa ali kosti, pri redkih (častniških ?) primerkih tudi iz slonovine. Kovinski odbojnik je ščitil spodnji del branika in utrdil prehod ročaja v rezilo.77 Okov z zanko v obliki stilizirane ptičje glavice (t. 3: 20) je del rimskega sestavljenega oklepa (lorica segmentata). Verjetno so take oklepe v rimski vojski uporabljali zgolj legionarji. Različne izvedbe sestavljenih oklepov so bile v rabi od srednjeavgustejske dobe do 3. st.78 Okovi, podobni primerku z Ambroževega gradišča, so bili z zakovicami pritrjeni na lamelo oklepa; njihova zanka je bila namenjena vezavi z zan72 73 74 75 76 77 77 20 Künzl 1996, 395, ig. 6: 1, 396, ig. 7: 1–3; Deschler-Erb 1999, 23; Bishop, Coulston 2006, 78–83. 78 Ustna informacija Alenke Miškec. FMRSl IV, 103, št. 41. Tik pred zaključkom redakcije je Narodni muzej Slovenije pridobil z najdišča več najdb. Predmeti so bili pobrani zgodaj spomladi leta 2014 med koreninami dreves, ki jih je podrlo neurje z žledom. Med najdbami so železni katapultni izstrelek, železni sulični kopiti, svinčeni izstrelki za pračo, železni žebljički za čevlje, bronasti odlomek ščitnega okova, rimski denarij (90 pr. n. št.) in rimska republikanska asa. Horvat 1995, 189. Horvat 1995, 183–188, 194–197, t. 7–13, 14: 1–7. Künzl 1996, 395, sl. 6: 1, 396, sl. 7: 1–3; Deschler-Erb 1999, 23; Bishop, Coulston 2006, 78–83. Bishop, Coulston 2006, 95, 254–257; Deschler-Erb 2007, 76. ko okova na nasprotni lameli oklepa. Taki zankasti okovi so znani iz vojaških kontekstov 1. stoletja v Augusti Raurici79 in Vindonissi.80 Ožja in daljša primerka, med katerimi ima eden podobno skovano glavico kot okov z Ambroževega gradišča, sta bila odkrita v kontekstu iz prve polovice 1. st. na Štalenski gori.81 S podobnimi okovi se je spenjal oklep iz zaklada Corbridge, datiran v 2. st.82 Zdi se, da so sestavljeni oklepi različice Corbridge nadomestili starejšo različico Kalkriese pred sredino 1. st. n. št.83 Med številnimi okovi sestavljenih oklepov ima le pri redkih zanka obliko ptičje glavice. Morda ravno ta motiv nakazuje, da gre za starejšo različico takih okovov. Podobno zanko je namreč imel okov iz poznoavgustejskih plasti na najdišču Šumi v Ljubljani. Andrej Gaspari je predmet opredelil kot okov sestavljenega oklepa avgustejske različice Kalkriese ali kot element konjske opreme.84 Obliko ptičje glavice imajo tudi zaključki enega izmed okovov nožnice rimskega meča iz Ljubljanice, ki je datiran v začetek druge polovice 1. stoletja pr. n. št.85 versions of lorica segmentata were in use from the Middle Augustan period to the 3rd century.78 Tie loops, similar to the one from Ambroževo gradišče, were itted to a strip of the armour by rivets; the loop could then be connected to the loop on the opposite strip of the armour. Such tie loops are known from the 1st century military contexts in Augusta Raurica79 and Vindonissa.80 he narrower and longer two examples, one of which has a head forged similarly to the itting from Ambroževo gradišče, were discovered in the 1st century context at Magdalensberg.81 Similar ittings were used to fasten the armour from the Corbridge hoard from the 2nd century.82 he Corbridge variant of lorica segmentata seems to have replaced the earlier Kalkriese variant before the middle of the 1st century AD.83 Among the many lorica segmentata ittings, only a few have a loop in the shape of a bird’s head. his motif could be indicative of an earlier version of such ittings. A similar loop was part of a itting from the Late Augustan layers at the Šumi site in Ljubljana. Andrej Gaspari has classiied the item as a lorica segmentata itting of the Augustan Kalkriese variant or as an element of a horse harness.84 he chapes from a scabbard of a Roman sword from the Ljubljanica River from the beginning of the second half of the 1st century are also shaped like a bird’s head.85 Domnevamo, da je predmet t. 3: 21 odlomek mrežastega okova nožnice. Za to poleg njegove oblike govori njegova elementna sestava, ki kaže, da je iz medenine. Medeninasti mrežasti okovi so krasili sprednje strani konic nožnic rimskih mečev (verjetno vrste Mainz) v srednje- in morda v zgodnjeavgustejski dobi. Njihova široka razprostranjenost nakazuje, da so bili del utečene proizvodnje rimskega orožja.86 Zgodnejši primerek, pri katerem je mrežasti okov pokrival celo sprednjo stran nožnice, je bil najden v Ljubljanici.87 Pokazatelj navzočnost rimskih vojakov na Ambroževem gradišču so tudi najdbe bronastih asov kovnice Nemavs.88 Alenka Miškec novce te skupine z območja jugovzhodnih Alp povezuje z rimskimi vojaškimi aktivnostmi v avgustejski dobi, najverjetneje s panonsko vojno med 14 in 8 pr. n. št.89 Sklop svinčenih želodov za pračo izvira najverjetneje iz zaloge (sl. 10). Večina izstrelkov iz sklopa je enotne vretenaste oblike, vsaj dva primerka sta polizdelka (t. 4: 1–2), nobeden nima za uporabljene izstrelke značilnih poškodb. Enaka patina na večini predmetov napeljuje na domnevo, da so bili najdeni blizu skupaj.90 Domnevamo, da je bila v avgustejski dobi in v prvih desetletjih 1. st. n. št. na Ambroževem gradišču rimska voja79 We assume that the object pl. 3: 21 is a fragment of a netlike scabbard itting, based on its shape, as well as its el78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 Bishop, Coulston 2006, 95, 254–257; Deschler-Erb 2007, 76. Deschler-Erb 1999, 146, pl. 15: 257–263. Unz, Deschler-Erb 1997, 29–30, pls. 31: 660–669, 32: 670–713. Deimel 1987, 292, pl. 76: 31–32. Thomas 2003, 91–108; Bishop, Coulston 2006, 29, igs. 11, 99, ig. 56: 30. Bishop 2002, 92, ig. 10.1. Gaspari 2010, 91, 94, pl. 28: Š 1016. Istenič 2000, 175–178. Figure 10. Ambroževo gradišče near Slavina. Lead slingshot (ater Laharnar 2011, 346, ig. 5; photo T. Lauko). Slika 10. Ambroževo gradišče pri Slavini. Svinčeni izstrelki za pračo (po Laharnar 2011, 346, sl. 5; foto T. Lauko). 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 Deschler-Erb 1999, 146, t. 15: 257–263. Unz, Deschler-Erb 1997, 29–30, t. 31: 660–669, 32: 670–713. Deimel 1987, 292, t. 76: 31–32. Thomas 2003, 91–108; Bishop, Coulston 2006, 29, sl. 11, 99, sl. 56: 30. Bishop 2002, 92, sl. 10.1. Gaspari 2010, 91, 94, t. 28: Š 1016. Istenič 2000, 175–178. Istenič 2003, 275. Istenič 2000. FMRSl IV, 45/1: 22–23; FMRSl V, 42: 14. Miškec 2009, 283–285, 287, sl. 5. Laharnar 2011, 370, sl. 5, t. 1: 5–6. 21 emental composition, which suggests brass. Brass net-ittings were a decoration of the front tips of scabbards of Roman swords (probably of the Mainz Type) in the Middle and possibly Early Augustan periods. heir wide distribution suggests they were part of the ongoing manufacture of Roman weapons.86 An earlier example with a net-like itting covering the whole front of the scabbard was found in the Ljubljanica.87 Another indication of the presence of Roman soldiers at Ambroževo gradišče are the bronze asses from the Nemausus mint.88According to Alenka Miškec, the coins from this group discovered in the area of the SE Alps point to Roman military operations in the Augustan period, most likely the Bellum Pannonicum of 14–8 BC.89 An assemblage of lead slingshot was probably part of stored ammunition (ig. 10). Most of the projectiles are uniformly spindle-like; at least two of them are uninished products (pl. 4: 1–2), and none of them has damage typical of a ired projectile. Similar patina on most of the objects would suggest they were found close together.90 We assume that Ambroževo gradišče harboured a Roman military outpost during the Augustan period and the irst decades of the 1st century. his is indicated by individual military inds, an assemblage of lead slingshot and coins. he supposition also allows for the simple (probably wooden) Augustan structures, discovered at the settlement by Mehtilda Urleb,91 which could possibly have served as military barracks. he pottery from these structures has sound parallels in both civilian and military contexts.92 he Roman army was well known for its eiciency, pragmatism and adjustment to existing circumstances. he choice of a well-fortiied local settlement for a military outpost would not have been out of the ordinary.93 Such cases are known from eastern Slavonia, for example, where Roman military bases of the Augustan period were set up in the Late La Tène settlements.94 4 The Roman army in the Notranjska region: 2nd and 3rd centuries, Late Roman period Among the material presented here, there are also artefacts that would indicate the presence of Roman soldiers after the relatively peaceful irst two centuries AD. hese inds suggest that some old and long-abandoned fortiied hill-top settlements were once again in use. During the 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 22 94 Istenič 2003, 275. Istenič 2000. FMRSl IV, 45/1: 22–23; FMRSl V, 42: 14. Miškec 2009, 283–285, 287, ig. 5. Laharnar 2011, 370, ig. 5, pl. 1: 5–6. Urleb 1957, 153–155; Horvat 1995, 183–188. Cf. Roth-Rubi 2006. Todd 2007; Maxield 2009, 79. Dizdar, Radman-Livaja 2004, 46. ška postojanka. To nakazujejo posamezne vojaške najdbe, sklop svinčenih izstrelkov in novci. S to domnevo se skladajo tudi preproste (verjetno lesene) avgustejske stavbe, ki jih je na gradišču odkrila Mehtilda Urleb91 in so morda bivališča vojakov. V njih odkrita rimska keramika ima namreč dobre primerjave v civilnih in tudi v vojaških kontekstih.92 Rimska vojska je bila znana po svoji učinkovitosti, pragmatičnosti in prilagajanju danim možnostim. Izbira dobro utrjene naselbine domačinov za vojaško postojanko ne bi bila neobičajna.93 Taki primeri so znani npr. v vzhodni Slavoniji, kjer so bila rimska vojaška oporišča avgustejske dobe postavljena v poznolatenske naselbine.94 4 Rimska vojska na Notranjskem: 2. in 3. stoletje, pozna rimska doba Med obravnavanim gradivom so tudi predmeti, ki nakazujejo navzočnost rimskih vojakov po relativno mirnemu obdobju prvih dveh stoletij n. št. Te najdbe kažejo, da so bile nekatere stare in že davno opuščene utrjene višinske naselbine spet v uporabi. V pozni rimski dobi, zaznamovani s postopnim propadanjem enotne rimske države, državljanskimi vojnami in vdori barbarskih ljudstev, je prek Notranjske tekel del obsežnega sistema julijskoalpskih zapor Claustra Alpium Iuliarum.95 Opustitvi linijske obrambe s sistemom zapor je po začetku 5. st. verjetno sledila vzpostavitev razpršene obrambe (načelo vojne krajine) z manjšimi višinskimi utrdbami in drugimi postojankami.96 Vojaški značaj v drugi polovici 4. in prvi polovici 5. st. kažeta najdišči v Jami pod Predjamskim gradom97 in na Križni gori.98 Afriško transportno posodje iz Šmarate je morda povezano z vojaško annono in posredno nakazuje navzočnost rimske vojske med koncem 4. in sredino 5. st.99 V posameznih primerkih poznorimskega in poznoantičnega orožja slutimo vojaško navzočnost tudi na Gradu pri Šmihelu.100 Za dvokrilno pasno spono (t. 3: 7), okov peltaste oblike (t. 3: 8) in gumb (t. 3: 9) z Ulake nad Starim trgom pri Ložu je Andrej Gaspari domneval, da so del zaključene celote, ki sestavlja del vojaške oprave srednjecesarskega obdobja.101 Vsi trije so bili namreč izkopani znotraj t. i. kovačnice E po Schmidu in jih povezujeta podobna patina ter ožganost, v t. i. kovačnici C po Schmidu pa je bil najden po- 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 Urleb 1957, 153–155; Horvat 1995, 183–188. Prim. Roth-Rubi 2006. Todd 2007; Maxield 2009, 79. Dizdar, Radman-Livaja 2004, 46. Šašel, Petru 1971; Johnson 1983; Christie 1991, 413–420. Šašel 1971, 18; Plaum 2004, 153; Ciglenečki, v tem zborniku. Korošec 1982; Pröttel 1996, 140–144; Vidrih Perko 2000, 444. Urleb 1974a; Urleb 1974b, antične najdbe: 69–71, t. 38–43, antična arhitektura: priloga 1; Ciglenečki 1985, 268–269. Vidrih Perko et al. 1998. Windischgrätz 1892; Hoernes 1892, [9], sl. 8, 18, 19, 20, 22; Horvat 2002, 161–163, t. 21: 1–5. Gaspari 2000, 52, t. 25: 1–2, 4. Late Roman period, characterized by a gradual demise of the uniied Roman state, civil wars and barbarian invasions, a considerable part of the Alpine defence system Claustra Alpium Iuliarum was positioned across Notranjska.95 he abandonment of the line defence with its system of barriers in the early 5th century was probably followed by adopting scattered defence (the principle of Military Frontier) with smaller hill-top strongholds and other outposts.96 he sites that were presumably military in character during the second half of the 4th century and the irst half of the 5th century are Jama under Predjamski grad (Predjama Castle)97 and Križna gora.98 he African transport containers from Šmarata may have been connected to the military annona and indirectly suggest the presence of the Roman army between the late 4th century and the middle of the 5th century.99 Sporadic examples of Late Roman and Late Antique weapons also hint at the military presence at Grad near Šmihel.100 Andrej Gaspari assumed a buckle loop (pl 3: 7), a peltate strap mount (pl. 3: 8) and a button (pl. 3: 9) from Ulaka above Stari trg pri Ložu are part of a set belonging to military attire from the Middle Imperial Age.101 Speciically, all three were excavated within the so-called forge E according to Schmid and are similarly covered with patina and singed. A button with two embossed concentric circles (t. 3: 10), also covered with patina and singed, was discovered in the so-called Schmid forge C. he buckle loop from Ulaka is a well-deined type with parallels in Pannonia and the strongholds of the Germanic limes, where they are mostly dated into the second half of the 2nd century.102 Comparable buckles have been discovered at sites in Romania, during the excavations of the cemeteries in Viminacium, as well as in Britain, Spain and Dura-Europos.103 Equally well-deinable is the peltate strap mount, dated on the basis of the parallels from the limes strongholds along the Rheine and Danube and other sites into the second half of the 2nd century and irst half of the 3rd century104 Two bronze double studs (pl. 3: 11–12) either from a military belt or straps of a horse harness could also be part of military attire. Bronze double buttons were a common 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 Šašel, Petru 1971; Johnson 1983; Christie 1991, 413–420. Šašel 1971, 18; Plaum 2004, 153; Ciglenečki, in this book. Korošec 1982; Pröttel 1996, 140–144; Vidrih Perko 2000, 444. Urleb 1974a; Urleb 1974b, Antique inds: 69–71, pl. 38–43, Antique architecture: Appendix 1; Ciglenečki 1985, 268–269. Vidrih Perko et al. 1998. Windischgrätz 1892; Hoernes 1892, [9], igs. 8, 18, 19, 20, 22; Horvat 2002, 161–163, pl. 21: 1–5. Gaspari 2000, 52, pl. 25: 1–2, 4. Oldstein 1976, 214–216, cf. pls. 75: 1005, 76: 1006, 1008. Bishop, Coulston 2006, 191, ig. 124: 7; James 2004, 79, ig. 37: cat. nos. 72, 74. Oldstein 1976, 171, pls. 47: 513–514, 48: 516–526; Ciglenečki 1990, 152, pl. 1: 5; Schleiermacher 2000, 186, 189, pl. 8: 1, 3–4. dobno patiniran in prav tako ožgan gumb s proiliranima koncentričnima krogoma (t. 3: 10). Ulaška dvokrilna pasna spona je dobro opredeljena oblika s primerjavami v Panoniji in utrdbah germanskega limesa, kjer so datirane večinoma v drugo polovico 2. st.102 Take spone so odkrili tudi na najdiščih v Romuniji, med izkopavanji grobišč Viminacija, v Britaniji, Španiji in DuraEuroposu.103 Dobro opredeljiv predmet je okov peltaste oblike, ki je s primerjavami iz utrdb renskega in donavskega limesa ter drugih najdišč datiran v drugo polovico 2. in prvo polovico 3. st.104 Del vojaške oprave sta morda bronasta dvojna gumba (t. 3: 11–12) z vojaškega pasu ali jermenja konjske opreme. Bronasti dvojni gumbi so pogosta najdba na rimskih najdiščih od druge polovice 2. do sredine 3. st.105 Na Notranjskem so jih našli tudi na utrjenih naselbinah Gradišče nad Gornjo Košano (t. 4: 19), Gradišče na Čepni (t. 4: 9–12) in na Ahacu (t. 4: 20). Okovom (t. 3: 8, 4: 14), gumbom (t. 3: 9–10, 4: 19–20) in dvojnim gumbom (t. 4: 9–11) je skupna značilna izvedba trna (ali dveh trnov), ki je masivne valjaste oblike s kapičastim zaključkom za namestitev (zapenjanje) na usnjen pas. Okov pasne spone z utrjene naselbine Gradišče nad Knežakom (t. 4: 13) je pripadal pasu, značilnemu za vojaško opravo v drugi polovici 3. in v 4. st.106 Številne primerjave za take okove vojaških pasov najdemo na najdiščih v Galiji in v vojaških postojankah ob renskem ter donavskem limesu.107 102 103 104 105 106 107 Oldstein 1976, 214–216, prim. t. 75: 1005, 76: 1006, 1008. Bishop, Coulston 2006, 191, sl. 124: 7; James 2004, 79, sl. 37: kat. št. 72, 74. Oldstein 1976, 171, t. 47: 513–514, 48: 516–526; Ciglenečki 1990, 152, t. 1: 5; Schleiermacher 2000, 186, 189, t. 8: 1, 3–4. Oldstein 1976, 167–169; Schwarz 2002, 235–236; Radman-Livaja 2004, 95, t. 45: 299–305; Plaum, Lux, v tem zborniku. Bishop, Coulston 2006, 218–219, sl. 137: 4. Sommer 1984, 22–23. Figure 11. The sites with the evidence of Roman army in Notranjska. 1 Grad near Šmihel pod Nanosom; 2 Predjama; 3 Baba near Slavina; 4 Ambroževo gradišče near Slavina; 5 Kerin above Pivka; 6 Primož above Raduhova vas; 7 Gradišče at Čepna; 8 Gradišče above Knežak; 9 Gradišče above Gornja Košana; 10 Ahac; 11 Stari grad above Unec; 12 Žerovnišček near Bločice; 13 Križna gora; 14 Ulaka above Stari trg pri Ložu; 15 Nadleški hrib; 16 Šmarata (© Narodni muzej Slovenije; © Geodetska uprava RS, layer vode PK 500, May 1998). Slika 11. Najdišča s sledovi rimske vojske na Notranjskem. 1 Grad pri Šmihelu pod Nanosom; 2 Predjama; 3 Baba pri Slavini; 4 Ambroževo gradišče pri Slavini; 5 Kerin nad Pivko; 6 Primož nad Raduhovo vasjo; 7 Gradišče na Čepni; 8 Gradišče nad Knežakom; 9 Gradišče nad Gornjo Košano; 10 Ahac; 11 Stari grad nad Uncem; 12 Žerovnišček pri Bločicah; 13 Križna gora; 14 Ulaka nad Starim trgom pri Ložu; 15 Nadleški hrib; 16 Šmarata (© Narodni muzej Slovenije; © Geodetska uprava RS, podatkovni sloj vod PK 500, maj 1998). 23 ind at Roman sites from the second half of the 2nd century to the middle of the 3rd century.105 In Notranjska, they have also been found at the fortiied settlements of Gradišče above Gornja Košana (pl. 4: 19), Gradišče at Čepna (pl. 4: 9–12) and Ahac (pl. 4: 20). What the ittings (pls. 3: 8, 4: 14), the buttons (pls. 3: 9–10, 4: 19–20) and the double studs (pl. 4: 9–11) have in common is the tang (or two tangs), which has a solid cylindrical shape and a cap-shaped terminal for fastening onto a leader belt. he belt buckle itting from the fortiied settlement of Gradišče above Knežak (pl. 4: 13) belonged to a belt typical of the military attire from the second half of the 3rd century and the 4th century.106 Many parallels for such military belt ittings were found on sites in Gaul and in army outposts along the Rheine and the Danube limes.107 he propeller-stifener (pl. 3: 13) and the fragment of an amphora-shaped strap terminal (pl. 3: 14) from Ulaka belong among the Late Roman military inds, typical of the second third of the 4th century and early 5th century.108 he belt ittings from the fortiied settlement of Primož above Raduhova vas (ig. 15) are from the same period.109 A propeller-stifener was also found at the nearby Kerin above Pivka (pl. 4: 17). 5 Conclusion Sometime after the colony in Aquileia was founded (181 BC) and probably before the existence of the Roman merchant outpost at Mandrga near Razdrto (late 2nd and early 1st centuries BC), the Romans attacked and conquered the fortiied settlement of Grad near Šmihel pod Nanosom. Antique written sources report of a series of military campaigns by the Roman consular armies east of Aquileia in the decades after it had been founded (the conquest of Istria 178/177 BC, the campaign of Gaius Cassius Longinus in 171 BC, the campaign of Gaius Sempronius Tuditanus in 129 BC, the campaign of Lucius Aurelius Cotta and Metellus in 115 BC, and the battles between Gnaeus Papirius Carbo and the Cimbri in 113 BC), but no one particular event can be associated with the Roman weapons from Šmihel. he supposed Roman military operations at Baba near Slavina, Stari grad above Unec, Ulaka above Stari trg pri Ložu and Roman military presence at Žerovnišček near Bločice are dated within the period of Julius Caesar’s administration of the Cisalpine Gaul and Illyricum (59–49 BC); the Octavian wars in Illyricum (35–33 BC) and the 105 106 107 108 24 109 Oldstein 1976, 167–169; Schwarz 2002, 235–236; RadmanLivaja 2004, 95, pl. 45: 299–305; Plaum, Lux, in this book. Bishop, Coulston 2006, 218–219, ig. 137: 4. Sommer 1984, 22–23. Prim. Plaum 2001a; Plaum 2001b. Istenič 1997a, pl. 2: 7–8; Plaum 2001b. Med poznorimske najdbe vojaške oprave z Ulake uvrščamo krilati pasni okov (t. 3: 13) in odlomek jermenskega zaključka amforaste oblike (t. 3: 14), značilna za obdobje druge tretjine 4. in začetek 5. st.108 Iz istega obdobja so pasni okovi z utrjene naselbine Primož nad Radohovo vasjo (sl. 15).109 Krilati okov so našli tudi na bližnjem Kerinu nad Pivko (t. 4: 17). 5 Zaključek Po ustanovitvi kolonije v Akvileji (181 pr. n. št.) in verjetno pred obstojem rimske trgovske postojanke na Mandrgi blizu Razdrtega (konec 2. in v začetku 1. stoletja pr. n. št.) so Rimljani v vojaškem napadu osvojili utrjeno naselbino Grad pri Šmihelu pod Nanosom. Antični pisni viri poročajo o seriji vojaških pohodov rimskih konzularnih vojsk vzhodno od Akvileje v desetletjih po njeni ustanovitvi (zavzetje Istre 178/177 pr. n. št., pohod Gaja Kasija Longina 171 pr. n. št., pohod Gaja Sempronija Tuditana 129 pr. n. št., pohod Lucija Avrelija Kote in Metela 115 pr. n. št. ter boje Gneja Papirija Karbona s Kimbri 113 pr. n. št.), vendar rimskega orožja iz Šmihela ni mogoče povezati z določenim dogodkom. V čas od Cezarjeve uprave Galije Cisalpine in Ilirika (59– 49 pr. n. št.), Oktavijanovih vojn v Iliriku (35–33 pr. n. št.) in do začetka srednjeavgustejske dobe (15 pr. n. št.) datiramo domnevne rimske vojaške posege na Babi pri Slavini, Starem gradu nad Uncem, Ulaki nad Starim trgom pri Ložu ter rimsko vojaško prisotnost na Žerovniščku pri Bločicah. Iz tega obdobja je morda tudi rimska utrdba na Nadleškem hribu. V obdobju od sredine 1. st. pr. n. št. do začetka srednjeavgustejske dobe je bilo ozemlje Notranjske tesno povezano z vojaško-političnimi dogajanji na vzhodni meji Galije Cisalpine (po 42 pr. n. št. del Italije).110 Cezar je imel med opravljanjem dveh mandatov prokonzulske službe v Galiji Cisalpini in Iliriku med 59 in 49 pr. n. št. v Akvileji občasno svoj štab in se je gotovo zavedal strateškega pomena in nujnosti vojaškega nadzora nad čim večjim delom akvilejskega zaledja. To je bilo nujno zaradi varnosti italskih naseljencev in celotne Italije, zlasti ob pripravah na vojno proti dačanskemu kralju Burebisti111 in po vpadu Japodov do Tergesta in Akvileje 52 pr. n. št.112 Poleg naštetega je bilo širše območje ob koridorju Tergeste–Okra–Navport–Emona, ki je bilo v času Cezarja verjetno najvzhodnejši del Galije Cisalpine, večinoma poseljeno z Rimljanom sovražnimi Karni, Japodi in Tavriski.113 Po Cezarjevi smrti (44 pr. n. št.) je rimsko osvajalno politiko na tem ozemlju nadaljeval Oktavijan (poznejši cesar Avgust). Po njegovih vojnah v Iliriku med 35 108 109 110 111 112 113 Prim. Plaum 2001a; Plaum 2001b. Istenič 1997a, t. 2: 7–8; Plaum 2001b. Glej Šašel Kos 2000, 280–281; Zaccaria 2003, 313–315. Dobesch 1994; Šašel Kos 1997, 31. Šašel Kos 2000, 292. Šašel Kos 2000, 291, sl. 1; Šašel Kos 2005, 340–341, sl. 81. beginning of the Middle Augustan period (15 BC). he Roman stronghold at Nadleški hrib may have been from the same period. in 33 pr. n. št. je bilo najverjetneje ozemlje sedanje Notranjske z drugimi deli zahodne Slovenije in osrednjo Slovenijo ter Dolenjsko s Posavjem pod rimsko oblastjo. From the middle of the 1st century BC to the beginning of the Middle Augustan period, the territory of Notranjska was closely connected to the military and political afairs at the eastern border of the Cisalpine Gaul (part of Italy after 42 BC).110 During his two mandates as proconsul, governing the Cisalpine Gaul and Illyricum between 59 and 49 BC, Julius Caesar had occasionally his headquarters stationed in Aquileia and was undoubtedly aware of its strategic importance and the necessity of military control over as much of its hinterland as possible. his was necessary for the safety of Italic settlers and the whole of Italy, particularly during preparations for the war against the Dacian king Burebista111 and after the incursion of the Iapodes to Tergeste and Aquileia in 52 BC.112 In addition, the wider area along the Tergeste–Ocra–Nauportus–Emona corridor, probably the easternmost part of the Cisalpine Gaul in Caesar’s times, was mostly populated by the hostile Carni, Iapodes and Taurisci.113 After Caesar’s death (44 BC), the Roman expansion policy in the area was continued by Octavianus (later Emperor Augustus). After his wars in Illyricum between 35 and 33 BC, the territory of the present-day Notranjska together with other parts of Western Slovenia, Central Slovenia and Dolenjska with Posavje most likely came under Roman rule. Vojaške najdbe avgustejske dobe in 1. stoletja nakazujejo navzočnost rimskih vojakov tudi po osvojitvi Notranjske. Zdi se, da je vojska uporabila stare utrjene naselbine na Ambroževem gradišču pri Slavini, Žerovniščku pri Bločicah in na Ulaki nad Starim trgom pri Ložu za občasno prebivanje posadk. Rimski vojaki so zgradili ali ponovno uporabili utrdbo na Nadleškem hribu. Domnevamo, da so sledovi rimske vojske iz avgustejske dobe povezani z nadzorom poti in zalednih območji osrednjih vojnih žarišč na Balkanskem polotoku, verjetno v času panonske vojne (14–8 pr. n. št.) ali panonsko-delmatskega upora (6–9 n. št.). Military inds from the Augustan period and the 1st century also indicate the presence of Roman soldiers after the conquest of Notranjska. he army seemed to have used old fortiied settlements at Ambroževo gradišče near Slavina, Žerovnišček near Bločice and Ulaka above Stari trg pri Ložu to occasional station its garrisons. Roman soldiers built or re-used the stronghold at Nadleški hrib. We assume the traces of Roman army from the Augustan period are associated with the control of the routes and the hinterlands of the major conlict zones in the Balkans, probably during the Bellum Pannonicum (14–8 BC) or the Great Illyrian Revolt (AD 6–9). Several inds indicate a Roman military presence in certain hill-top settlements in the Late Roman period. his is not at all surprising, because the sites of Ulaka above Stari trg pri Ložu, Kerin above Pivka, Sv. Primož above Raduhova vas, Gradišče at Čepna, Gradišče above Knežak, Gradišče above Gornja Košana and Ahac lie in the immediate hinterland of the Claustra Alpium Iuliarum. One of the alternative routes between Siscia and Aquileia during the turbulent period between the 4th and 6th centuries probably also led through Notranjska.114 110 111 112 113 114 See Šašel Kos 2000, 280–281; Zaccaria 2003, 313–315. Dobesch 1994; Šašel Kos 1997, 31. Šašel Kos 2000, 292. Šašel Kos 2000, 291, ig. 1; Šašel Kos 2005, 340–341, ig. 81. Ciglenečki 1985, 267–270. Več najdb nakazuje vojaško navzočnost na nekaterih višinskih naselbinah v pozni rimski dobi. To ni presenetljivo, saj najdišča Ulaka nad Starim trgom pri Ložu, Kerin nad Pivko, Primož nad Raduhovo vasjo, Gradišče na Čepni, Gradišče nad Knežakom, Gradišče nad Gornjo Košano in Ahac ležijo v neposrednem zaledju alpskih zapor. Prek Notranjske je verjetno vodila tudi ena od alternativnih povezav med Siscijo in Akvilejo v nemirnem času 4. do 6. stoletja.114 KATALOG Grad pri Šmihelu pod Nanosom Predmete hranita Park vojaške zgodovine v Pivki (t. 1: 1, 3–21) in Narodni muzej Slovenije (t. 1: 2, 22–28; sl. 12: 1–32). Ob objavi članka Laharnar 2011 smo poznali z najdišča 57 svinčenih izstrelkov za pračo115 (izbor je na t. 1: 14–28), pozneje smo dokumentirali še 32 izstrelkov (sl. 12: 1–32). Tabla 1. 1. Železna ost katapultnega izstrelka. Dol. 15,3 cm; teža 109,2 g. 2. Železna ost katapultnega izstrelka. Dol. 15,2 cm; teža 112 g. Inv. št. R24080. 3. Železna ost katapultnega izstrelka. Dol. 12,2 cm; teža 72,1 g. 4. Železna ost katapultnega izstrelka. Dol. 11,5 cm; teža 34,4 g. 5. Železna ost katapultnega izstrelka. Dol. 9,5 cm; teža 33,9 g. 6. Železna ost katapultnega izstrelka. Dol. 10 cm; teža 41,9 g. 7. Železna ost katapultnega izstrelka. Dol. 9,6 cm; teža 35,5 g. 8. Železna ost katapultnega izstrelka (?) / puščična ost (?). Dol. 7,5 cm; teža 23,9 g. 9. Železna ost katapultnega izstrelka (?) / puščična ost (?). Dol. 9,2 cm; teža 20 g. 10. Železna puščična ost. Dol. 6 cm; teža 11,5 g. 11. Železna puščična ost. Dol. 7,2 cm; teža 11,9 g. 12. Železna puščična ost. Dol. 7 cm; teža 8,5 g. 13. Železna puščična ost. Dol. 7 cm; teža 5,9 g. 14. Svinčeni izstrelek za pračo, vretenaste oblike, Völling IIb, površina obdelana s tolčenjem. Dolž. 4,4 cm; teža 101,7 g. 15. Svinčeni izstrelek za pračo, dvojnopiramidaste oblike, večkotni presek, Völling III, površina obdelana s tolčenjem. Dol. 4,8 cm; teža 40,4 g. 114 115 Ciglenečki 1985, 267–270. Laharnar 2011, 363. 25 CATALOGUE Grad near Šmihel pod Nanosom he objects are kept by the Park of Military History, Pivka (pl. 1: 1, 3–21) and by the National Museum of Slovenia (pl. 1: 2, 22–28; ig. 12: 1–32). Upon the publication of Laharnar 2011, 57 lead slingshot were known from the site115 (a selection on pl. 1: 14–28); another 32 have been recorded since (ig. 12: 1–32). Plate 1. 1. Iron catapult-bolt. Length 15.3 cm; weight 109.2 g. 2. Iron catapult-bolt. Length 15.2 cm; weight 112 g. Inv. No. R24080. 3. Iron catapult-bolt. Length 12.2 cm; weight 72.1 g. 4. Iron catapult-bolt. Length 11.5 cm; weight 34.4 g. 5. Iron catapult-bolt. Length 9.5 cm; weight 33.9 g. 6. Iron catapult-bolt. Length 10 cm; weight 41.9 g. 7. Iron catapult-bolt. Length 9.6 cm; weight 35.5 g. 8. Iron catapult-bolt (?) / arrowhead (?). Length 7.5 cm; weight 23.9 g. 9. Iron catapult-bolt (?) / arrowhead (?). Length 9.2 cm; weight 20 g. 10. Iron arrowhead. Length 6 cm; weight 11.5 g. 11. Iron arrowhead. Length 7.2 cm; weight 11.9 g. 12. Iron arrowhead. Length 7 cm; weight 8.5 g. 13. Iron arrowhead. Length 7 cm; weight 5.9 g. 14. Lead slingshot, spindle-like, Völling IIb, surface is hammered. Length. 4.4 cm; weight 101.7 g. 15. Lead slingshot, double-pyramid shaped, multi-angular in section, Völling III, surface is hammered. Length 4.8 cm; weight 40.4 g. 16. Lead slingshot, spindle-like, Völling IIa, surface is hammered. Length 4.8 cm; weight 54.1 g. 17. Lead slingshot, oval-shaped, Völling IIb, surface is hammered, one tip damaged. Length 4.1 cm; weight 61.2 g. 18. Lead slingshot, spindle-like, Völling IIb, surface is hammered. Length 3.5 cm; weight 45.1 g. 19. Lead slingshot, spindle-like, Völling IIb, surface is hammered. Length 3.6 cm; weight 32.9 g. 20. Lead slingshot, spindle-like, Völling IIa, surface is hammered. Length 3.4 cm; weight 28.2 g. 21. Lead slingshot, Völling V, surface is hammered, a teardropshaped tip. Length 2.8 cm; weight 26.4 g. 22. Lead slingshot, spindle-like, Völling IIb, one tip bent, casting seam “wing” is hammered. Length 4.7 cm; weight 39.02 g. Inv. No. R 26876. 23. Lead slingshot, spindle-like, surface is hammered. One tip is not completed, poorly cast. Length 3.4 cm; weight 66 g. Inv. No. R 26871. 24. Lead slingshot, spindle-like, Völling IIa. Length 3.7 cm; weight 47.10 g. Inv. No. R 26874. 25. Lead slingshot, spindle-like, Völling IIb. Length 3.7 cm; weight 52.33 g. Inv. No. R 26875. 26. Lead slingshot, spindle-like, surface is hammered. Length 3.7 cm; weight 50 g. Inv. No. R 26872. 27. Lead slingshot, spindle-like, Völling IIa, one tip broken-of, the other one crumpled. Length 2.9 cm; weight 51.70 g. Inv. No. R 26873. 28. Lead slingshot, spindle-like, Völling IIb. Length 3.1 cm; weight 38.03 g. Inv. No. R 26877. 26 115 Laharnar 2011, 363. 16. Svinčeni izstrelek za pračo, vretenaste oblike, Völling IIa, površina obdelana s tolčenjem. Dol. 4,8 cm; teža 54,1 g. 17. Svinčeni izstrelek za pračo, ovalne oblike, Völling IIb, površina obdelana s tolčenjem, ena konica poškodovana. Dol. 4,1 cm; teža 61,2 g. 18. Svinčeni izstrelek za pračo, vretenaste oblike, Völling IIb, površina obdelana s tolčenjem. Dol. 3,5 cm; teža 45,1 g. 19. Svinčeni izstrelek za pračo, vretenaste oblike, Völling IIb, površina obdelana s tolčenjem. Dol. 3,6 cm; teža 32,9 g. 20. Svinčeni izstrelek za pračo, vretenaste oblike, Völling IIa, površina obdelana s tolčenjem. Dol. 3,4 cm; teža 28,2 g. 21. Svinčeni izstrelek za pračo, oblike Völling V, površina obdelana s tolčenjem, konica kapljičaste oblike. Dol. 2,8 cm; teža 26,4 g. 22. Svinčeni izstrelek za pračo, vretenaste oblike, Völling IIb, ena konica zvita, potolčeno krilce livnega šiva. Dol. 4,7 cm; teža 39,02 g. Inv. št. R 26876. 23. Svinčeni izstrelek za pračo, vretenaste oblike. Površina obdelana s tolčenjem. Ena konica ni izdelana, slabo ulit. Dol. 3,4 cm; teža 66 g. Inv. št. R 26871. 24. Svinčeni izstrelek za pračo, vretenaste oblike, Völling IIa. Dol. 3,7 cm; teža 47,10 g. Inv. št. R 26874. 25. Svinčeni izstrelek za pračo, vretenaste oblike, Völling IIb. Dol. 3,7 cm; teža 52,33 g. Inv. št. R 26875. 26. Svinčeni izstrelek za pračo, vretenaste oblike. Površina obdelana s tolčenjem. Dol. 3,7 cm; teža 50 g. Inv. št. R 26872. 27. Svinčeni izstrelek za pračo, vretenaste oblike, Völling IIa, ena konica odlomljena, druga zmečkana. Dol. 2,9 cm; teža 51,70 g. Inv. št. R 26873. 28. Svinčeni izstrelek za pračo, vretenaste oblike, Völling IIb. Dol. 3,1 cm; teža 38,03 g. Inv. št. R 26877. Slika 12. 1. Svinčeni izstrelek za pračo podolgovate dvojnopiramidaste oblike, Völling III. Dol. 5,1 cm; teža 47,62 g. Inv. št. R 26878. 2. Svinčeni izstrelek za pračo dvojnopiramidaste oblike, Völling III. Dol. 3,1 cm; teža 22,11 g. Inv. št. R 26886. 3. Svinčeni izstrelek za pračo vretenaste oblike, Völling IIb. Dol. 3,6 cm, teža 50 g. Akc. št. 2013/61-5. 4. Svinčeni izstrelek za pračo vretenaste oblike, Völling IIb. Dol. 4,2 cm; teža 42 g. Inv. št. R 26899. 5. Svinčeni izstrelek za pračo podolgovate dvojnopiramidaste oblike, Völling III. Ena konica zvita. Dol. 4,6 cm; teža 54,10 g. Inv. št. R 26887. 6. Svinčeni izstrelek za pračo dvojnopiramidaste oblike, Völling III. Dol. 4,1 cm; teža 57,59 g. Inv. št. R 26888. 7. Svinčeni izstrelek za pračo vretenaste oblike, Völling IIa. Dol. 3,4 cm; teža 44,31 g. Inv. št. R 26891. 8. Svinčeni izstrelek za pračo vretenaste oblike. Po celotni površini obdelan s tolčenjem. Ena konica je topa (napaka pri ulivanju). Dol. 3,5 cm; teža 67,18 g. Inv. št. R 26890. 9. Poškodovan svinčeni izstrelek za pračo dvojnopiramidaste oblike, Völling III. Dol. 4,1 cm; teža 41,18 g. Inv. št. R 26892. 10. Svinčeni izstrelek za pračo dvojnopiramidaste oblike, Völling III. Dol. 4,2 cm; teža 44 g. Akc. št. 2013/61-3. 11. Svinčeni izstrelek za pračo dvojnopiramidaste oblike, Völling III. Ena od konic zvita. Dol. 3,5 cm; teža 33,36 g. Inv. št. R 26885. 12. Poškodovan (močno upognjen, manjka tretjina predmeta) svinčeni izstrelek za pračo dvojnopiramidaste oblike, Völling III. Dol. 3,9 cm; teža 31,32 g. Inv. št. R 26883. 13. Svinčeni izstrelek za pračo vretenaste oblike, Völling IIb. Dol. 3,3 cm, teža 42 g. Akc. št. 2013/61-11. 14. Svinčeni izstrelek za pračo vretenaste oblike, Völling IIa. Dol. 4,8 cm; teža 64 g. Akc. št. 2013/61-1. Figure 12. 1. Lead slingshot, extended double-pyramid shaped, Völling III. Length 5.1 cm; weight 47.62 g. Inv. No. R 26878. 2. Lead slingshot, double-pyramid shaped, Völling III. Length 3.1 cm; weight 22.11 g. Inv. No. R 26886. 3. Lead slingshot, spindle-like, Völling IIb. Length 3.6 cm; weight 50 g. Acc. No. 2013/61-5. 4. Lead slingshot, spindle-like, Völling IIb. Length 4.2 cm; weight 42 g. Inv. No. R 26899. 5. Lead slingshot, extended double-pyramid shaped, Völling III. One tip is bent. Length 4.6 cm; weight 54.10 g. Inv. No. R 26887. 6. Lead slingshot, double-pyramid shaped, Völling III. Length 4.1 cm; weight 57.59 g. Inv. No. R 26888. 7. Lead slingshot, spindle-like, Völling IIa. Length 3.4 cm; weight 44.31 g. Inv. No. R 26891. 8. Lead slingshot, spindle-like. he entire surface is hammered. One tip is blunt (casting imperfection). Length 3.5 cm; weight 67.18 g. Inv. No. R 26890. 9. Damaged lead slingshot, double-pyramid shaped, Völling III. Length 4.1 cm; weight 41.18 g. Inv. No. R 26892. 10. Lead slingshot, double-pyramid shaped, Völling III. Length 4,2 cm; weight 44 g. Acc. No. 2013/61-3. 11. Lead slingshot, double-pyramid shaped, Völling III. One tip is bent. Length 3.5 cm; weight 33.36 g. Inv. No. R 26885. 12. Damaged (severely bent, a third of the object is missing) lead slingshot, double-pyramid shape, Völling III. Length 3.9 cm; weight 31.32 g. Inv. no. R 26883. 13. Lead slingshot, spindle-like, Völling IIb. Length 3.3 cm; weight 42 g. Acc. No. 2013/61-11. 14. Lead slingshot, spindle-like, Völling IIa. Length 4.8 cm; weight 64 g. Acc. No. 2013/61-1. 15. Lead slingshot, spindle-like, Völling IIa. Length 3.6 cm; weight 47.80 g. Inv. no. R 26897. 16. Lead slingshot, spindle-like, Völling IIa. Length 5 cm; weight 50 g. Acc. No. 2013/61-2. 17. Lead slingshot, double-pyramid shaped, Völling III. Length 3.5 cm; weight 39.66 g. Inv. no. R 26881. 18. Lead slingshot, double-pyramid shaped, Völling IIb. Length 4.1 cm; weight 42 g. Inv. no. R 26897. 19. Lead slingshot, spindle-like, Völling IIb. Length 3.3 cm; weight 37.19 g. Inv. no. R 26880. 20. Lead slingshot, spindle-like, Völling IIb. One tip is damaged. Length 3.9 cm; weight 54 g. Inv. no. R 26898. 21. Lead slingshot, spindle-like, Völling IIb. Length 3.4 cm; weight 42 g. Acc. No. 2013/61-7. 22. Lead slingshot, spindle-like, Völling IIb. Length 3.2 cm; weight 40 g. Acc. No. 2013/61-9. 23. Lead slingshot, spindle-like, Völling IIa. Length 3.6 cm; weight 50.81 g. Inv. no. R 26889. 24. Lead slingshot, spindle-like, Völling IIb. Length 3.7 cm; weight 40 g. Acc. No. 2013/61-6. 25. Lead slingshot, spindle-like, Völling IIb. Length 3.4 cm; weight 40 g. Acc. No. 2013/61-8. 26. Lead slingshot, spindle-like with a depression (damaged or casting imperfection), Völling IIb. Length 3.1 cm; weight 35.40 g. Inv. no. R 26893. 27. Lead slingshot, spindle-like, Völling IIb. Length 3.6 cm; weight 40 g. Acc. No. 2013/61-4. 28. Lead slingshot, spindle-like, Völling IIb. Length 3.1 cm; weight 40 g. Acc. No. 2013/61-10. 29. Lead slingshot, spindle-like, Völling IIb. One tip is poorly cast, casting imperfection. Length 2.6 cm; weight 35.26 g. Inv. No. R 26896. 30. Lead slingshot, spindle-like, Völling IIb. Length 3 cm; weight 33.67 g. Inv. No. R 26895. 15. Svinčeni izstrelek za pračo vretenaste oblike, Völling IIa. Dol. 3,6 cm; teža 47,80 g. Inv. št. R 26897. 16. Svinčeni izstrelek za pračo vretenaste oblike, Völling IIa. Dol. 5 cm, teža 50 g. Akc. št. 2013/61-2. 17. Svinčeni izstrelek za pračo dvojnopiramidaste oblike, Völling III. Dol. 3,5 cm; teža 39,66 g. Inv. št. R 26881. 18. Svinčeni izstrelek za pračo dvojnopiramidaste oblike, Völling IIb. Dol. 4,1 cm; teža 42 g. Inv. št. R 26879. 19. Svinčeni izstrelek za pračo vretenaste oblike, Völling IIb. Dol. 3,3 cm; teža 37,19 g. Inv. št. R 26880. 20. Svinčeni izstrelek za pračo vretenaste oblike, Völling IIb. Ena od konic poškodovana. Dol. 3,9 cm; teža 54 g. Inv. št. R 26898. 21. Svinčeni izstrelek za pračo vretenaste oblike, Völling IIb. Dol. 3,4 cm, teža 42 g. Akc. št. 2013/61-7. 22. Svinčeni izstrelek za pračo vretenaste oblike, Völling IIb. Dol. 3,2 cm, teža 40 g. Akc. št. 2013/61-9. 23. Svinčeni izstrelek za pračo vretenaste oblike, Völling IIa. Dol. 3,6 cm; teža 50,81 g. Inv. št. R 26889. 24. Svinčeni izstrelek za pračo vretenaste oblike, Völling IIb. Dol. 3,7 cm, teža 40 g. Akc. št. 2013/61-6. 25. Svinčeni izstrelek za pračo vretenaste oblike, Völling IIb. Dol. 3,4 cm, teža 40 g. Akc. št. 2013/61-8. 26. Svinčeni izstrelek za pračo vretenaste oblike s poglobitvijo (poškodba ali napaka pri ulivanju), Völling IIb. Dol. 3,1 cm; teža 35,40 g. Inv. št. R 26893. Figure 12. Grad near Šmihel pod Nanosom. Lead slingshot (photo T. Lauko). Slika 12. Grad pri Šmihelu pod Nanosom. Svinčeni izstrelki za pračo (foto T. Lauko). 27 31. Lead slingshot, double-pyramid shaped, Völling III. A visible air bubble or a casting defect under one tip. Length 2.9 cm; weight 32.24 g. Inv. No. R 26894. 32. Lead slingshot, extended double-pyramid shaped, Völling III. Length 4.9 cm; weight 60.65 g. Inv. No. R 26882. Baba near Slavina he objects are kept by the National Museum of Slovenia. Plate 2. 1. Iron hobnail with a cone-like head. he underside has a tang, rectangular in section, with a cruciform pattern of ribs and protuberances between them. Diameter 1.8 cm. Inv. No. R 25170. 2. Fragment of a bronze conchoidal brooch; preserved head and part of the bow with three coil-like swellings. Length 2.9 cm. Inv. No. R 26575. 3. Bronze fragment of an Idrija type cup handle. Length 2.2 cm. Inv. No. P 19411. Figure 4. 31 lead slingshot (publication: Laharnar 2011, 364). Stari grad above Unec he objects are kept by the National Museum of Slovenia. Plate 2. 4. Brass Alesia group brooch, Demetz Variant Ic. Length 5.2 cm. Inv. No. R 17281 (publication: Istenič 1997b, pl. 6: 7; Istenič 2005b, 206, pl. 1: 4). 5. Bronze Alesia group brooch, Demetz Variant Ic. Length 6.8 cm. Inv. No. P 19283 (publication: Istenič 2005b, 206, pl. 1: 6). 6. Brass Alesia group brooch, Demetz Variant Ia3. Length 7.5 cm. Inv. No. P 19282 (publication: Istenič 2005b, 205–206, pl. 1: 2). 7. Brass Alesia group brooch, Demetz Variant IIc; iron pivot. Length 3.9 cm. Inv. No. P 19946. 8. Bronze Alesia group brooch, Demetz Variant IIc with a bow with an oval expansion; two holes on the expansion. Decorated with tiny incisions. he pin is missing. Length 6.1 cm. Inv. No. R 25132 (publication: Istenič 2005b, 208, pl. 1: 13). 9. Bronze Alesia group brooch, Demetz Variant IIe with a concavely expanded bow. Length 4.2 cm. Inv. No. R 17677. 10. Iron hobnail with a semi-globular head and a tang, square in section. he underside contains a cruciform pattern of ribs and protuberances between them. Diameter 1.9 cm; Length 1.5 cm. Inv. No. R 25140. 11. Iron hobnail with a cone-like head and a tang, square in section. he underside contains a cruciform pattern of ribs and protuberances between them. Diameter 1.9 cm; Length 1.5 cm. Inv. No. R 25141. 12. Iron hobnail with a semi-globular head and a tang, square in section. he underside contains a cruciform pattern of ribs and protuberances between them. Diameter 1.4 cm; Length 1.5 cm. Inv. No. R 25142. 13. Bronze button and loop fastener, decorated with incised concentric circles and a depression. Diameter 1.3 cm. Inv. No. R 17746. Figure 6. 43 lead slingshot (publication: Laharnar 2011, 365–366). 28 27. Svinčeni izstrelek za pračo vretenaste oblike, Völling IIb. Dol. 3,6 cm, teža 40 g. Akc. št. 2013/61-4. 28. Svinčeni izstrelek za pračo vretenaste oblike, Völling IIb. Dol. 3,1 cm, teža 40 g. Akc. št. 2013/61-10. 29. Svinčeni izstrelek za pračo vretenaste oblike, Völling IIb. Ena od konic slabo ulita, viden zračni žep ali lunker. Dol. 2,6 cm; teža 35,26 g. Inv. št. R 26896. 30. Svinčeni izstrelek za pračo vretenaste oblike, Völling IIb. Dol. 3 cm; teža 33,67 g. Inv. št. R 26895. 31. Svinčeni izstrelek za pračo dvojnopiramidaste oblike, Völling III. Pod eno od konic viden zračni žep ali lunker. Dol. 2,9 cm; teža 32,24 g. Inv. št. R 26894. 32. Svinčeni izstrelek za pračo podolgovate dvojnopiramidaste oblike, Völling III. Dol. 4,9 cm; teža 60,65 g. Inv. št. R 26882. Baba pri Slavini Predmete hrani Narodni muzej Slovenije. Tabla 2. 1. Železni žebljiček za čevlje s stožčasto glavico. Na spodnji strani trn pravokotnega preseka in štiri križno postavljena rebra z bunčico v medprostorih. Pr. 1,8 cm. Inv. št. R 25170. 2. Odlomek bronaste školjčne ibule; ohranjena glava in del loka s tremi svitkastimi odebelitvami. Dol. 2,9 cm. Inv. št. R 26575. 3. Bronasti odlomek ročaja čaše vrste Idrija. Dol. 2,2 cm. Inv. št. P 19411. Slika 4. 31 svinčenih izstrelkov za pračo (objava: Laharnar 2011, 364). Stari grad nad Uncem Predmete hrani Narodni muzej Slovenije. Tabla 2. 4. Medeninasta ibula vrste Alezija Ic po Demetzu. Dol. 5,2 cm. Inv. št. R 17281 (objava: Istenič 1997b, t. 6: 7; Istenič 2005b, 206, t. 1: 4). 5. Bronasta ibula vrste Alezija Ic po Demetzu. Dol. 6,8 cm. Inv. št. P 19283 (objava: Istenič 2005b, 206, t. 1: 6). 6. Medeninasta ibula vrste Alezija Ia3 po Demetzu. Dol. 7,5 cm. Inv. št. P 19282 (objava: Istenič 2005b, 205–206, t. 1: 2). 7. Medeninasta ibula vrste Alezija IIc po Demetzu; os tečaja železna. Dol. 3,9 cm. Inv. št. P 19946. 8. Bronasta ibula vrste Alezija IIc po Demetzu z ovalno razširjenim lokom; na razširitvi dve luknjici. Okrašena z drobnimi vrezi. Igla ni ohranjena. Dol. 6,1 cm. Inv. št. R 25132 (objava: Istenič 2005b, 208, t. 1: 13). 9. Bronasta ibula vrste Alezija IIe po Demetzu s kalotasto razširjenim lokom. Dol. 4,2 cm. Inv. št. R 17677. 10. Železni žebljiček za čevlje s polkroglasto glavico in trnom kvadratnega preseka. Na spodnji strani štiri križno postavljena rebra z bunčico v medprostorih. Pr. 1,9 cm; dol. 1,5 cm. Inv. št. R 25140. 11. Železni žebljiček za čevlje s stožčasto glavico in trnom kvadratnega preseka. Na spodnji strani štiri križno postavljena rebra z bunčico v medprostorih. Pr. 1,9 cm; dol. 1,5 cm. Inv. št. R 25141. 12. Železni žebljiček za čevlje s polkrožno glavico in trnom kvadratnega preseka. Na spodnji strani štiri križno postavljena rebra z bunčico v medprostorih. Pr. 1,4 cm; dol. 1,5 cm. Inv. št. R 25142. 13. Bronasti gumb z enojno zanko, okrašen z vrezanimi koncentričnimi krožci in vdolbinico. Pr. 1,3 cm. Inv. št. R 17746. Žerovnišček near Bločice he objects are kept by the National Museum of Slovenia (pl. 2: 14–19, 21, 23–24) and the Notranjska Museum Postojna (pl. 2: 20, 22). Plate 2. 14. Iron slingshot, spindle-like, Völling IIa. Length 4.6 cm. Inv. No. P 19648 (publication: Laharnar 2009, 141, pl. 5: 5). 15. Iron slingshot, spindle-like, Völling IIb. Length 4.4 cm. Inv. No. s. n. (publication: Laharnar 2009, 141, pl. 5: 6). 16. Two-part hinged buckle with a D-shaped bow, a tang and a rectangular itting made of a folded brass sheath. he buckle is riveted with two brass ferrules. A tiny hole at the back of the itting suggests that it was fastened to the surface (probably a leather strap) with a rivet (nail). he itting is decorated with three groups of double vertical incisions and with six incisions on the folded part by the tang. Length 2.7 cm. Inv. No. R 18456 (publication: Laharnar 2009, 141, pl. 5: 9). 17. Iron hobnail with a cone-like head. he underside contains a cruciform pattern of ribs and protuberances between them. he tang, square in section, is bent. Diameter of the head 2 cm. Inv. No. R 18460 (publication: Laharnar 2009, 141, t. 5: 10). 18. Iron hobnail with a semi-globular head. he underside contains a cruciform pattern of ribs and protuberances between them. he tang, square in section, is bent. Diameter of the head 1.7 cm. Inv. No. R 18472 (publication: Laharnar 2009, 141, pl. 5: 11). 19 Iron hobnail with a semi-globular head. he underside contains a cruciform pattern of ribs and protuberances between them. he tang, square in section, is bent. Diameter of the head 1.6. Inv. No. R 18473 (publication: Laharnar 2009, 141, pl. 5: 12). 20. Iron hobnail with a cone-like faceted head. he underside contains a cruciform pattern of ribs and protuberances between them. he tang is square in section. Diameter of the head 2 cm. NMP (publication: Laharnar 2009, 141, pl. 5: 14). 21. Iron hobnail with a cone-like faceted head. he underside contains a cruciform pattern of ribs and protuberances between them. he tang, square in section, is bent. Diameter of the head 1.6 cm. Inv. No. R 18461 (publication: Laharnar 2009, 141, pl. 5: 13). 22. Damaged iron hobnail with a semi-globular head and seven circularly positioned protuberances on the underside. he tang, square in section, is bent. Diameter of the head 1.6 cm. NMP (publication: Laharnar 2009, 141, pl. 5: 15). 23. Damaged iron hobnail with a cone-like head. he underside contains a cruciform pattern of ribs. he tang, square in section, is bent. Diameter of the head 1.9 cm. Inv. No. R 18474 (publication: Laharnar 2009, 141, pl. 5: 16). 24. Iron hobnail with a semi-globular head and a tang, square in section. Diameter of the head 1.7 cm. Inv. No. R 18475 (publication: Laharnar 2009, 141, pl. 5: 17). Ulaka above Stari trg pri Ložu he objects are kept by the National Museum of Slovenia (ig. 8, 13; pl. 3: 1–14). Upon the publication of Laharnar 2011, 21 lead slingshot were known from the site (ig. 8); another 5 have been recorded since (ig. 13). Plate 3. 1. Brass Alesia group brooch, Demetz Variant IIa. On the right side of the tubiform hinge, a side button survives; the pivot is iron. Length 5.3 cm. Inv. No. R 17319 (publication: Istenič 2005b, 207, pl. 1:10). Slika 6. 43 svinčenih izstrelkov za pračo (objava: Laharnar 2011, 365–366). Žerovnišček pri Bločicah Predmete hranita Narodni muzej Slovenije (t. 2: 14–19, 21, 23– 24) in Notranjski muzej Postojna (t. 2: 20, 22). Tabla 2. 14. Svinčeni izstrelek za pračo vretenaste oblike, Völling IIa. Dol. 4,6 cm. Inv. št. P 19648 (objava: Laharnar 2009, 141, t. 5: 5). 15. Svinčeni izstrelek za pračo vretenaste oblike, Völling IIb. Dol. 4,4 cm. Inv. št. s. n. (objava: Laharnar 2009, 141, t. 5: 6). 16. Dvodelna sponka z lokom D-oblike, trnom in pravokotnim okovom iz zapognjene medeninaste pločevine. Sponka zakovana z dvema medeninastima kapicama. Luknjica v zadnjem delu okova kaže, da je bil na podlago (najverjetneje usnjeni jermen) pritrjen z zakovico (žebljičkom). Okov okrašen s tremi skupinami dvojnih navpičnih vrezov ter šestimi vrezi na zapognjenem delu ob trnu. Dol. 2,7 cm. Inv. št. R 18456 (objava: Laharnar 2009, 141, t. 5: 9). 17. Železni žebljiček za čevlje s stožčasto glavico. Na spodnji strani kapice štiri križno postavljena rebra z bunčico v medprostorih. Trn kvadratnega preseka upognjen. Pr. glavice 2 cm. Inv. št. R 18460 (objava: Laharnar 2009, 141, t. 5: 10). 18. Železni žebljiček za čevlje s polkroglasto glavico. Na spodnji strani kapice štiri križno postavljena rebra z bunčico v medprostorih. Trn kvadratnega preseka upognjen. Pr. glavice 1,7 cm. Inv. št. R 18472 (objava: Laharnar 2009, 141, t. 5: 11). 19. Železni žebljiček za čevlje s polkroglasto glavico. Na spodnji strani štiri križno postavljena rebra z bunčico v medprostorih. Trn kvadratnega preseka upognjen. Pr. glavice 1,6. Inv. št. R 18473 (objava: Laharnar 2009, 141, t. 5: 12). 20. Železni žebljiček za čevlje s stožčasto fasetirano glavico. Na spodnji strani štiri križno postavljena rebra z bunčico v medprostorih. Trn kvadratnega preseka. Pr. glavice 2 cm. NMP (objava: Laharnar 2009, 141, t. 5: 14). 21. Železni žebljiček za čevlje s stožčasto fasetirano glavico. Na spodnji strani štiri križno postavljena rebra z bunčico v medprostorih. Trn kvadratnega preseka upognjen. Pr. glavice 1,6 cm. Inv. št. R 18461 (objava: Laharnar 2009, 141, t. 5: 13). 22. Poškodovan železni žebljiček za čevlje s polkroglasto glavico in sedmimi krožno razporejenimi bunčicami na spodnji strani kapice. Trn kvadratnega preseka in upognjen. Pr. glavice 1,6 cm. NMP (objava: Laharnar 2009, 141, t. 5: 15). 23. Poškodovan železni žebljiček za čevlje s stožčasto glavico. Na spodnji strani štiri križno postavljena rebra. Trn kvadratnega preseka upognjen. Pr. glavice 1,9 cm. Inv. št. R 18474 (objava: Laharnar 2009, 141, t. 5: 16). 24. Železni žebljiček za čevlje s polkroglasto glavico in trnom kvadratnega preseka. Pr. glavice 1,7 cm. Inv. št. R 18475 (objava: Laharnar 2009, 141, t. 5: 17). Ulaka nad Starim trgom pri Ložu Predmete hrani Narodni muzej Slovenije (sl. 8, 13; t. 3: 1–14). Ob objavi članka Laharnar 2011 smo z najdišča poznali 21 svinčenih izstrelkov za pračo (sl. 8), pozneje smo evidentirali še 5 izstrelkov (sl. 13). Tabla 3. 1. Medeninasta ibula vrste Alezija IIa po Demetzu. Na desni strani cevastega tečaja ohranjen stranski gumb, os železna. 29 2. Bronze button and loop fastener. Diameter 1.4 cm. Inv. No. R 18453. 3. Iron peg, rectangular in section; the upper part contains a loop, through which a ring is passed, and a lat globular terminal. Length 19.2 cm. Inv. No. R 18514. 4. Bronze harness pendant, Bishop Type 3. Length 6.3 cm; width 5.2 cm. Inv. No. R 17311. 5. Bronze harness pendant, Bishop Type 3, decorated with tiny incisions. Upper surface probably tinned (?). Length 4.55 cm; width 2.7 cm. Inv. No. R 17314. 6. Bronze harness pendant, Bishop Type 5. Length 3.5 cm; width 2.9 cm. Inv. No. R 18001. 7. Bronze buckle loop. A trace of an iron tang is visible at the seam between the “wings”. Singed. Length 3.5 cm. Inv. No. P 12752. 8. Bronze peltate strap mount with two cylindrical tangs with an expanded cap-shaped fastener. Singed. Length 3.5 cm. Inv. No. P 12754. 9. Bronze button with two cylindrical tangs with an expanded cap-shaped fastener. Singed. Diameter 2.5 cm. Inv. No. P 12756. 10. Bronze button with a cylindrical tang with an expanded capshaped fastener, decorated with two embossed concentric circles and a punched dot. Singed. Diameter 3.6 cm. Inv. No. P 12753. 11. Bronze double button. he upper, larger button is decorated with punched circles, dots and groups of small triangles. Upper button diameter 3.3 cm, lower button diameter 2.7 cm. Inv. No. R 17310. 12. Bronze double button. Upper button diameter 3.3 cm, lower button diameter 2.9 cm. Inv. No. R 17315. 13. Bronze propeller-stifener. Length 2.4 cm. Inv. No. R 17842. 14. Fragment (upper part) of a bronze amphora-shaped strap terminal. Height 2.8 cm. Inv. No. R 17841. Figure 8. 21 lead slingshot (publication: Laharnar 2011, 348–349). 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. Slika 8. 21 svinčenih izstrelkov za pračo (objava: Laharnar 2011, 348–349). Slika 13. 1. Svinčeni izstrelek za pračo vretenaste oblike. Polizdelek (?), ohranjena krilca livnega šiva, konici neizdelani. Dol. 5,4 cm; teža 109,95 g. Akc. št. 2013/58-1. 2. Svinčeni izstrelek za pračo vretenaste oblike. Manjka približno tretjina predmeta (posledica nepopolnega ulivanja). Dol. 4,4 cm; teža 99,97 g. Akc. št. 2013/58-2. 3. Svinčeni izstrelek za pračo vretenaste oblike, Völling IIb. Dol. 4,8 cm; teža 80,69 g. Akc. št. 2013/58-5. 4. Svinčeni izstrelek za pračo vretenaste oblike, Völling IIb. Dol. 4,3 cm; teža 81,07 g. Akc. št. 2013/58-3. 5. Svinčeni izstrelek za pračo vretenaste oblike, Völling IIb. Dol. 3,9 cm; teža 70,78 g. Akc. št. 2013/58-4. Figure 13. Ulaka. Lead slingshot (photo Đ. Todorović). Slika 13. Ulaka. Svinčeni izstrelki za pračo (foto Đ. Todorović). 30 2. 3. Dol. 5,3 cm. Inv. št. R 17319 (objava: Istenič 2005b, 207, t. 1:10). Bronasti gumb z enojno zanko. Pr. 1,4 cm. Inv. št. R 18453. Železni klin pravokotnega preseka; na zgornjem koncu luknja z vdetim obročem in ploščat gumbasti zaključek. Dol. 19,2 cm. Inv. št. R 18514. Bronasti obesek konjske opreme 3. vrste po Bishopu. Dol. 6,3 cm; šir. 5,2 cm. Inv. št. R 17311. Bronasti obesek konjske opreme 3. vrste po Bishopu, okrašen z drobnimi vrezi. Zgornja površina verjetno kositrena (?). Dol. 4,55 cm; šir. 2,7 cm. Inv. št. R 17314. Bronasti obesek konjske opreme 5. vrste po Bishopu. Dol. 3,5 cm; šir. 2,9 cm. Inv. št. R 18001. Bronasta dvokrilna pasna spona. Na stiku med krilcema ohranjena sled železnega trna. Ožgana. Dol. 3,5 cm. Inv. št. P 12752. Bronasti okov peltaste oblike z valjastima trnoma s kapičasto razširitvijo za zapenjanje. Ožgana. Dol. 3,5 cm. Inv. št. P 12754. Bronasti gumb z valjastima trnoma s kapičasto razširitvijo za zapenjanje. Ožgan. Pr. 2,5 cm. Inv. št. P 12756. Bronasti gumb z valjastim trnom s kapičasto razširitvijo za zapenjanje, okrašen s proiliranima koncentričnima krogoma in puncirano piko. Ožgan. Pr. 3.6 cm. Inv. št. P 12753. Bronasti dvojni gumb. Zgornji, večji gumb okrašen s punciranimi krožci, pikami in skupinami majhnih trikotnikov. Zgornji gumb pr. 3,3 cm, spodnji gumb pr. 2,7 cm. Inv. št. R 17310. Bronasti dvojni gumb. Zgornji gumb pr. 3,3 cm, spodnji gumb pr. 2,9 cm. Inv. št. R 17315. Bronasti krilati okov. Dol. 2,4 cm. Inv. št. R 17842. Odlomek (zgornji del) bronastega jermenskega zaključka amforaste oblike. Viš. 2,8 cm. Inv. št. R 17841. Figure 13. 1. Iron slingshot, spindle-like. Uninished product (?), with preserved “wings” of the casting seam, the tips are not completed. Length 5.4 cm; weight 109.95 g. Acc. No. 2013/58-1. 2. Iron slingshot, spindle-like. About a third of the object is missing (due to imperfect casting). Length 4.4 cm; weight 99.97 g. Acc. No. 2013/58-2. 3. Iron slingshot, spindle-like, Völling IIb. Length 4.8 cm; weight 80.69 g. Acc. No. 2013/58-5. 4 Iron slingshot, spindle-like, Völling IIb. Length 4.3 cm; weight 81.07 g. Acc. No. 2013/58-3. 5. Iron slingshot, spindle-like, Völling IIb. Length 3.9 cm; weight 70.78 g. Acc. No. 2013/58-4. Nadleški hrib Predmete hrani Narodni muzej Slovenije. Tabla 3. 15. Svinčeni izstrelek za pračo vretenaste oblike, Völling IIb. Dol. 4,55 cm; teža 87,67 g. Inv. št. R 18660 (objava: Laharnar 2011, 367). 16. Svinčeni izstrelek za pračo vretenaste oblike, Völling IIa. Dol. 3,8 cm; teža 96,09 g. Inv. št. R 18661 (objava: Laharnar 2011, 367). 17. Svinčeni izstrelek za pračo vretenaste oblike, Völling IIb . Konici potolčeni. Dol. 3,8 cm; teža 41,57 g. Inv. št. R 18662 (objava: Laharnar 2011, 367). 18. Železno šilo z zanko. Dol. 11,3 cm. Inv. št. R 18753. Nadleški hrib he objects are kept by the National Museum of Slovenia. Plate 3. 15. Iron slingshot, spindle-like, Völling IIb. Length 4.55 cm; weight 87.67 g. Inv. No. R 18660 (publication: Laharnar 2011, 367). 16. Iron slingshot, spindle-like, Völling IIa. Length 3.8 cm; weight 96.09 g. Inv. No. R 18661 (publication: Laharnar 2011, 367). 17. Iron slingshot, spindle-like, Völling IIb. he tips are hammered. Length 3.8 cm; weight 41.57 g. Inv. No. R 18662 (publication: Laharnar 2011, 367). 18. Iron awl with a loop. Length 11.3 cm. Inv. No. R 18753. Ambroževo gradišče near Slavina he objects are kept by the National Museum of Slovenia. Upon the publication of Laharnar 2011, 20 lead slingshot were known from the site (ig. 10; pl. 4: 1–3), another 6 have been recorded since (ig. 14: 1–6). Plate 3. 19. Bronze fragment of the hilt guard of a Mainz Type gladius. he underside is decorated with tiny punched semicircles, which stand out from the surface on the upper side. Length 4.7 cm. Inv. No. R 25152. 20. Bronze itting of lorica segmentata, three fastening holes, a duck-head shaped loop. Length 5.9 cm. Inv. No. R 25153. 21. Bronze fragment of a net-like (sword or dagger) scabbard itting. Length 1.88 cm. Inv. No. R 25157. 22. Bronze harness pendant, with the loop and a part of its iron pivot surviving. Length 7.9 cm. Inv. No. R 25146. Ambroževo gradišče pri Slavini Predmete hrani Narodni muzej Slovenije. Ob objavi članka Laharnar 2011 smo poznali z najdišča 20 svinčenih izstrelkov za pračo (sl. 10; t. 4: 1–3), pozneje smo dokumentirali še 6 izstrelkov (sl. 14: 1–6). Tabla 3. 19. Bronast odlomek branika ročaja meča (gladija) vrste Mainz. Na spodnji strani punciran okras majhnih polkrogov, ki na zgornji strani izstopajo iz površine. Dol. 4,7 cm. Inv. št. R 25152. 20. Bronasti zankasti okov sestavljenega oklepa (lorica segmentata), tri luknjice za pritrditev, zanka v obliki račje glavice. Dol. 5,9 cm. Inv. št. R 25153. 21. Bronasti odlomek mrežastega okova nožnice meča/bodala. Dol. 1,88 cm. Inv. št. R 25157. 22. Bronasti obesek konjske opreme, ohranjena zanka in del železne osti tečaja. Dol. 7,9 cm. Inv. št. R 25146. Tabla 4. 1. Svinčeni izstrelek za pračo, vretenaste oblike. Konica neizdelana, izrazita krilca livnega šiva, polizdelek. Dol. 5,4 cm; teža 90,11 g. Inv. št. R 17358. 2. Svinčeni izstrelek za pračo, vretenaste oblike, konica neizdelana, polizdelek. Dol. 5,4 cm. Teža 76,83 g. Inv. št. R 17359. 3. Sploščen svinčeni izstrelek za pračo, Völling IV. Dol. 5,8 cm; teža 108,75 g. Inv. št. R 25161. Slika 10. 20 svinčenih izstrelkov za pračo (objava: Laharnar 2011, 346– 347). Figure 14. Ambroževo gradišče. Lead slingshot (photo Đ. Todorović). Slika 14. Ambroževo gradišče. Svinčeni izstrelki za pračo (foto Đ. Todorović). Plate 4. 1. Iron slingshot, spindle-like. One tip not completed, pronounced “wings” of the casting seam, uninished product. Length 5.4 cm; weight 90.11 g. Inv. No. R 17358. 2. Iron slingshot, spindle-like, one tip not completed, uninished product. Length 5.4 cm. Weight 76.83 g. Inv. No. R 17359. 3. Flattened iron slingshot, Völling IV. Length 5.8 cm; weight 108.75 g. Inv. No. R 25161. Figure 10. 20 lead slingshot (publication: Laharnar 2011, 346–347). Figure 14. 1. Iron slingshot, spindle-like, Völling weight 82 g. Inv. No. R 26578. 2. Iron slingshot, spindle-like, Völling weight 76 g. Inv. No. R 26579. 3. Iron slingshot, spindle-like, Völling weight 76 g. Inv. No. R 26580. 4. Iron slingshot, spindle-like, Völling weight 74 g. Inv. No. R 26581. 5. Iron slingshot, spindle-like, Völling weight 82.53 g. Acc. No. 2013/59-1. 6. Iron slingshot, spindle-like, Völling weight 73.14 g. Acc. No. 2013/59-2. IIb. Length 4.8 cm; IIb. Length 4.5 cm; IIb. Length 4.2 cm; IIb. Length 4.1 cm; IIb. Length 4.4 cm; IIb. Length 4.1 cm; Slika 14. 1. Svinčeni izstrelek za pračo, vretenaste oblike, Dol. 4,8 cm; teža 82 g. Inv. št. R 26578. 2. Svinčeni izstrelek za pračo, vretenaste oblike, Dol. 4,5 cm; teža 76 g. Inv. št. R 26579. 3. Svinčeni izstrelek za pračo, vretenaste oblike, Dol. 4,2 cm; teža 76 g. Inv. št. R 26580. 4. Svinčeni izstrelek za pračo, vretenaste oblike, Dol. 4,1 cm; teža 74 g. Inv. št. R 26581. 5. Svinčeni izstrelek za pračo, vretenaste oblike, Dol. 4,4 cm; teža 82,53 g. Akc. št. 2013/59-1. 6. Svinčeni izstrelek za pračo, vretenaste oblike, Dol. 4,1 cm; teža 73,14 g. Akc. št. 2013/59-2. Völling IIb. Völling IIb. Völling IIb. Völling IIb. Völling IIb. Völling IIb. Gradišče na Čepni he objects are kept by the National Museum of Slovenia. Gradišče na Čepni Predmete hrani Narodni muzej Slovenije. Plate 4. 4. Iron (catapult) projectile (or a javelin?) with a tip, triangular in section. Length 13.5 cm; weight 78.41 g. Inv. No. R 1588. Tabla 4. 4. Železni izstrelek mehanskega orožja (ali kopje ?) s konico trikotnega preseka. Dol. 13,5 cm; teža 78,41 g. Inv. št. R 1588. 31 32 5. Lobed iron arrowhead, rhomboid in section, (a javelin?); the socket is made from a forged folded sheath; a fastening nail is preserved. Length 10.5 cm. Inv. No. R 1589. 6. Iron arrowhead with a deltoid-shaped blade, lattened rhomboid in section; the socket is made from a forged folded sheath. Length 8.5 cm. Inv. No. R 1590. 7. Bronze button and loop fastener with a double loop. Diameter 2.2 cm. Inv. No. P 19350. 8. Bronze amphora-shaped strap terminal. Length 5 cm. Inv. No. R 1660. 9. Bronze double button. Upper button diameter 1.7 cm, lower button diameter 1.4 cm. Inv. No. P 20554a. 10. Bronze double button. Upper button diameter 1.5 cm, lower button diameter 1 cm. Inv. No. P 20554b. 11. Bronze double button. Both buttons 2.2 cm in diameter. Inv. No. R 1688. 12. Bronze double button. Upper button diameter 1.2 cm, lower button diameter 1 cm. Inv. No. P 19988. 5. Železna ost rombičnega preseka s krilci (kopje ?); tul iz zapognjene razkovane pločevine, ohranjen pričvrstitveni žebelj. Dol. 10,5 cm. Inv. št. R 1589. 6. Železna puščična konica z listom deltaste oblike in sploščenim rombičnim presekom; tul iz zapognjene razkovane pločevine. Dol. 8,5 cm. Inv. št. R 1590. 7. Bronasti gumb z dvojnim ušescem. Pr. 2,2 cm. Inv. št. P 19350. 8. Bronasti jermenski zaključek amforaste oblike. Dol. 5 cm. Inv. št. R 1660. 9. Bronasti dvojni gumb. Pr. zgornjega gumba 1,7 cm, pr. spodnjega gumba 1,4 cm. Inv. št. P 20554a. 10. Bronasti dvojni gumb. Pr. zgornjega gumba 1,5 cm, pr. spodnjega gumba 1 cm. Inv. št. P 20554b. 11. Bronasti dvojni gumb. Pr. obeh gumbov 2,2 cm. Inv. št. R 1688. 12. Bronasti dvojni gumb. Zgornji gumb pr. 1,2 cm, spodnji gumb pr. 1 cm. Inv. št. P 19988. Gradišče above Knežak he objects are kept by the National Museum of Slovenia. Gradišče nad Knežakom Predmete hrani Narodni muzej Slovenije. Plate 4. 13. Belt buckle plate, made from a folded bronze sheath, with four holes for rivets; the holes are bordered with incised concentric circles. Length 4.4 cm. Inv. No. R 18120. 14. Bronze itting with two cylindrical tangs with an expanded cap-shaped fastener. Length 5.3 cm. Inv. No. R 17374. 15. Fragment of a rectangular bronze openwork belt-itting; the surviving part contains a hole. Length 6.4 cm. Inv. No. R 18652. 16. Bronze button and loop fastener with a single triangularshaped loop; an open bronze ring hangs from the loop. Length 3.2 cm. Inv. No. R 18653. Tabla 4. 13. Okov pasne spone, izdelan iz zapognjene bronaste pločevine s štirimi luknjicami za zakovice; okrog luknjic vrezani koncentrični krožci. Dol. 4,4 cm. Inv. št. R 18120. 14. Bronasti okov z dvema valjastima trnoma s kapičasto razširitvijo za zapenjanje. Dol. 5,3 cm. Inv. št. R 17374. 15. Odlomek pravokotnega bronastega pasnega okova, izdelanega v predrti tehniki; na ohranjenem koncu luknjica. Dol. 6,4 cm. Inv. št. R 18652. 16. Bronasti gumb z enojno zanko trikotne oblike; na zanko obešen nesklenjen bronasti obroček. Dol. 3,2 cm. Inv. št. R 18653. Kerin above Pivka he object is kept by the National Museum of Slovenia. Kerin nad Pivko Predmet hrani Narodni muzej Slovenije. Plate 4. 17. Fragment of a bronze propeller-stifener; decorated with punched circles and dots. Length 2.5 cm. Inv. No. R 18582. Tabla 4. 17. Odlomek bronastega krilatega okova; okrašen s punciranimi krožci in pikami. Dol. 2,5 cm. Inv. št. R 18582. Sv. Primož above Raduhova vas he objects are kept by the National Museum of Slovenia. Sv. Primož nad Raduhovo vasjo Predmete hrani Narodni muzej Slovenije. Figure 15. 1. Bronze propeller-stifener. Decorated with incised concentric circles in the middle and a series of dots along the edges. Each “wing” contains two holes. Length 4.6 cm. Inv. No. R 17278 (publication: Istenič 1997a, t. 2: 7; Plaum 2001b). 2. Bronze propeller-stifener with three fastening holes. he central part is decorated with two incised circles; globular terminals and incised decoration in the corners of the wings. Length 4.4 cm. Inv. No. R 17839 (publication: Plaum 2001b). 3. Oblong bronze belt-itting, decorated with wedge incisions. Two trapeze-shaped plates with a fastening hole. Length 7.5 cm. Inv. No. R 17277 (publication: Istenič 1997a, t. 2: 8; Plaum 2001b). 4. Bronze belt-itting, triangular shape, decorated with wedge incisions. Rivet holes in the corners. Length 7.1 cm. Inv. No. R 17295 (publication: Plaum 2001b). Slika 15. 1. Bronasti krilati pasni okov. Na sredini okrašen z vrezanimi koncentričnimi krogi in nizom pik ob robu. Na vsakem krilu dve luknjici. Dol. 4,6 cm. Inv. št. R 17278 (objava: Istenič 1997a, t. 2: 7; Plaum 2001b). 2. Bronasti krilati pasni okov s tremi luknjicami za pritrditev. Osrednji del okrašen z dvema vrezanima krožnicama; na vogalih krilc kroglasti zaključki in vrezan okras. Dol. 4,4 cm. Inv. št. R 17839 (objava: Plaum 2001b). 3. Podolgovat bronasti pasni okov, okrašen v tehniki klinastega vreza. Ploščici trapezaste oblike z luknjico za pritrditev. Dol. 7,5 cm. Inv. št. R 17277 (objava: Istenič 1997a, t. 2: 8; Plaum 2001b). 4. Bronasti okov pasne garniture, trikotne oblike, okrašen s klinastim vrezom. Na vogalih luknjice za zakovico. Dol. 7,1 cm. Inv. št. R 17295 (objava: Plaum 2001b). Figure 15. Sv. Primož above Raduhova vas. Beltittings. (ater Plaum 2001b; photo T. Lauko). Slika 15. Sv. Primož nad Raduhovo vasjo. Okovi pasne garniture (po Plaum 2001b; foto T. Lauko). Gradišče nad Gornjo Košano he objects are kept by the National Museum of Slovenia. Gradišče nad Gornjo Košano Predmeta hrani Narodni muzej Slovenije. Plate 4. 18. Bronze itting in the shape of a double trapeze. he underside has a bent tang, circular in section. Length 4.3 cm. Inv. No. R 17279. 19. Bronze double button. Upper button diameter 2.3 cm, lower button diameter 1.2 cm. Inv. No. R 18596. Tabla 4. 18. Bronasti okov v obliki dvojnega trapeza. Na hrbtni strani upognjen trn okroglega preseka. Dol. 4,3 cm. Inv. št. R 17279. 19. Bronasti dvojni gumb. Zgornji gumb pr. 2,3 cm, spodnji gumb pr. 1,2 cm. Inv. št. R 18596. Ahac he object is kept by the National Museum of Slovenia. Ahac Predmet hrani Narodni muzej Slovenije. Plate 4. 20. Damaged bronze button, decorated with an embossed circle and a punched dot, with a cylindrical tang with an expanded cap-like fastener. Diameter 3.05 cm. Inv. no. R 18599. Tabla 4. 20. Poškodovan bronasti gumb, okrašen s proilirano krožnico in puncirano piko ter valjastim trnom s kapičasto razširitvijo za zapenjanje. Pr. 3,05 cm. Inv. št. R 18599. Translation: Katarina Jerin Language editing: Terry Troy Jackson BIBLIOGRAPHY / LITERATURA ANSl 1975: Arheološka najdišča Slovenije. – Ljubljana. BISHOP, M. C. 1988, Cavalry equipment of the Roman army in the irst century A. D. – In/V: J. C. Coulston (ur./ed.), Military Equipment and the Identity of Roman Soldiers, Proceedings of the Fourth Roman Military Equipment Conference, BAR International Series 394, Oxford, 67–195. BISHOP, M. C. 2002, Lorica segmentata 1. A handbook of articulated Roman plate armour. – Journal of Roman Military Equipment Studies Monograph 1, Duns. BISHOP, M. C., COULSTON, J. C. N. 2006, Roman Military Equipment. From the Punic Wars to the Fall of Rome. – Oxford. BOŽIČ, D. 2011, Prazgodovinske najdbe s Tonovcovega gradu in železnodobna kultna mesta v Posočju / Prehistoric inds from Tonovcov grad and Iron Age cult places in the Posočje area. – 33 In/V: Z. Modrijan, T. Milavec, Poznoantična utrjena naselbina Tonovcov grad pri Kobaridu, Najdbe / Late Antique fortiied settlement Tonovcov grad near Kobarid, Finds, Opera Instituti Archaeologici Sloveniae 24, Ljubljana, 239–277. CHIABÀ, M. 2007, La romanizzazione tra Natisone e Isonzo: problemi e spunti per una rilessione. – In/V: M. Chiabà, P. Maggi, C. Magrini (eds./ur.), Le valli del Natisone e dell’ Isonzo tra Centroeuropa e Adriatico, Atti del convegno internazionale di studi, San Pietro al Natisone (UD) 15–16 settembre 2006, Studi e ricerche sulla Gallia Cisalpina 20, Trieste, 53–58. CHRISTIE, N. 1991, he Alps as a frontier (A. D. 168–774). – Journal of Roman Archaeology 4, 410–430. CIGLENEČKI, S. 1985, Potek alternativne ceste Siscija–Akvileja na prostoru zahodne Dolenjske in Notranjske v času 4. do 6. stoletja. Preliminarno poročilo o raziskovanjih Korinjskega hriba in rekognosciranjih zahodne Dolenjske. – Arheološki vestnik 36, 255–284 [summary in German / povzetek v nemščini]. CIGLENEČKI, S. 1990, K problemu datacije nastanka rimskodobnih višinskih utrdb v jugovzhodnoalpskem prostoru. – Šašlov zbornik, Arheološki vestnik 41, 147–176 [summary in German / povzetek v nemščini]. CONTRERAS RODRIGO, F., MÜLLER, R., VALLE, F., AMY BURNS, T. 2006, he Roman Military Settlement at Sanitja (123– 45 BC): An Approximation to its Historical Context. – Mayurqa. DEGRASSI, A. 1954, Il conine nord-orientale dell’Italia romana. Ricerche storico-topograiche. – Dissertationes Bernenses I/6, Bern. DEIMEL, M. 1987, Die Bronzekleinfunde vom Magdalensberg. – Kärntner Museumsschriften 71, Archäologische Forschungen zu den Grabungen auf dem Magdalensberg 9, Klagenfurt. DESCHLER-ERB, E. 1999, Ad arma! Römisches Militär des 1. Jahrhunderts n. Chr. in Augusta Raurica. – Forschungen in Augst 28, Augst. DESCHLER-ERB, E. 2007, Bemerkungen zu den Militaria von Kalkriese. – In/V: G. A. Lehmann, R. Wiegels (eds./ur.), Römische Präsenz und Herrschaft im Germanien der augusteischen Zeit, Abhandlungen der Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Göttingen, Phil.-Hist. Klasse 3/279, Göttingen, 75–88. DESCHLER-ERB, E., PETER, M., DESCHLER-ERB, S. 1991, Das frühkaiserzeitliche Militärlager in der Kaiseraugster Unterstadt. – Forschungen in Augst 12, Augst. DESCHMANN, C., HOCHSTETTER, F. von 1879, Prähistorische Ansiedlungen und Begräbnissstätten in Krain. – Denkschriften der matematisch- naturwissenschaftlichen Classe der kaiserlichen Akademie der Wissenschaften 42, 1–44. DEYBER, A. 1994, 213. Deux balles de fronde. – In/V: Vercingétorix et Alésia. Saint-Germain-en-Laye Musée des Antiquités nationales, 29 mars – 18 juillet 1994, Paris, 267–268. 34 DIZDAR, M., RADMAN-LIVAJA, I. 2004, Nalaz naoružanja iz Vrtne ulice u Vinkovcima kao prilog poznavanju rane romanizacije istočne Slavonije. – Prilozi Instituta za arheologiju u Zagrebu 21, 37–53 [summary in English / povzetek v angleščini]. DOBESCH, G. 1994, Zur Chronologie des Dakerkönigs Burebista. – In/V: Studien zu den Militärgrenzen Roms III, Vorträge des 13. Internationaler Limeskongress, Aalen 1983, Forschungen und Berichte zur Vor- und Frühgeschichte in Baden-Württemberg 20, Stuttgart, 308–315 FINGERLIN, G. 1986, Dangstetten I. Katalog der Funde (Fundstellen 1 bis 603). – Forschungen und Berichte zur Vor- und Frühgeschichte in Baden-Württemberg 22, Stuttgart. FINGERLIN, G. 1998, Dangstetten II. Katalog der Funde (Fundstellen 604–1358). – Forschungen und Berichte zur Vor- und Frühgeschichte in Baden-Württemberg 69, Stuttgart. FISCHER, T. 2012, Wafenweihungen und Tropaia im römischen Reich. – In/V: W. Sölder, A. Höck (eds./ur.), Wafen für die Götter, Krieger, Trophäen, Heiligtümer, Innsbruck, 206–214. FMRSl IV: A. Šemrov, Die Fundmünzen der römischen Zeit in Slowenien IV. – Berlin 1998. FMRSl V: A. Šemrov, Die Fundmünzen der römischen Zeit in Slowenien V. – Mainz am Rhein 2004. GABROVEC, S. 1975, Šmihel pod Nanosom. – In/V: ANSl 1975, 150–151. GASPARI, A. 2000, Ulaka. Prazgodovinska in rimska naselbina nad Starim trgom pri Ložu. – Unpublished Master’s thesis / Neobjavljena magistrska naloga, Oddelek za arheologijo, Filozofska fakulteta Univerze v Ljubljani. GASPARI, A. 2009, Some Iron Age and Early Roman inds from Stari grad above Unec (Notranjska, Slovenia). – In/V: G. Tiefengraber, B. Kavur, A. Gaspari (eds./ur.), Keltske študije II, Studies in Celtic Archaeology, Papers in honour of Mitja Guštin, Protohistoire Européenne 11, Montagnac, 315–329. GASPARI, A. 2010, “Apud horridas gentis ...”. Začetki rimskega mesta Colonia Iulia Emona / Beginnings of the Roman Town of Colonia Iulia Emona. – Ljubljana. GOLUBOVIĆ, S. 2008, Grobovi u obliku bunara sa nekropola Viminacijuma / Well graves in the Roman cemeteries at Viminacium. – Viminacium 2, Beograd. GUŠTIN, M. 1979, Notranjska. K začetkom železne dobe na severnem Jadranu / Zu den Anfängen der Eisenzeit an der nördlichen Adria. – Katalogi in monograije 17, Ljubljana. HARNECKER, J., FRANZIUS, G. 2008, Kalkriese 4. Katalog der römischen Funde vom Oberesch. Die Schnitte 1 bis 22. – Römisch-Germanische Forschungen 66, Mainz am Rhein. HARNECKER, J., TOLKSDORF-LIENEMANN, E. 2004, Kalkriese 2. Sondierungen in der Kalkrieser-Niewedder Senke. Archäologie und Bodenkunde. – Römisch-Germanische Forschungen 62, Mainz am Rhein. HOERNES, M. 1892, Bemerkungen über die neuen Funde von St. Michael. – Mittheilungen der Anthropologischen Gesellschaft in Wien 22, [7]–[11]. HORVAT, J. 1993, Svinčeni izstrelki za pračo na jugovzhodnoalpskem področju. – In/V: B. Lamut (ed./ur.), Ptujski arheološki zbornik ob 100-letnici muzeja in Muzejskega društva, Ptuj, 331– 340 [summary in English / povzetek v angleščini]. buch 2005, Wien, 77–87 [summary in German / povzetek v nemščini]. HORVAT, J. 1995, Notranjska na začetku rimske dobe: Parti pri Stari Sušici, Ambroževo gradišče in Baba pri Slavini. – Arheološki vestnik 46, 177–216 [summary in English / povzetek v angleščini]. ISTENIČ, J. 2005b, Brooches of the Alesia group in Slovenia / Fibule skupine Alesia v Sloveniji. – Arheološki vestnik 56, 187–212. HORVAT, J. 1997, Roman Republican weapons from Šmihel in Slovenia. – In/V: M. Feugère (ed./ur.), L’equipement militaire et l’ armament de la république (Ive-Ier s. avant J.-C.), Journal of Roman Military Equipement Studies 8, 105–120. HORVAT, J. 1999, Sledovi rimske zasedbe. – In/V: D. Božič et al., Zakladi tisočletij, Zgodovina Slovenije od neandertalcev do Slovanov, Ljubljana, 189–192. HORVAT, J. 2002, he Hoard of Roman Republican Weapons from Grad near Šmihel / Zaklad rimskega republikanskega orožja z Gradu pri Šmihelu pod Nanosom. – Arheološki vestnik 53, 117–192. HORVAT, J. 2005, Poselitev na Pivškem in ob zgornjem toku Reke od pozne bronaste dobe do pozne antike / Settlement in the Pivka Area and Along the Upper Course of the Reka River From the Late Bronze Age to the Late Antique Period. – In/V: A. Mihevc (ed./ur.), Kras, Voda in življenje v kamniti pokrajini / Water and Life in a Rocky Landscape, Ljubljana, 220–248. HORVAT, J., BAVDEK, A. 2009, Okra. Vrata med Sredozemljem in Srednjo Evropo / Ocra. he gateway between the Mediterranean and Central Europe. – Opera Instituti Archaeologici Sloveniae 17, Ljubljana. HVALEC, S., MASARYK, R., BADOVINAC, D., VOJAKOVIĆ, P., HRUSTEL, J., ŽERJAL, T., PORENTA, S., ČEŠAREK, D., FIRŠT, S., BEKLJANOV-ZIDANŠEK, I., PLESTENJAK, A., ZOROVIĆ, M. 2009, Utrip Tribune. Doživetja arheološkega vsakdana. – Ljubljana. ISTENIČ, J. 1997a, Radohova vas. Sv. Primož. – In/V: D. Svoljšak et al., Novo gradivo v Arheološkem oddelku Narodnega muzeja v Ljubljani (pridobljeno v letih od 1987 do 1993), Varstvo spomenikov 36/94–95, 251–252. ISTENIČ, J. 1997b, Unec. Stari grad (Hasberg). – In/V: D. Svoljšak et al., Novo gradivo v Arheološkem oddelku Narodnega muzeja v Ljubljani (pridobljeno v letih od 1987 do 1993), Varstvo spomenikov 36/94–95, 254. ISTENIČ, J. 1999, Poetovio, zahodna grobišča I. Grobne celote iz Deželnega muzeja Joanneuma v Gradcu / Poetovio, the western cemeteries I. Grave-Groups in the Landesmuseum Joanneum, Graz. – Katalogi in monograije 32, Ljubljana. ISTENIČ, J. 2000, A Roman late-republican gladius from the river Ljubljanica (Slovenia) / Rimski poznorepublikanski gladij iz Ljubljanice. – Arheološki vestnik 51, 171–182. ISTENIČ, J. 2003, Augustan sword-scabbards with net-like itments / Avgustejske nožnice mečev z mrežastimi okovi. – Arheološki vestnik 54, 271–279. ISTENIČ, J. 2005a, Evidence for a very late Republican siege at Grad near Reka in Western Slovenia. – “Archäologie der Schlachtfelder – Militaria aus Zerstörungshorizonten”, Carnuntum Jahr- ISTENIČ, J. 2006, Rimska doba. – In/V: T. Nabergoj (ed./ ur.), Stopinje v preteklost, Zakladi iz arheoloških zbirk Narodnega muzeja Slovenije, Ljubljana, 42–48 [= J. Istenič, he Roman Period. – In/V: T. Nabergoj (ed./ur.), Steps into the Past, Treasures from the archaeological collections of the National Museum of Slovenia, Ljubljana, 42–48]. ISTENIČ, J. 2009, Ljubljanica in rimska vojska. – In/V: P. Turk et al. (eds./ur.), Ljubljanica – kulturna dediščina reke, Ljubljana, 81–85 [= J. Istenič, he Ljubljanica and the Roman army. – In/V: P. Turk et al. (eds./ur.), Ljubljanica – a River and its Past, Ljubljana 2009, 86–91]. JAMES, S. 2004, Excavations at Dura-Europos 1928–1937. Final Report VII. he Arms and Armour and other Military Equipment. – London. JOHNSON, S. 1983, Late Roman fortiications. – London. KOROŠEC, P. 1982, Predjama konec 4. do sredine 5. stoletja. – Arheološki vestnik 33, (1983), 84–114 [summary in German / povzetek v nemščini]. KÜNZL, E. 1996, Gladiusdekorationen der frühen römischen Kaiserzeit: dynastische Legitimation, Victoria und Aurea Aetas. – Jahrbuch des Römisch-Germanischen Zentralmuseums Mainz 43, (1998), 383–474. LAHARNAR, B. 2009, he Žerovnišček Iron Age hillfort near Bločice in the Notranjska region / Železnodobno gradišče Žerovnišček pri Bločicah na Notranjskem. – Arheološki vestnik 60, 97–157. LAHARNAR, B. 2011, Roman lead slingshots (glandes plumbeae) in Slovenia / Rimski svinčeni izstrelki za pračo (glandes plumbeae) iz Slovenije. – Arheološki vestnik 62, 339–374. LAHARNAR, B. 2012, Notranjska med prazgodovino in antiko [he Notranjska region (SW Slovenia) between prehistory and antiquity]. – Unpublished Ph. D. thesis / Neobjavljena doktorska disertacija, Oddelek za arheologijo, Filozofska fakulteta Univerze v Ljubljani. LAHARNAR, B. 2013, he Roman stronghold at Nadleški hrib, Notranjska region / Rimska utrdba na Nadleškem hribu na Notranjskem. – Arheološki vestnik 64, 123–147. LUIK, M. 2002, Die Funde aus den römischen Lagern um Numantia im Römisch-Germanischen Zentralmuseum. – Kataloge Vor- und Frühgeschichtlicher Altertümer 31, Mainz. MACKENSEN, M. 1987, Frühkaiserzeitliche Kleinkastelle bei Nersingen und Burlaingen an der oberen Donau. – Münchner Beiträge zur Vor- und Frühgeschichte 41, München. MARTIN-KILCHER, S. 2011, Römer und gentes Alpinae im Konlikt – archäologische und historische Zeugnisse des 1. Jahrhunderts v. Chr. – In/V: G. Moosbauer, R. Wiegels (eds./ ur.), Fines imperii-imperium sine ine? Römische Okkupations- 35 und Grenzpolitik im frühen Principat. Beiträge zum Kongress “Fines imperii-imperium sine ine?” Osnabrück vom 14. bis 18. september 2009, Osnabrücker Forschungen zu Altertum und Antike-Rezeption 14, Rahden, 27–62. MAXFIELD, V. A. 2009, Where did they put the men? An enquiry into the accommodation of soldiers in Roman Egypt. – In/V: S. W. Hanson (ed./ur.), he Army and Frontiers of Rome, Papers ofered to David J. Breeze on the occasion of his sixty-ifth birthday and his retirement from Historic Scotland, Journal of Roman Archaeology, Supplementary series 74, Portsmouth, Rhode-Island, 63–82. MIŠKEC, A. 2009, he Augustan conquest of southeastern Alpine and western Pannonian areas: coins and hoards / Avgustejska zasedba jugovzhodnoalpskega prostora in zahodne Panonije: posamične in zakladne novčne najdbe. – Arheološki vestnik 60, 283–296. MÜLLER, M. 2002, Die römischen Buntmetallfunde von Haltern. – Bodenaltertümer Westfalens 37, Mainz. MÜLLNER, A. 1892, Die “Gradišča” in Krain. Das Gradišče von St. Michael bei Hrenovic. – Argo 1, 25–28, 41–50, 65–74, 81–88, 105–118. OLDSTEIN, J. 1976, Zur Ausrüstung römischer Auxiliareinheiten. – Bericht der Römisch-Germanischen Kommission 57, 51–284. PFLAUM, V. 2001a, Jermenski zaključki. – In/V: P. Bitenc, T. Kniic (eds./ur.), Od Rimljanov do Slovanov, Predmeti, Ljubljana, 21 (kat. št./cat. no. 39). PFLAUM, V. 2001b, Pasno okovje. – In/V: P. Bitenc, T. Kniic (eds./ur.), Od Rimljanov do Slovanov, Predmeti, Ljubljana, 22 (kat. št./cat. no. 45). PFLAUM, V. 2004, Poznorimski obrambni in vojaški sledovi 5. stoletja na ozemlju sedanje Slovenije. – Unpublished Ph. D. thesis / Neobjavljena doktorska disertacija, Oddelek za arheologijo, Filozofska fakulteta Univerze v Ljubljani. PLESNIČAR GEC, L. 2006, Forum. Katalog gradiva. – In/V: L. Plesničar Gec, Emonski forum / Emona forum. – Koper. POUX, M. 2008, L’empreinte du militaire tardo-républicain dans les faciès mobiliers de La Tène inale. – In/V: M. Poux (ed./ ur.), Sur les traces de César, Militaria tardo-républicains en contexte gaulois, Collection Bibracte 14, Glux-en-Glenne, 299–432. PRÖTTEL, Ph. M. 1996, Mediterrane Feinkeramikimporte des 2. bis. 7. Jahrhunderts n. Chr. im oberen Adriaraum und in Slowenien. – Kölner Studien zur Archäologie der römischen Provinzen 2, Espelkamp. RADMAN-LIVAJA, I. 2004, Militaria Sisciensia. Nalazi rimske vojne opreme iz Siska u fundusu Arheološkoga muzeja u Zagrebu / Finds of the Roman military equipment in Sisak in the holdings of the Archeological Museum in Zagreb. – Katalozi i monograije Arheološkoga muzeja u Zagrebu 1/1, Zagreb. 36 RAGETH, J. 2004, Frührömische Militaria aus dem Oberhalbstein GR – Belege für den Alpenfeldzug? – Jahrbuch der Schweizerischen Gesellschaft für Ur- und Frühgeschichte 87, 297–303. ROTH-RUBI, K. 2006, Dangstetten III. Das Tafelgeschirr aus dem Militärlager von Dangstetten. – Forschungen und Berichte zur Vor- und Frühgeschichte in Baden-Württemberg 103, Stuttgart. SARIA, B. 1935, Terenski rad Arheološkog seminara Univerze kralja Aleksandra I. u Ljubljani. – Jugoslovenski istoriski časopis 1–2, 744–746. SCHLEIERMACHER, M., 2000, Römisches Pferdegeschirr aus den Kastellen Saalburg, Zugmantel und Feldberg. – Saalburg Jahrbuch 50, 167–193. SCHWARZ, P.-A. 2002, Kastelen 4. Die Nordmauer und die Überreste der Innenbebauung der spätrömischen Befestigung auf Kastelen. – Forschungen in Augst 24, Augst. SLAPŠAK, B. 2003, O koncu prazgodovinskih skupnosti na Krasu / he end of prehistoric communities in the Karst region. – Arheološki vestnik 54, 243–257. SOMMER, M. 1984, Die Gürtel und Gürtelbeschläge des 4. und 5. Jahrhunderts im römischen Reich. – Bonner Hefte zur Vorgeschichte 22, Bonn. ŠAŠEL, J. 1971, Antični viri. – In/V: J. Šašel, P. Petru (eds./ur.), Claustra Alpium Iuliarum I, Fontes, Katalogi in monograije 5, Ljubljana, 17–45. ŠAŠEL, J. 1974, Okra. – Kronika, Časopis za slovensko krajevno zgodovino 22, 9–17. ŠAŠEL, J. 1975, Ulaka. – In/V: ANSl, 155. ŠAŠEL, J., PETRU, P. (eds./ur.) 1971, Claustra Alpium Iuliarum I. Fontes. – Katalogi in monograije 5, Ljubljana. ŠAŠEL KOS, M. 1997, he End of the Norican Kingdom and the Formation of the Provinces of Noricum and Panonia. – In/V: B. Djurić, I. Lazar (eds./ur.), Akten des IV. Internationalen Kolloquiums über Probleme des provinzialrömischen Kunstschafens / Akti IV. mednarodnega kolokvija o problemih rimske provincialne umetnosti, Celje, 8.–12. Mai / maj 1995, Situla 36, Ljubljana, 21–42. ŠAŠEL KOS, M. 2000, Caesar, Illyricum, and the hinterland of Aquileia. – In/V: G. Urso (ed./ur.), L’ultimo Cesare, Scritti, riforme, progetti, poteri, congiure, Atti del convegno internazionale, Cividale del Friuli, 16–18 settembre 1999, Centro ricerche e documentazione sull’antichità classica, Monograie 20, Roma, 277–304. ŠAŠEL KOS, M. 2005, Appian and Illyricum. – Situla 43, Ljubljana. TAGLIAFERRI, A. 1986, Coloni e legionari romani nel Friuli celtico. Una ricerca archeologica per la storia. 1: Testi. – Pordenone. THOMAS, M. D. 2003, Lorica segmentata 2. A Catalogue of Finds. – Journal of Roman Military Equipment Studies Monograph 2, Duns. TODD, M. 2007, Roman Militray Occupation at Hembury (Devon). – Britannia 38, 107–123. ULBERT, G. 1984, Cáceres el Viejo. Ein spätrepublikanisches Legionslager in Spanisch-Extremadura. – Madrider Beiträge 11, Mainz. UNZ, Ch., DESCHLER-ERB, E. 1997, Katalog der Militaria aus Vindonissa. Militärische Funde, Pferdegeschirr und Jochteile bis 1976. – Veröfentlichungen der Gesellschaft Pro Vindonissa 14, Brugg. URLEB, M. 1957, Gradišče v Slavini. – Arheološki vestnik 8, 150– 161 [summary in Italian / povzetek v italijanščini]. URLEB, M. 1974a, Križna gora pri Ložu. – Varstvo spomenikov 17–19/1, 217–230. URLEB, M. 1974b, Križna gora pri Ložu. Halštatska nekropola / Hallstattzeitliches Gräberfeld Križna gora. – Katalogi in monograije 11. VIČIČ, B. 2002, Zgodnjerimsko naselje pod Grajskim gričem v Ljubljani. Gornji trg 3. – Arheološki vestnik 53, 193–221 [summary in German / povzetek v nemščini]. VIDRIH PERKO, V. 2000, Amfore v Sloveniji. – Annales, Series historia et sociologia 10/2 (22), 421–456. VIDRIH PERKO, V., BAVDEK, A., LAZAR, I. 1998, Poznoantično najdišče Šmarata. – Arheološki vestnik 49, 271–283 [summary in English / povzetek v angleščini]. VÖLLING, T. 1990, Funditores in römischen Heer. – Saalburg Jahrbuch 45, 24–58. WINDISCHGRÄTZ, E. 1892, Eisenwafen aus St. Michael. – Mittheilungen der Anthropologischen Gesellschaft in Wien 22, [7] and igs. on p. / in sl. na str. [9]. ZACCARIA, C. 2003, Amministrazione e vita politica ad Aquileia dalle origini al III secolo d. C. – In/V: G. Cuscito (ed./ ur.) Aquileia dalle origini alla costituzione del ducato langobardo. Storia, amministrazione, società. – Antichità Altoadriatiche 54, 293–338. ZANIER, W. 2009, Römische Wafenfunde vom Alpenfeldzug 15 v. Chr. – In/V: H. Meller (ed./ur.), Schlachtfeldarchäologie / Battleield Archaeology 1, Tagungen des Landesmuseums für Vorgeschichte Halle 2, Halle, 89–97. 37 Plate 1. Grad near Šmihel pod Nanosom. 1–13 iron; 14–28 lead. Scale = 1 : 2 (drawing I. Murgelj). Tabla 1. Grad pri Šmihelu pod Nanosom. 1–13 železo; 14–28 svinec. M = 1 : 2 (risba I. Murgelj). 38 Plate 2. 1–3 Baba near Slavina; 4–13 Stari grad above Unec; 14–24 Žerovnišček near Bločice. 2–4, 8–9, 13 bronze; 5–7 brass; 16 bronze, brass and iron; 1, 10–12, 17–24 iron; 14–15 lead. Scale = 1 : 2 (drawing I. Murgelj). Tabla 2. 1–3 Baba pri Slavini; 4–13 Stari grad nad Uncem; 14–24 Žerovnišček pri Bločicah. 2–4, 8–9, 13 bron; 5–7 medenina; 16 bron, medenina in železo; 1, 10–12, 17–24 železo; 14–15 svinec. M = 1 : 2 (risba I. Murgelj). 39 Plate 3. 1–14 Ulaka above Stari trg pri Ložu; 15–18 Nadleški hrib; 19–22 Ambroževo gradišče near Slavina. 1–2, 4–14, 19–22 bronze; 3, 18 iron; 15–17 lead. Scale = 1 : 2 (drawing I. Murgelj). Tabla 3. 1–14 Ulaka nad Starim trgom pri Ložu; 15–18 Nadleški hrib; 19–22 Ambroževo gradišče pri Slavini. 1–2, 4–14, 19–22 bron; 3, 18 železo; 15–17 svinec. M = 1 : 2 (risba I. Murgelj). 40 Plate 4. 1–3 Ambroževo gradišče near Slavina; 4–12 Gradišče na Čepni; 13–16 Gradišče above Knežak; 17 Kerin above Pivka; 18–19 Gradišče nad Gornjo Košano; 20 Ahac. 7–20 bronze; 4–6 iron; 1–3 lead. Scale = 1 : 2 (drawing I. Murgelj). Tabla 4. 1–3 Ambroževo gradišče pri Slavini; 4–12 Gradišče na Čepni; 13–16 Gradišče nad Knežakom; 17 Kerin nad Pivko; 18–19 Gradišče nad Gornjo Košano; 20 Ahac. 7–20 bron; 4–6 železo; 1–3 svinec. M = 1 : 2 (risba I. Murgelj). 41 TRACES OF OCTAVIAN'S MILITARY ACTIVITIES AT GRADIŠČE IN CERKNO AND VRH GRADU NEAR PEČINE SLEDOVI OKTAVIJANOVEGA VOJAŠKEGA DELOVANJA NA GRADIŠČU V CERKNEM IN VRH GRADU PRI PEČINAH Janka Istenič, with a contribution by Alenka Miškec (the coin catalogue) Janka Istenič, s prispevkom Alenke Miškec (katalog novcev) Abstract Izvleček he paper describes and discusses the archaeological evidence from Gradišče in Cerkno and Vrh gradu near Pečine in the Posočje region (the Tolmin-Cerkno area, Western Slovenia). he Roman weapons (various projectiles) and military equipment recovered there indicate Roman military activities and closely resemble those from Grad near Reka and its environs that are probably connected with Octavian’s Illyrian wars (35–33 BC; Istenič 2005). V članku obravnavamo materialne sledove rimskega vojaškega delovanja na Gradišču v Cerknem in na Vrh gradu pri Pečinah v Posočju, na Tolminsko-Cerkljanskem. Tam najdeni primerki rimskega orožja (ohranjeni so različni izstrelki) in vojaške opreme so zelo podobni najdbam z Gradu pri Reki z okolico, za katere se je pokazalo (Istenič 2005a), da so zelo verjetno povezani z Okravijanovimi ilirskimi vojnami (35–33 pr. Kr.). Keywords: Gradišče in Cerkno, Vrh gradu near Pečine, Grad near Reka, battleields, Illyrian wars (35–33 BC), Late Republican weapons, military equipment from the end of the Republican period Ključne besede: Gradišče v Cerknem, Vrh gradu pri Pečinah, Grad pri Reki, sledovi vojaških spopadov, ilirske vojne (35–33 pr. Kr.), poznorepublikansko orožje, poznorepublikanska vojaška oprema Introduction Uvod In the 1980s and 1990s, several metal detector enthusiasts revealed two sites, Grad near Reka and its environs and Gradišče in Cerkno (the Posočje region, western Slovenia; ig. 1), which yielded a very similar range of inds consisting of Roman weapons, military equipment and coins. hese items probably represent traces of Roman military assaults. A comparative analysis of the inds indicates a date in the fourth decade BC. Considering the wider historical context, I believe the inds to be related to Octavian’s Illyrian wars (35– 33 BC). For the Romans and the safety of Italy, it was of crucial importance to pacify the hinterland of the Soča Valley before undertaking military campaigns towards the southeast. Another important piece of evidence in support of the above-proposed date of the Roman military action at Grad near Reka can be found in Appian’s Illyrike (Illyr. 16,47), where the Carni are mentioned among the tribes defeated during Octavian’s Illyrian wars. he Carni occupied areas in the northern Adriatic, including the Tolmin-Cerkno area, extending eastwards perhaps as far as the present-day Kranj.1 V 80-ih in 90-ih letih minulega stoletja je več oseb s pomočjo detektorjev kovin na Gradu pri Reki z okolico in na Gradišču v Cerknem (Posočje, zahodna Slovenija; sl. 1) odkrilo dve najdišči z zelo podobnim spektrom najdb rimskega orožja in vojaške opreme ter rimskega denarja. Ti predmeti so verjetno sledovi rimskih vojaških napadov. Primerjalna analiza arheoloških najdb je pokazala na njihovo datacijo v 4. desetletje pr. Kr. Glede na zgodovinske okoliščine smo sklepali, da so povezani z Oktavijanovimi ilirskimi vojnami (35–33 pr. Kr.). Osvojitev zaledja doline Soče je bila namreč pomembna z vidika varnosti Italije in je bila nujna pred vojaškimi posegi proti jugovzhodu. Za datacijo v 4. stoletje govori tudi Apijanova omemba Karnov med ljudstvi, ki jih je Oktavijan premagal v ilirskih vojnah (Illyr. 16,47). Karni so namreč, poleg številnih drugih severnojadranskih območij, najverjetneje poseljevali tudi Tolminsko in Cerkljansko ter na vzhodu morda tudi območje sedanjega Kranja.1 Archaeological remains of Roman military conlicts are extremely rare and therefore exceptional inds. his is also 1 Istenič 2005a. Sledovi vojaških spopadov v rimski dobi so redke in zato izjemne najdbe. Iz obdobja med koncem Cezarjevih galskih vojn (50 pr. Kr.) in začetkom srednjeavgustejske dobe 1 Istenič 2005a. 43 (15 pr. Kr.) pa je sploh le malo dobro datiranih najdišč z rimskimi vojaškimi najdbami.2 V članku iz leta 20053 je poudarek na najdiščnem sklopu s središčem na Gradu pri Reki, Gradišče v Cerknem pa je kot sočasno najdišče vključeno v diskusijo o dataciji. V tu objavljenem članku predstavljamo zgodnjerimske vojaške najde z Gradišča v Cerknem in z Vrh gradu pri Pečinah na Šentviški planoti (sl. 1), ki najverjetneje prav tako sodi v sklop rimskih vojaških posegov na začetku ilirskih vojn. V diskusiji vsa tri najdišča obravnavamo v luči v zadnjem desetletju objavljenih študij o rimskih osvajanjih alpskega območja. Gradišče v Cerknem Figure 1. Geographical position of the archaeological sites from the 2nd–1st centuries BC and other locations mentioned in the text (I. Murgelj). Legend: × battleield site, ◉ Roman town, ▫ Roman fort, ● other sites, locations; ₎₍ pass. Slika 1. Geografska lega v besedilu omenjenih krajev in najdišč 2. in 1. stoletju pr. Kr (izdelava I. Murgelj). Legenda: × najdišče s sledovi rimskega vojaškega napada; ◉ rimsko mesto; ▫ rimski vojaški tabor; ● druga najdišča oziroma kraji; ₎₍ prelaz. the case for the period spanning from the end of Caesar’s Gallic wars (50 BC) to the beginning of the Middle Augustan period (15 BC), for which very few reliably dated archaeological sites of a military character are known.2 In my 2005 article the emphasis was on the inds centred upon Grad near Reka, while the contemporary inds from Gradišče in Cerkno were included in the discussion on dating.3 he current contribution reports on the Early Roman military inds from Gradišče in Cerkno and Vrh gradu near Pečine on the plateau of the Šentviška planota (ig. 1), which most probably also testify to Roman military interventions at the beginning of the Illyrian wars. he two sites are discussed below together with Grad near Reka in the light of publications on Roman military metalwork from the end of the Republican period and studies on the Roman conquest of the Alps published after 2005. Gradišče in Cerkno Gradišče is an elongated hill running in a north-south direction and rising above the centre of the town of Cerkno (igs. 2–3). It has a level top just over 80 m in length and 2 44 3 Andagoste: Ocháran Larrondo, Unzueta Portilla 2002; Ocháran Larrondo, Unzueta Portilla 2006; Osuna: Sievers 1997; surroundings of Seville (probably Roman Munda): MartinKilcher 2011, 37, ig. 11. Istenič 2005a. Gradišče v Cerknem je podolgovata, približno v smeri sever–jug orientirana vzpetina neposredno nad središčem Cerkna (sl. 2–3). Na vrhu je malo manj kot 80 m dolga in največ okoli 15 m široka ravnica (sl. 7: A). Vzhodno in zahodno pobočje sta izrazito strma. Južno pobočje je manj strmo in se s številnimi terasami, na katerih so bile do pred desetletji njive, spušča k pribl. 130 m nižji dolini ob reki Cerknici v Cerknem. Vrhnja ravnica Gradišča se na severozahodu zoži v pribl. 15 m dolg greben (sl. 7: B). Temu proti severu sledi izrazita kopasta razširitev, ki strmo pada proti zahodu, severu in vzhodu (sl. 4; 5: C; 7: C). Najverjetneje gre za obrambni nasip, ki je branil najlažji dostop na Gradišče. Prek nasipa se namreč pot spusti na sedlo (sl. 5: D; 7: D), ki Gradišče loči od severno ležečega hribovitega sveta in na katerega z vzhoda vodi pot iz Cerkna. Z Gradišča, njegovih pobočij in vznožja je Arheološki oddelek Narodnega muzeja Slovenije v zadnjih 15 letih vpisal okoli 120 drobnih najdb, ki so jih tam izkopali nepooblaščeni iskalci s pomočjo detektorjev kovin. Večina teh predmetov je v več sklopih, zadnji leta 2014, prišla v zbirke Arheološkega oddelka Narodnega muzeja Slovenije. Med maloštevilnimi prazgodovinskimi predmeti so sulična ost (t. 1: 1) in obeski iz starejše železne dobe (t. 1: 2–5),4 iz mlajše železne dobe pa so za idrijsko skupino značilna ibula z nazaj obrnjeno živalsko glavo (t. 1: 6),5 kopača (t. 1: 7)6 in kosa (t. 1: 8).7 V 60. letih minulega stoletja so na južnem vznožju Gradišča (sl. 7: 2) našli depo 12 rimskih republikanskih srebrnikov, od katerih jih je Tolminski muzej pridobil devet, 2 3 4 5 6 7 Andagoste: Ocháran Larrondo, Unzueta Portilla 2002; Ocháran Larrondo, Unzueta Portilla 2006; Osuna: Sievers 1997; okolica Seville (verjetno antična Munda): Martin-Kilcher 2011, 37, sl. 11. Istenič 2005a. Pavlin 2014; Teßmann 2007; Teržan 1973, 684. Prim. Guštin 1991, 36, t. 6: 11, 9: 11, 13: 3, 24: 7. Prim. Guštin 1991, t. 45: 2. Prim. Guštin 1991, t. 1: 8, 45: 8. up to 15 m wide (ig. 7: A); the eastern and western slopes are very steep. he gentler southern slope, with many terraces that were cultivated until a few decades ago, descends some 130 m towards the valley of the River Cerknica. Towards the north-west the top narrows into a roughly 15 m long ridge (ig. 7: B). To the north of this is a dome-like widening that descends steeply towards the west, north and east (igs. 4; 5: C; 7: C). his widening is probably a rampart that defended the most easily accessible part of Gradišče. On the other side of this rampart the access path descends to a saddle (igs. 5: D; 7: D) separating Gradišče from the hills to the north, which is accessed by a track running from the east, from Cerkno. he top, slopes and foot of Gradišče are documented by the Archaeological Department at the National Museum of Slovenia as the site of roughly 120 small inds dug out over the last 15 years by unauthorised enthusiasts using metal detectors. hese objects reached the museum in several stages, the last in 2014. he few prehistoric inds consist of a spearhead (pl. 1: 1) and pendants from the Early Iron Age (pl. 1: 2–5),4 as well as a brooch with a reverted animal head typical of the Idrija group (pl. 1: 6),5 a hoe (pl. 1: 7)6 and a scythe (pl. 1: 8) from the Late Iron Age.7 In the 1960s, a hoard of 12 Roman Republican silver coins was found on the southern slope of Gradišče (ig. 7: 2); nine were acquired by the Tolmin Museum, while the remaining three are lost. he latest coin is a well-preserved denarius, minted in either 47 or 46 BC.8 On the eastern slope of Gradišče,9 a well-preserved coin (tetradrachma) of the Norican group came to light.10 trije pa so izgubljeni. Najmlajši novec je dobro ohranjen denarij, skovan leta 47 ali 46 pr. Kr.8 Other coins from the site include a Greek coin minted in southern Italy between 270 and 203 BC,11 and three Roman coins from the 2nd century BC,12 all but one well preserved and none halved. he site has yielded no later Roman coins. Na vzhodnem pobočju Gradišča9 je bila najdena zelo dobro ohranjena tetradrahma noriške skupine.10 Other Roman inds consist largely of weapons and other objects connected with the Roman army in the second half of the 1st century BC. Most are projectiles: iron tanged catapult-bolts with pyramidal heads (pls. 2: 15–32; 3: 1–11), iron socketed catapult-bolts with pyramidal heads (pl. 3: 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Pavlin 2014; Teßmann 2007; Teržan 1973, 684. Cf. Guštin 1991, 36, pls. 6: 11, 9: 11, 13: 3, 24: 7. Cf. Guštin 1991, pl. 45: 2. Cf. Guštin 1991, pls. 1: 8, 45: 8. FMRSl I, 2-2; for circumstances of the ind and the location see: Vuga 1970. The information on the indspot of the coin was provided by Jože Golja, for which I thank him sincerely. Catalogue of coins, Cerkno – Gradišče, No. 2. Catalogue of coins, Cerkno – Gradišče, No. 1. Catalogue of coins, Cerkno – Gradišče, Nos. 3–5. Z najdišča izvirajo še grški novec iz južne Italije, kovan med 270 in 203 pr. Kr.11 in trije rimski novci iz 2. stoletja pr. Kr.,12 vsi razen enega dobro ohranjeni in noben med njimi polovičen. Mlajšega rimskega denarja s tega najdišča ne poznamo. Med rimskimi najdbami prevladujejo orožje in drugi predmeti, ki kažejo na povezavo z rimsko vojsko v drugi polovici 1. stoletja pr. Kr. Največ je izstrelkov: katapultne konice s piramidalno konico in trnom (t. 2: 15–32; 3: 1–11), katapultne konice s piramidalno glavo in tulcem (t. 3: 12–16), trirobe puščične osti (t. 4: 1–7), enostavne asimetrične pu8 9 10 11 12 FMRSl I, 2-2; najdiščne okoliščine in lega najdišča: Vuga 1970. Za podatek o tem, kje je bil novec najden, se zahvaljujem najditelju Jožetu Golji. Katalog novcev, Cerkno – Gradišče, št. 2. Katalog novcev, Cerkno – Gradišče, št. 1. Katalog novcev, Cerkno – Gradišče, št. 3–5. Figure 2. Gradišče in Cerkno. View towards the southwest (photo J. Hanc). Slika 2. Gradišče v Cerknem. Pogled proti jugozahodu (foto J. Hanc). Figure 3. Gradišče in Cerkno. View towards the northwest (photo J. Hanc). Slika 3. Gradišče v Cerknem. Pogled proti severozahodu (foto J. Hanc). 45 ščične osti s trnom (t. 4: 8–25), puščični osti z zalustima (t. 3: 17, 18) ter puščična ost z eno zalustjo in tulcem (t. 3: 19). Zanimivo je, da svinčenih želodov s tega najdišča po nam dosegljivih podatkih ni. Z najdišča izvirajo tudi žebljički, s katerimi so bili okovani podplati vojaških obuval (t. 2: 5–14) ter prstan (t. 2: 4), zaponka skupine Aucissa (t. 2: 1) in ibuli skupine Jezerine (t. 2: 2, 3). Edini zanesljivo mlajši antični predmet z Gradišča v Cerknem je dvodelna samostrelna bronasta zaponka z železno peresovino iz 6. stoletja (sl. 8).13 Figure 4. Gradišče in Cerkno. View towards the south of the rampart that blocks access to the summit plateau of Gradišče from the north (photo J. Istenič). Slika 4. Gradišče v Cerknem. Pogled proti jugu na nasip, ki na severu zapira dostop k vrhnji ravnici Gradišča (foto J. Istenič). Figure 5. Gradišče in Cerkno. View towards the (north-)east onto the rampart (C) that blocks access from the saddle (D) and across a ridge (B) to the summit plateau (A) of Gradišče (photo J. Istenič). Slika 5. Gradišče v Cerknem. Pogled proti (severo) vzhodu na nasip (C), ki na severu zapira dostop s sedla (D) čez greben (B) na vrhnjo ravnico (A) Gradišča (foto J. Istenič). 46 12–16), tri-bladed tanged arrowheads with barbs (pl. 4: 1–7), simple tanged bodkins with asymmetrical heads (pl. 4: 8–25), two-bladed socketed arrowheads (pl. 3: 17, 18) and a single-bladed socketed arrowhead (pl. 3: 19). Interestingly, according to the available information, no lead slingshot has been recovered. he site has also yielded hobnails that studded Roman military footwear (pl. 2: 5–14), a inger-ring (pl. 2: 4), an Aucissa brooch (pl. 2: 1) and two Jezerine brooches (pl. 2: 2, 3). he only object from Gradišče in Cerkno that can be reliably dated to a later period is a two-piece bronze brooch with a long iron spring from the 6th century (ig. 8).13 he individual from whom the National Museum obtained the greatest number of inds was able to recall relatively precise locations within the site. Plotting his information onto a map of the site and its surroundings (ig. 7) revealed that all but one of the tanged catapult-bolts were found on the south-western slope of Gradišče, on a 13 Ivanišević, Kazanski, Mastykova 2006, 18–20. Jože Golja obtained the brooch from a collector from Škoja Loka, who found it with a metal detector ‘on the top of Gradišče, above the steep slope’. The National Museum of Slovenia also keeps a knee brooch (Inv. No. R 26616), reportedly from Gradišče at Cerkno, although the latter information is unreliable because the brooch came to the museum as part of the collection of A. Bešter, who obtained it from another collector. Najditelj, od katerega je Narodni muzej Slovenije prejel največ najdb, si je za številne predmete razmeroma dobro zapomnil, kje v okviru najdišča jih je našel. Iz vnosa njegovih najdiščnih podatkov na načrt najdišča z okolico (sl. 7) izhaja, da je vse katapultne izstrelke s trni, razen enega, našel na jugozahodnem pobočju Gradišča, na grebenu, ki leži prečno na pobočje (sl. 6: f; 7: f), pri čemer je bila gostota izstrelkov v nižje ležeči polovici tega območja večja. Druga izrazita koncentracija izstrelkov je bila na severnem, zahodnem in južnem pobočju obrambnega nasipa, ki je s severa zapiral dostop na plato na vrhu Gradišča (sl. 4; 5: C; 7: e). Tam je našel vse katapultne konice s tulastimi nastavki, enostavne osti s trni in asimetričnimi konicami in puščični osti z dvema zalustima (t. 3: 12–18; t. 4: 8–25) ter vse trirobe puščične osti, razen ene (sl. 7: 3); verjetno od tam izvira tudi sponka skupine Aucissa. Okovne žebljičke obuval je našel na zahodnem pobočju blizu vrhnjega platoja (sl. 7: g). Iskalec z detektorjem kovin ni pregledal najdišča v celoti. Izogibal se je na primer južnemu pobočju in drugim območjem, kjer so bile do pred par desetletji njive. Zato se nam zdi pomenljiva predvsem koncentracija izstrelkov pod skrajnim severozahodnim delom Gradišča (sl. 4; 5: C; 7: e); potrjuje namreč, da je bil tam obrambni nasip, ki je varoval najlažji pristop na vrhnji plato. Za območje na jugozahodnem pobočju, od koder izvirajo katapultni izstrelki s trni (sl. 6: f; 7: f), velja, da njegov severni in južni rob ne kažeta dejanske razširjenosti teh izstrelkov, saj proti severu in jugu niso iskali najdb. Zanimivo se zdi, da je v nižje ležečem (zahodnem) delu koncentracija izstrelkov bistveno večja kot v višje ležečem (vzhodnem) delu. Domnevamo, da so bili rimski stroji za izstreljevanje izstrelkov nameščeni na izrazitem grebenu zahodno od Gradišča (sl. 6: h). Skoraj vse rimske vojaške najdbe s tega najdišča imajo odlične primerjave med predmeti z Gradu pri Reki in iz 13 Ivanišević, Kazanski, Mastykova 2006, 18–20. Jože Golja je to ibulo dobil od zbiralca iz Škoje Loke, ki jo je našel z detektorjem kovin »na vrhu Gradišča v Cerknem, nad strmim pobočjem«. Vprašanje je, ali je z Gradišča v Cerknem kolenčasta ibula (inv. št. R 26616). V Arheološki oddelek Narodnega muzeja Slovenije je prišla kot del zbirke A. Beštra, ki predmeta ni našel sam, ampak ga je dobil – skupaj s podatki o najdišču – od drugega zbiralca. ridge running down the slope (igs. 6: f; 7: f). he density of bolts was greater in the lower half of this area. he second concentration of projectiles was observed on the northern, western and southern slopes of the rampart that blocked access to the summit plateau of Gradišče from the north (igs. 4; 5: C; 7: e). It consisted of all the socketed catapult-bolts, simple tanged bodkins with asymmetrical heads, two-bladed barbed arrowheads (pl. 3: 12–18; pl. 4: 8–25) and all but one of the tri-bladed arrowheads (ig. 7: 3); the Aucissa brooch was probably also found there. he hobnails were found on the western slope (ig. 7: g). his amateur with the metal-detector did not survey the whole site: for example, he avoided the southern slope and other areas that had previously been cultivated. With that in mind, the concentration of projectiles below the most northwestern part of Gradišče seems particularly important (igs. 4; 5: C; 7: e) – it conirms that it was the location of the rampart that defended the easiest access to the summit plateau. With regard to the area on the south-western slope that yielded the tanged catapult-bolts (igs. 6: f; 7: f), I believe that its northern and southern edges do not relect the actual distribution of these bolts, because the amateur searchers did not seek inds further to the north and south. What is interesting is that the lower-lying (western) part revealed a far greater concentration of bolts than the higher-lying (eastern) part. his suggests that the Roman catapults were positioned on the pronounced ridge west of Gradišče (ig. 6: h). Almost all the Roman military inds from this site have close parallels at Grad near Reka,14 with the exception of the twobladed socketed arrowheads (pl. 3: 17, 18) and the singlebladed socketed arrowhead (pl. 3: 19) discussed below (cf. Discussion), as well as the brooch on pl. 2: 1. he latter has a cast bow and a knobbed foot typical of Aucissa brooches. However, the head gradually widens from the bow, which is rare in Aucissa brooches but typical of Alesia brooches15 and possibly indicative of a (typologically) early example of the Aucissa brooch. Brooches of a similar form with V-shaped decoration on the head were found at Gradišče on Čepna,16 in the sanctuary at Este17 and in France,18 although none are from a dated context. he brooch from Gradišče in Cerkno is not made of brass, as is usual for Aucissa brooches,19 but of gunmetal (an alloy of copper, tin and zinc). Aucissa brooches are well represented in the fortress at Dangstetten, dated between 20/15 and 9/7 BC.20 he ratio between the Aucissa brooches and their forerunners, the Ale- okolice.14 To ne velja le za puščični osti z zalustima (t. 3: 17, 18) ter puščično ost z eno zalustjo in tulcem (t. 3: 19), predstavljene v pogl. Diskusija in za ibulo t. 2: 1. Ulit lok in tečaj ter značilno oblikovana noga z gumbom jo uvrščajo v skupino Aucissa. Vendar ibula nima jasno izoblikovane glave, ampak se enakomerno razširi iz loka. To je pri ibulah skupine Aucissa redkost, značilno pa je za ibule skupine Alezija15 in bi lahko nakazovalo na (tipološko) zgodnji primerek ibule skupine Aucissa. Podobno oblikovane ibule, ki imajo tudi podoben V-okras na glavi, so bile najdene na Gradišču na Čepni,16 v svetišču v Estah17 in v Franciji18 – nobena ni bila najdena v okoliščinah, ki bi omogočale ožjo datacijo. Fibula z Gradišča v Cerknem ni narejena iz medenine, kar je za ibule skupine Aucissa običajno,19 temveč iz t. i. rdeče litine, tj. zlitine bakra s kositrom in cinkom. Fibule skupine Aucissa so močno zastopane v legijskem taboru Dangstetten, datiranem med 20/15 in 9/7 pr. Kr.20 Razmerje med ibulami skupine Aucissa in njihovimi predhodnicami, ibulami skupine Alezija na tem najdišču, je 101 : 12. Fibule skupine Aucissa so torej v vojaških kontekstih najkasneje v srednjeavgustejski dobi že močno prevladovale nad ibulami skupine Alezija.21 Pojav zgodnjih ibul skupine Aucissa v sredini 40-ih let 1. st. pr. Kr. se zato ne zdi nemogoč. Seveda pa ni izključeno, da gre pri ibuli t. 2: 1 za mlajši rimski predmet, ki ni povezan s spopadom v času ilirskih vojn, vendar bi bil tak predmet zaenkrat na Gradišču v Cerknem osamljen. 14 15 16 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Cf. Istenič 2005a. Cf. Erice Lacabe 1995, Nos. 171, 177. Laharnar 2012, 163, pl. 13: 14. Meller 2002, pl. 45: 531. Feugère 1985, pl. 116: 1495. Istenič 2005b, 188. Roth-Rubi 2002; Roth-Rubi 2006, 103; Martin-Kilcher 2011, 44–45. Figure 6. Gradišče in Cerkno. View towards the southeast: on the slope to the let is a ridge that yielded tanged catapult-bolts (f), while the ridge to the right is presumably where the catapults were positioned (h) (photo J. Istenič). Slika 6. Gradišče v Cerknem. Pogled proti jugovzhodu: levo na pobočju Gradišča je viden greben, na katerem so našli katapultne konice s trni (f), desno pa greben, na katerem so bili verjetno nameščeni katapulti (h) (foto J. Istenič). 17 18 19 20 21 Prim. Istenič 2005a. Prim. Erice Lacabe 1995, št. 171, 177. Laharnar 2012, 163, t. 13: 14. Meller 2002, t. 45: 531. Feugère 1985, t. 116: 1495. Istenič 2005b, 204. Roth-Rubi 2002; Roth-Rubi 2006, 103; Martin-Kilcher 2011, 44–45. Istenič 2005b, 189, 190, op. 7 (k ibulam skupine Alezija, naštetim na navedenem mestu, je treba prišteti še ibulo Fingerlin 1986, 236: 2). 47 Figure 7. Plan of Gradišče in Cerkno. Marked on the plan are the prominent parts of the site mentioned in the text, the approximate location of the concentrations of inds and the locations of individual small inds (sources: basic topographic map 5000, digital elevation model 5 and ield measurements (rampart C, summit plateau A, two lower-lying terraces and locations of small inds); R. Klasinc). Slika 7. Načrt Gradišča v Cerknem. Označeni so značilni, v besedilu omenjeni deli najdišča, zgostitve (ali »območja zgostitev«) drobnih najdb ter znane lege posameznih najdb (viri: TTN 5000, DMV 5 in meritve na terenu (nasip C, ravnica A in dve nižje ležeči terasi, lege drobnih najdb); izdelava R. Klasinc). Legend / Legenda: A summit plateau of Gradišče / vrhnja ravnica Gradišča; B ridge in northern part of Gradišče / greben na severnem delu Gradišča; C rampart / obrambni nasip; D saddle / sedlo. Approximate indspots of objects / Približne lege najdišč predmetov: 1 coin, Catalogue of coins, Gradišče in Cerkno, No. 3 / novec, katalog novcev, Gradišče v Cerknem, št. 3; 2 hoard of Late Republican silver coins / zaklad poznorepublikanskih srebrnikov; 3 tri-lobed tanged arrowhead / triroba puščična ost; 4 triangular pendant pl. 1: 3 / trikotni obesek t. 1: 3; 5 Jezerine group brooch pl. 2: 2 / ibula skupine Jezerine t. 2: 2; 6 basket-shaped pendant pl. 1: 5 / košarasti obesek t. 1: 5; 7 triangular hollow pendant pl. 1: 2 or 4 / trikotni votli obesek t. 1: 2 ali 4; 8 iron hoe pl. 1: 7 / železna kopača t. 1: 7; 9 coin, Catalogue of coins, Gradišče in Cerkno, No. 1 / novec, katalog novcev, Gradišče v Cerknem, št. 1; 10 brooch with an animal head pl. 1: 6 / ibula z živalsko glavo t. 1: 6; 11 spearhead pl. 1: 1 / sulična ost t. 1: 1; 12 Jezerine group brooch pl. 2: 3 / ibula skupine Jezerine t. 2: 3; e area that revealed socketed catapultbolts, simple tanged bodkins with asymmetrical heads, two-bladed arrowheads and all but one tri-bladed tanged arrowhead (cf. pls. 3: 12–18; 4: 1–25; 5: 27, 28) / območje, kjer so bile najdene katapultne konice s tulastimi nastavki, enostavne osti s trni in asimetričnimi konicami, puščični osti z dvema zalustima in vse trirobe puščične osti, razen ene (prim. t. 3: 12–18; 4: 1–25; 5: 27, 28); f area that revealed tanged catapultbolts (high, low concentration; cf. pls. 2: 15–32; 3: 1–11) / območje, kjer so bili najdeni katapultni izstrelki s trni (gostejši, redkejši; cf. t. 2: 15–32; 3: 1–11); g area that revealed eight hobnails (cf. pl. 2: 5–14) / območje, kjer so našli osem okovnih žebljičkov obuval (prim. t. 2: 5–14). sia brooches, at Dangstetten is 101 : 12. his suggests that, by the Middle Augustan period at the latest, Aucissa brooches greatly outnumbered Alesia brooches in military contexts.21 he appearance of early Aucissa brooches in the mid-40s of the 1st century BC thus does not seem impossible. However, the possibility cannot be excluded that the brooch represents a Roman object of a later date and is thus not related to the conlict during the Illyrian wars, although it would be the only such a ind at Gradišče in Cerkno to date. he site also revealed two Jezerine brooches (Subgroup Demetz IIa): a brass one, repaired in Antiquity (pl. 2: 3), and a bronze one (pl. 2: 2). Jezerine brooches probably began to be produced sometime between the mid-1st century and 30 BC.22 Brooches of the small Jezerine I subgroup (with either a plain bow or a bow bearing speciic relief Tam sta bili najdeni tudi dve ibuli skupine Jezerine (različice Demetz IIa): medeninasta, ki so jo v antični dobi popravili (t. 2: 3), in bronasta (t. 2: 2). Fibule te skupine so začeli izdelovati verjetno med sredino 1. st. pr. Kr. in pred letom 30 pr. Kr.22 Primerke maloštevilčne podskupine Jezerine I (z gladkim lokom ali z lokom, ki ima poseben reliefni okras), za katero domnevamo, da je starejša od podskupine II, so izdelovali verjetno v severni Italiji. Temu v prid govorijo predvsem njihova razširjenost in razultati raziskav zlitin, ki so pokazali, da sta edini analizirani ibuli tega tipa iz čiste medenine, ki so jo v tistem času v Evropi znali izdelovati le Rimljani.23 Fibule Jezerine II, ki so lahko iz čiste medenine, brona ali zlitine bakra, kositra in cinka24 ter jih je ohranjenih občutno več, pa so razen v Italiji izdelovali v Galiji Narbonensis in zelo verjetno marsikje drugje.25 22 21 48 22 Istenič 2005b, 189, 190, note 7 (the list of Alesia brooches should also include the brooch published in Fingerlin 1986, 236: 2). Demetz 1999, 104–105; Istenič, Šmit 2007, 142, 145. 23 24 25 Demetz 1999, 104–105; Istenič, Šmit 2007, 142, 145. Istenič, Šmit 2007, 142, 145. Istenič, Šmit 2007, 145; Drnić 2013. Adam, Feugère 1982, 142–144, sl. 8; Istenič, Šmit 2007, 142, 145. decoration), presumed to be earlier than Subgroup II, were probably made in northern Italy. his is suggested primarily by their distribution and the results of metal analysis; the two analysed brooches were of pure brass, which at that time in Europe only the Romans were able to produce.23 he Jezerine II brooches, made either of pure brass, bronze or gunmetal24 and considerably more numerous, were made in Italy, but also in Gallia Narbonensis and very likely in many other regions as well.25 If we accept the date of the inds from Gradišče in Cerkno as the time of the Illyrian wars (35–33 BC), the two Jezerine II brooches from the site rank among the earliest examples. Presumably they were Roman products related to the presence of Roman soldiers at the site. he brooch on pl. 2: 3 would conirm this assumption, as it is made of brass. Fibuli z Gradišča v Cerknem sodita, če sprejmemo njuno datiranje v čas ilirskih vojn, med najstarejše primerke, zato se zdi verjetno, da sta rimska izdelka in da sta na najdišču povezana z rimskimi vojaki. V primeru ibule t. 2: 3 na to jasno kaže tudi dejstvo, da je iz medenine. In attempting to date the Roman inds from Gradišče in Cerkno, it is important to note that they do not include objects reliably datable to a time after the end of the 1st century BC.26 It thus seems reasonable to presume that all Roman military inds from the site are related to the Roman assault from the time of Octavian’s Illyrian wars. Za datiranje rimskih najdb z Gradišča v Cerknem je pomembno, da med njimi ni predmetov, ki bi jih lahko zanesljivo datirali po koncu 1. stoletja pr. Kr.26 Zato se zdi verjetno, da so vsi predmeti, povezani z rimsko vojsko, ostanki rimskega napada iz časa Oktavijanovih ilirskih vojn. Vrh gradu near Pečine Vrh gradu pri Pečinah he site of Vrh gradu is located near the village of Pečine on the south-western fringes of the plateau of Šentviška planota. It is a naturally well-protected and ridge-like rock promontory overlooking the valley of the River Idrijca and the ravine of its tributary, the Kostanjevica torrent (ig. 9). he ridge runs from the north-west to the south-east. It features man-made terraces and on its eastern side a rampart which defended the only relatively easy access to the site.27 Najdišče Vrh gradu pri vasi Pečine leži na jugozahodnem robu Šentviške planote. Obsega dobro naravno zavarovan, v smeri severozahod–jugovzhod ležeč skalni grebenast pomol nad dolino reke Idrijce in grapo njenega pritoka, hudourniškega potoka Kostanjevica (sl. 9). Na grebenu so vidne umetno narejene terase in na vzhodni strani, kjer je edini neizpostavljeni dostop na greben, obrambni nasip.27 he site has not been archaeologically excavated, but has yielded numerous metal objects collected by amateurs using a metal detector. hese inds are kept in the National Museum of Slovenia and the Tolmin Museum. he earliest ind is from the Late Bronze Age, but more numerous are inds from the Late Hallstatt period (the feet of three Certosa brooches, half of a hollow globular pendant, a hollow trapezoid pendant, part of a bronze clatter sceptre28) and the Middle-Late La Tène period. he latter include a silver votive plaque with a Venetic inscription (pl. 5: 2),29 a penan23 24 25 26 27 28 29 Istenič, Šmit 2007, 142, 145. Istenič, Šmit 2007, 145; Drnić 2013. Adam, Feugère 1982, 142–144, ig. 8; Istenič, Šmit 2007, 142, 145. The knee brooch kept in the National Museum of Slovenia under Inv. No. R 26616 cannot reliably be attributed to this site – cf. note 13. Laharnar, Mlinar 2011, 24; Laharnar, Mlinar 2014, 10. Laharnar, Mlinar 2011; Božič 1999, 75, 77, ig. 5: 1–2; unpublished inds kept in the National Museum of Slovenia and the Tolmin Museum. Božič 2011, 256–258, ig. 6.17: 2; Mlinar, Crevatin 2012; Laharnar, Mlinar 2014, 10–12, ig. 2. Figure 8. Brooch with a long spring and a reverted foot from Gradišče in Cerkno. XRF analyses have shown most of it to be cast of brass, while the spring axis and the remains of the coils are of iron, and the decorative coils on the spring of copper. Scale = 1 : 1 (drawing I. Murgelj). Slika 8. Samostrelna ibula z nazaj zavito nogo z Gradišča v Cerknem. XRF analize so pokazale, da je ulita iz medenine, os peresovine in ostanki navojev peresovine so železni, okrasni navoji na peresovini pa so bakreni. M = 1 : 1 (risba I. Murgelj). Arheoloških izkopavanj na najdišču ni bilo, vendar z njega izvirajo številni kovinski predmeti, ki so jih tam izkopali iskalci z detektorji kovin. Hranita jih Narodni muzej Slovenije in Tolminski muzej. Najstarejši predmet je iz pozne bronaste dobe, številnejše pa so najdbe iz mlajšega dela starejše železne dobe (noge treh certoških ibul, polovica votlega kroglastega obeska, votel trapezasti obesek, del bronaste kultne palice28) in iz srednje-poznolatenske dobe: srebrna daritvena ploščica z napisom v venetski pisavi (t. 5: 2),29 obročasta ibula vrste Posočje (t. 5: 5),30 ibula vrste Idrija pri Bači (t. 5: 4),31 železna ibula srednjelatenske sheme z bronastim okrasom na loku (t. 5: 3)32 in odlomek no26 27 28 29 30 31 32 Za kolenčasto ibulo (Narodni muzej Slovenije, inv. št. R 26616) je vprašanje, ali je res s tega najdišča – prim. op. 13. Laharnar, Mlinar 2011, 24; Laharnar, Mlinar 2014, 10. Laharnar, Mlinar 2011; Božič 1999, 75, 77, sl. 5: 1–2; neobjavljeni predmeti v Narodnem muzeju Slovenije in Tolminskem muzeju. Božič 2011, 256–258, sl. 6.17: 2; Mlinar, Crevatin 2012; Laharnar, Mlinar 2014, 10–12, sl. 2. Božič 1999, 75, sl. 5: 3; Guštin 1991, 40. Božič 2011, 253–255. Fibula enake vrste je bila najdena na Berlotovem robu, bronasti okras loka take ibule pa na Ulaki; najdiščne okoliščine 49 Figure 9. Vrh gradu near Pečine. View towards the southwest (photo J. Hanc). Slika 9. Vrh gradu pri Pečinah. Pogled proti jugozahodu (foto J. Hanc). nular brooch of the Posočje type (pl. 5: 5),30 a brooch of the Idrija pri Bači type (pl. 5: 4),31 an iron brooch of the Middle La Tène scheme with bronze decoration on the bow (pl. 5: 3)32 and fragments of a sword scabbard (pl. 5: 1).33 Most inds suggest that ritual oferings took place at the site in the Late Hallstatt and (Middle to) Late La Tène periods.34 Roman inds predominate. he Early Roman objects consist mostly of weapons: lead slingshot (pls. 6; 7: 1–9) and iron projectiles – a couple of two-bladed arrowheads (pl. 5: 22, 23) and two single-bladed tanged arrowheads (pl. 5: 24, 25). he Early Roman military equipment comprises a pickaxe (pl. 7: 10), a tent peg (pl. 7: 11) and tongs (pl. 7: 12), but also hobnails (pl. 5: 9–21), a belt buckle (pl. 5: 8), a brass Jezerine type brooch (pl. 5: 6) and possibly a brooch of the Gorica type (pl. 5: 7). Later Roman inds suggest that the site was also in use from the 1st to the 3rd centuries AD.35 he site has yielded many Late Roman objects. Most are weapons (javelin heads, tri-bladed tanged arrowheads, simple bodkins) and items of military or oicials’ attire (an iron two-piece brooch with a reverted foot, an iron bow 30 31 32 33 34 50 35 Božič 1999, 75, ig. 5: 3; Guštin 1991, 40. Božič 2011, 253–255. A ibula of the same type was found at Berlotov rob, while the bronze decoration of the bow of such a ibula came to light at Ulaka; the circumstances of the ind do not allow us to date the ibulae more precisely (Laharnar 2012, 145, 146). Cf. Gaspari 2009, Cat. Nos. 30a, c. Božič 2011, 265; Mlinar, Crevatin 2012; Laharnar, Mlinar 2014, 10. Cf. Božič 1999, ig. 5: 13, ig. 6. žnice meča (t. 5: 1).33 Večina omenjenih najdb nakazuje, da je bil na Vrh gradu v pozni halštatski in v (srednje-)pozno latenski dobi daritveni prostor (svetišče).34 Močno prevladujejo rimski predmeti. Med zgodnjerimskim je največ orožja: svinčeni želodi (t. 6; 7: 1–9) in železni izstrelki – dve dvokrilni puščični osti s tulcem (t. 5: 22, 23) ter dve asimetrični puščični osti s trnom in eno zalustjo (t. 5: 24, 25). K zgodnjerimski vojaški opremi sodita sekira/kopača (t. 7: 10) in šotorski klin (t. 7: 11) ter verjetno klešče (t. 7: 12), k noši pa poleg okovnih žebljičkov obuval (t. 5: 9–21) še pasna spona (t. 5: 8), ibula skupine Jezerine iz medenine (t. 5: 6) in morda ibula vrste Gorica (t. 5: 7). Mlajši rimski predmeti nakazujejo uporabo najdišča v 1.–3. st.35 Močno so zastopani poznorimski predmeti. Med njimi je največ orožja (osti kopij in trokrilne puščične osti s trnom ter enostavne osti s tulastim nastavkom) in delov vojaške oz. uradniške noše (železna dvodelna ibula z nazaj zavito nogo, železna ločna ibula s tulastim tečajem, gumb čebuličaste ibule, jermenski zaključek v obliki amfore, majhna nepravilno ovalna spona). Iz poznoantične dobe so še železna samostrelna ibula z navzgor zavitim zaključkom noge in tri miniaturna rala.36 33 34 35 36 ne omogočajo datiranja teh ibul (Laharnar 2012, 145, 146). Prim. Gaspari 2009, kat. št. 30a, c. Božič 2011, 265; Mlinar, Crevatin 2012; Laharnar, Mlinar 2014, 10. Prim. Božič 1999, sl. 5: 13, sl. 6. Neobjavljene najdbe iz Narodnega muzeja Slovenije in Tolminskega muzeja. brooch, a fragment of a crossbow brooch, an amphorashaped strap-end, a small buckle). Late Antiquity is represented by an iron brooch with a long spring and an upturned foot terminal, as well as three miniature ploughs.36 he site has revealed 14 coins, which ofer a similar picture as the other inds. Six coins date from the Late Republican period: four asses, the latest minted in 148 BC,37 and two well-preserved denarii minted in 45 and 36 BC respectively.38 hree coins were minted in the 1st and 2nd centuries AD (the earliest in AD 72),39 while ive date to the Late Roman period, all of Honorius, minted between 408 and 423.40 To sum up, the site predominantly revealed Early and Late Roman inds of a military character. he Late Roman inds will be discussed as part of a comprehensive publication of the site,41 while the Early Roman ones are presented below. he hobnails have close parallels at Grad near Reka42 and Gradišče in Cerkno (pl. 2: 5–14), while the lead slingshot has good matches at Grad near Reka and its environs.43 he two-bladed socketed arrowheads have parallels at Gradišče in Cerkno (pl. 3: 17–18) and the single-bladed tanged arrowheads at Grad near Reka.44 A comparison of these inds from Vrh gradu near Pečine with those from Grad near Reka and Gradišče in Cerkno suggest that they can be interpreted as traces of Roman military activity during Octavian’s Illyrian wars, which is corroborated by the numismatic evidence from Vrh gradu. Interestingly, Vrh gradu thus far lacks a number of projectile types recovered at both Grad near Reka and Gradišče in Cerkno: tri-bladed tanged arrowheads (pl. 4: 1–7; Istenič 2005a, ig. 3: 1–16), tanged catapult-bolts (pl. 3: 1–11; Istenič 2005a, ig. 4: 6–10), socketed catapult-bolts (pl. 3: 12–16; Istenič 2005a, ig. 4: 1–5) and simple bodkins with asymmetrical heads (pl. 4: 8–25; Istenič 2005a, ig. 3: 22–27). he tent peg (pl. 7: 11) is of a form in use from the Late Republican period to the 1st century AD.45 A close parallel for the dolabra (pl. 7: 10) with a triangularly widened middle part could not be found; the closest come from the Late Republican camp at Peña Redonda near Numantia46 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 Unpublished inds kept in the National Museum of Slovenia and the Tolmin Museum. Catalogue of coins, Pečine – Vrh gradu, Nos. 2–5. Catalogue of coins, Pečine – Vrh gradu, Nos. 1, 6. Catalogue of coins, Pečine – Vrh gradu, Nos. 7–9. Catalogue of coins, Pečine – Vrh gradu, Nos. 10–14. Istenič, Laharnar, Mlinar, in preparation. Istenič 2005a, ig. 5: 5–13. Istenič 2005a, ig. 4: 11–20. Istenič 2005a, ig. 3: 17–21. Bishop, Coulston 2006, 69–70, ig. 35: 7–8; Grote 2005, 60, ig. 83; Harnecker 1997, 19–20, pl. 36: 414, pl. 37: 418, 425, 431, 432; Harnecker, Mylo 2011, pl. 9: 2196, 2198; Rageth 2004, ig. 2: 7–9; Rageth 2011, ig. 4: 3–4. Bishop, Coulston 2006, 69–70, ig. 35: 1. Z najdišča je znanih 14 novcev, ki kažejo podobno sliko kot druge najdbe. Šest je poznorepublikanskih: štirje asi, med katerimi je bil najmlajši skovan 148 pr. Kr.,37 in dva dobro ohranjena denarija, skovana 45 oz. 36 pr. Kr.38 Iz prvega in drugega stoletja so trije novci (najstarejši iz leta 72),39 pet pa je poznorimskih – vsi so Honorijevi, skovani med letoma 408 in 423.40 Na najdišču so torej močno zastopane najdbe iz zgodnje in pozne rimske dobe, ki v obeh primerih kažejo na navzočnost rimske vojske. Poznorimske najdbe bomo obravnavali v okviru celostne objave najdišča,41 zgodnjerimske pa v nadaljevanju. Okovni žebljički imajo najbližje in odlične primerjave med najdbami z Gradu pri Reki42 in Gradišča v Cerknem (t. 2: 5–14), svinčeni želodi pa na Gradu pri Reki.43 Dvokrilni puščični osti s tulcem imata analogije na Gradišču v Cerknem (t. 3: 17–18), asimetrični osti s trnom in eno zalustjo pa na Gradu pri Reki.44 Primerjava teh predmetov z najdbami z Gradišča v Cerknem in z Gradu pri Reki z okolico nakazuje, da gre za sledove delovanja rimske vojske v času Oktavijanovih ilirskih vojn. Za to govorijo tudi novčne najdbe z Vrh gradu pri Pečinah. Zanimivo je, da doslej na Vrh gradu niso bili najdeni številni tipi izstrelkov, zastopani na Gradu pri Reki in Gradišču v Cerknem: trikrilne puščične konice (t. 4: 1–7; Istenič 2005a, sl. 3: 1–16), katapultne konice s trnom (t. 3: 1–11; Istenič 2005a, sl. 4: 6–10), katapultne konice s tulcem (t. 3: 12–16; Istenič 2005a, sl. 4: 1–5) ter asimetrične puščične osti s trnom (t. 4: 8–25; Istenič 2005a, sl. 3: 22–27). Šotorski klin t. 7: 11 pripada obliki, ki je bila v uporabi od pozne republike do vključno 1. stoletja.45 Dolabri (sekira/ teslo) t. 7: 10 z nakazano trikotno razširitvijo osrednjega dela nismo našli dobrih primerjav; še najbolj sta ji podobni sekira/koničast kramp iz poznorepublikanskega tabora Peña Redonda pri Numantiji46 in sekira/teslo z območja Crap Ses (Švica, kanton Graubünden).47 Podobne kovaške klešče kot t. 7: 12, so med najdbami iz poznoavgustejskega legijskega tabora v Halternu.48 K vojaški opremi sodi tudi pasna ali jermenska spona t. 5: 8, ki ima predavgustejske 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 Katalog novcev, Pečine – Vrh gradu, št. 2–5. Katalog novcev, Pečine – Vrh gradu, št. 1, 6. Katalog novcev, Pečine – Vrh gradu, št. 7–9. Katalog novcev, Pečine – Vrh gradu, št. 10–14. Istenič, Laharnar, Mlinar, v pripravi. Istenič 2005a, sl. 5: 5–13. Istenič 2005a, sl. 4: 11–20. Istenič 2005a, sl. 3: 17–21. Bishop, Coulston 2006, 69–70, sl. 35: 7–8; Grote 2005, 60, sl. 83; Harnecker 1997, 19–20, t. 36: 414, t. 37: 418, 425, 431, 432; Harnecker, Mylo 2011, t. 9: 2196, 2198; Rageth 2004, sl. 2: 7–9; Rageth 2011, sl. 4: 3–4. Bishop, Coulston 2006, 69–70, sl. 35: 1. Rageth 2004, sl. 4: 13; Rageth 2011, sl. 2: 1. Harnecker 1997, 11, t. 20: 208. 51 and from the Crap Ses area (Switzerland, Graubünden canton).47 Similar blacksmith tongs to those on pl. 7: 12 were found in the Late Augustan fortress at Haltern.48 Also forming part of the military equipment is the belt or strap buckle (pl. 5: 8) with pre-Augustan and later parallels.49 he cited parallels and the absence of Early Principate objects of a military character suggest that these objects are contemporaneous with other Roman military inds from the time of the Illyrian wars on the site. he same could be said of the brass brooch of the Jezerine IIb subgroup (pl. 5: 6; cf. chapter on Gradišče in Cerkno) and the iron brooch of the Gorica I subgroup (pl. 5: 7).50 Discussion Grad near Reka, Gradišče in Cerkno and Vrh gradu near Pečine are poorly accessible and naturally well-protected locations. Gradišče in Cerkno and Vrh gradu near Pečine are additionally fortiied by a rampart in places where access would be easier, while at Grad near Reka this was not necessary because of the natural protection it enjoys. heir summit plateaus are long and narrow and unsuitable for habitation, which leads us to see them as sites dedicated to the cult practices of the pre-Roman population that lived in as yet unknown settlements in the vicinity. Small inds corroborate such an interpretation for Vrh gradu near Pečine.51 hese sites were probably of great importance for the identity of the pre-Roman population and were also well-protected against attackers and thus perhaps became (the central and possibly last) points defended by the locals. An important element for dating the military conlicts at these sites is numismatic evidence. he latest coins from the 1st century BC are a well-preserved denarius minted in 47/46 BC from Gradišče in Cerkno,52 a well-preserved denarius minted in 36 BC from Vrh gradu near Pečine53 and an excellently preserved denarius minted in 56 BC from Grad near Reka.54 After these there is a gap until the coins of Vespasian.55 Another important element in dating the three Posočje sites (Gradišče in Cerkno, Vrh gradu near Pečine and Grad near Reka) is the site at Andagoste in northern Spain, which boasts a strategic location between the Bay of Biscay and the valley of the River Ebro. Traces of conlict between the Romans and the local population were 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 52 55 Rageth 2004, ig. 4: 13; Rageth 2011, ig. 2: 1. Harnecker 1997, 11, pl. 20: 208. Poux 2008, 373–374, ig. 51; Müller 2002, 56, pl. 66; Harnekker, Mylo 2011, 6, pl. 9: 6164–2169. Demetz 1999, 106–109. Laharnar, Mlinar 2011; Mlinar, Crevatin 2012, 291. FMRSl I 2/2-9; cf. note 8. FMRSl IV 7-2; cf. Catalogue of coins, Vrh gradu near Pečine, No. 6. FMRSl III 4-1; cf. Catalogue of coins, Grad near Reka, No. 2. Cf. Catalogue of coins. in mlajše primerjave.49 Sočasnost teh predmetov z rimskimi vojaškimi najdbami iz časa ilirskih vojn se zdi glede na navedene primerjave in zaradi odsotnosti zgodnjecesarskih predmetov vojaškega značaja na najdišču verjetna. Enako velja za medeninasto ibulo podskupine Jezerine IIb (t. 5: 6; prim pogl. Gradišče v Cerknem) in za železno ibulo podskupine Gorica I (t. 5: 7).50 Diskusija Vsa tri najdišča ležijo na težko dostopnih in naravno dobro zavarovanih legah, ki so – razen na Gradu pri Reki, kjer to zaradi naravno zavarovanega dostopa ni bilo potrebno – na mestu, kjer bi bil sicer dostop najlažji, dodatno utrjena z obrambnim nasipom. Njihovi vrhnji platoji so ozki in dolgi ter se ne zdijo primerni za naselbino, zato domnevamo, da so bili namenjeni kultnim obredom predrimskih prebivalcev, ki so živeli v – zaenkrat še neugotovljenih – naseljih v bližini. Za Vrh gradu pri Pečinah tudi drobne najdbe kažejo, da gre za predrimsko kultno mesto.51 Domnevamo, da so bila ta najdišča pomembna za identiteto predrimskih prebivalcev, obenem pa so bila razmeroma dobro zavarovana pred napadalci, zato so bila (osrednje in morda tudi zadnje) točke, ki so jih domačini branili. Pomemben element za datacijo obravnavanih prizorišč vojaških spopadov so tam najdeni novci. Najmlajši novci iz 1. stoletja pr. Kr. so namreč dobro ohranjen denarij, skovan 47/46 pr. Kr., z Gradišča v Cerknem,52 dobro ohranjen denarij, skovan 36 pr. Kr. z Vrh gradu pri Pečinah,53 in zelo dobro ohranjen denarij, skovan 56 pr. Kr. z Gradu pri Reki;54 naslednji mlajši denar s teh najdišč je šele Vespazijanov.55 Za datacijo obravnavanih najdišč je bistveno najdišče Andagoste v severni Španiji, ki ima strateško lego na prehodu sever–jug med biskajsko obalo in dolino reke Ebro. Med letoma 1998 in 2003 so tam raziskovali ostanke spopada med Rimljani in domačini ter odkrili številne drobne najdbe, ki jih lahko povežejo z rimsko vojsko. Glede na denar s tega najdišča je spopad datiran v konec 5. ali v 4. desetletje pr. Kr.56 Med najdbami iz Andagoste ima pet tipov rimskega orožja in vojaške opreme z obravnavanih najdišč odlične analogije. To so okovni žebljički vojaških čevljev (našli so 681 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 Poux 2008, 373–374, sl. 51; Müller 2002, 56, t. 66; Harnecker, Mylo 2011, 6, t. 9: 6164–2169. Demetz 1999, 106–109. Laharnar, Mlinar 2011; Mlinar, Crevatin 2012, 291. FMRSl I 2/2-9; prim. op. 8. FMRSl IV 7-2; prim. katalog novcev, Vrh gradu pri Pečinah, št. 6. FMRSl III 4-1; prim. katalog novcev, Grad pri Reki, št. 2. Prim. katalog novcev. Ocháran Larrondo, Unzueta Portilla 2002; Ocháran Larrondo, Unzueta Portilla 2006; Ocháran Larrondo 2006. investigated there between 1998 and 2003 and comprise numerous small inds relating to the Roman army. Based on the numismatic evidence, the conlict was dated to the end of the ifth or the fourth decade BC.56 he inds from Andagoste include ive types of Roman weapons and military equipment with excellent parallels at the three Posočje sites. hese inds are hobnails of military footwear (681 pieces found), tanged catapultbolts with a pyramidal head, socketed catapult-bolts with a pyramidal head, lead slingshot (114 pieces found) and Alesia type brooches (four pieces mentioned).57 here are also tri-bladed arrowheads, of which only one has been published, complete with a drawing although without information as to its state of preservation,58 making it of lesser value for comparison. he tanged catapult-bolts, the hobnails with an embossed cross and four dots on the underside, the lead slingshot and the Alesia type brooches also have close matches at the Septimer Pass, where a Roman military camp (2311 m a.s.l.) was located, and at sites in the Crap Ses Gorge (Switzerland, Graubünden canton).59 he pass and the gorge lie along an important route leading from Italy (from the colony at Como) across the Alps (the Septimer Pass) to Chur, across the area of Lakes Wallensee and Zürichersee (Switzerland) to the upper reaches of the Rhine, where a fortress at Dangstetten was established around 20 BC.60 Jürg Rageth and Werner Zanier, who investigated the sites at the Septimer Pass and in the Crap Ses Gorge, dated them to the time of the military campaigns of Tiberius and Drusus in 15 BC, when the Romans were conquering the central Alps and as far as the upper reaches of the Danube.61 heir dating, however, was not based on archaeological evidence, but rather on ancient written sources. By contrast, Stefanie Martin-Kilcher62 argues – in my opinion convincingly – that the Roman conquest of the Alpine passes was a gradual endeavour, lasting roughly from 40 to 7/6 BC, when a inal victory over the Alpine tribes was celebrated with the erection of the Tropaeum Alpium at La Tourbie above Monaco. he Roman conquest of the 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 Ocháran Larrondo, Unzueta Portilla 2002; Ocháran Larrondo, Unzueta Portilla 2006; Ocháran Larrondo 2006. Ocháran Larrondo, Unzueta Portilla 2002, ig. 2: 1–7, 10–12; Ocháran Larrondo, Unzueta Portilla 2006, 475–476, 483– 484, ig. 121: 1–4, 6, 7–8, 10–12. For the Alesia type brooches from Grad near Reka see Istenič 2005b, pl. 1: 1, 8, 11. Ocháran Larrondo, Unzueta Portilla 2002, ig. 2: 6. Rageth 2004, igs. 1, 3, ig. 4: 5, 8–11; Rageth 2005, ig. 2: 4–6, 9–14, 16; ig. 3: 2–14; Rageth 2011, ig. 1: 1–13, 15–22, 24); Rageth 2009; Zanier 2009a; Zanier 2009c, 93–94. Zanier 2006, 26–31, app. 1; Zanier 2009a. Rageth 2004; Rageth 2005; Rageth 2009; Rageth 2011; Zanier 2009a: presumes that the camp at the Septimer Pass was established in 16 BC and controlled the traic across the pass for the following 30 years. Martin-Kilcher 2011. primerkov), katapultne konice s piramidalno konico in trnastim nastavkom, katapultne konice s piramidalno konico in tulastim nastavkom, svinčeni želodi (114 primerkov) in ibule skupine Alezija (omenjajo štiri primerke).57 Tu so bile najdene tudi trikrilne puščične konice, vendar je z risbo objavljena le ena. Ker ni jasno, kako dobro je ohranjena,58 jo je težko primerjati s puščičnimi konicami z obravnavanih najdišč. Katapultne konice s trnastim nastavkom, okovni žebljički s križem in štirimi bunčicami na spodnji strani, svinčeni želodi in sponke skupine Alezija imajo dobre analogije tudi med najdbami z najdišč na območju prelaza Septimer, kjer je bil rimski vojaški tabor (2311 m nm. v.) in tesni Crap Ses (Švica, kanton Graubünden).59 Prelaz in tesen ležita ob pomembni poti iz Italije (izhodišče je bila kolonija v Comu) čez Alpe (prelaz Septimer) v Chur, čez območje ob jezeru Wallensee in Zürichersee (v Švici) do zgornjega Rena, kjer je bil okoli 20 pr. Kr. zgrajen legijski tabor v Dangstettnu.60 Jürg Rageth in Werner Zanier, ki sta ta najdišča raziskovala, sta jih datirala v čas Tiberijevega in Druzovega vojaškega pohoda čez osrednje Alpe leta 15 pr. Kr., ko so Rimljani osvojili območje do zgornjega toka Donave.61 Vendar pri tem nista izhajala iz primerjalne analize drobnih najdb, ampak iz povezave s pisnimi viri. Nasprotno je Stefanie Martin-Kilcher62 po našem mnenju prepričljivo pokazala, da so Rimljani alpske prelaze osvajali počasi, med okrog 40 in 7/6 pr. Kr., ko so dokončno zmago nad alpskimi ljudstvi proslavili s postavitvijo Tropaeum Alpium v kraju La Tourbie nad Monakom. Rimsko osvajanje Alp je bilo sestavljeno iz številnih vojaških pohodov iz Italije na sever. Nasprotniki Rimljanov so bile majhne skupnosti (gentes Alpinae), ki so nadzorovale posamezne alpske prelaze. Vojaški pohod leta 15 pr. Kr. je v virih najbolj v ospredju, ker je bil deležen največje propagande. Glavna najdišča, ki izpričujejo rimsko vojaško osvajanje Alp pred letom 15 pr. Kr., so poleg prelaza Septimer in tesni Crap Ses še stolpi ob Wallenseeju.63 Vendar je treba opozoriti, da se je Martin-Kilcherjeva pri datiranju najdb z območja prelaza Septimer in tesni Crap 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 Ocháran Larrondo, Unzueta Portilla 2002, sl. 2: 1–7, 10–12; Ocháran Larrondo, Unzueta Portilla 2006, 475–476, 483– 484, sl. 121: 1–4, 6, 7–8, 10–12. Za ibule skupine Alezija z Gradu pri Reki glej Istenič 2005b, t. 1: 1, 8, 11. Ocháran Larrondo, Unzueta Portilla 2002, sl. 2: 6. Rageth 2004, sl. 1, 3, sl. 4: 5, 8–11; Rageth 2005, sl. 2: 4–6, 9–14, 16; sl. 3: 2–14; Rageth 2011, sl. 1: 1–13, 15–22, 24); Rageth 2009; Zanier 2009a; Zanier 2009c, 93–94. Zanier 2006, 26–31, priloga 1; Zanier 2009a. Rageth 2004; Rageth 2005; Rageth 2009; Rageth 2011; Zanier 2009a: domneva, da so tabor na prelazu Septimer postavili leta 16 pr. Kr. in da je 30 let nadzoroval promet čez prelaz. Martin-Kilcher 2011. Martin-Kilcher 2011; podrobno o stolpih ob Wallenseeju in njihovi geografski legi: Zanier 2006, 102–119. 53 Alps was achieved through a series of military campaigns starting in Italy and moving northwards. he Romans’ opponents were the small communities (gentes Alpinae) who controlled the Alpine passes. he military campaign in 15 BC features most often in ancient literary sources, because it was the subject of greatest propaganda eforts. he main sites ofering evidence of the Roman conquest of the Alps prior to 15 BC are the Septimer Pass, the Crap Ses Gorge and the watchtowers at Lake Wallensee.63 It should be noted that to a considerable extent MartinKilcher bases her dating of the camp at the Septimer Pass and the sites in the Crap Ses Gorge64 on a comparison with the inds from Grad near Reka and their dating at the time of Octavian’s Illyrians wars.65 In the case of Gradišče in Cerkno and Vrh gradu near Pečine, citing the Swiss parallels and their date as put forward by Martin Kilcher would thus represent a circular argument. he Roman military activities along the route from Italy across the Septimer Pass and the Crap Ses Gorge began in the fourth decade BC and most probably continued at a later time, possibly in 15 BC.66 As for the watchtowers at Lake Wallensee, they yielded inds that include tri-bladed tanged arrowheads of the Zanier Ia type67 such as were also found at Grad near Reka68 and Gradišče in Cerkno (pl. 4: 1–7), and tanged pila with single-barbs, similar to the ones from Grad near Reka69 (ig. 10). Martin-Kilcher presumes that the watchtowers were constructed around 30 BC and abandoned soon after the military campaign across the Alps in 16/15 BC.70 She also suggests that part of the weapons from Döttenbichl near Oberammergau, a site of ritual character (Brandopferplatz) located in the vicinity of the main route from northern Italy across the Reschen Pass towards the upper reaches of the Danube, dates to the pre- or Early Augustan period.71 Werner Zanier connects this site to the Roman campaign across the Alps in 15 BC.72 he sites of the military conlicts from western Slovenia and Döttenbichl have in common tri-bladed arrowheads of the Zanier Ia type, socketed catapult-bolts and hobnails with a characteristic pattern of a cross and four dots on the underside;73 the latter clearly show that part of the Roman 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 54 Martin-Kilcher 2011; for more details on the watchtowers at Lake Wallensee and their geographic locations see: Zanier 2006, 102–119. Martin-Kilcher 2011, 41–43. Istenič 2005a. Martin-Kilcher 2011, 45–50. Zanier 1988. Istenič 2005a, ig. 3: 1–16. Istenič 2005a, ig. 3: 28–29. Martin-Kilcher 2011, 45–50, ig. 20aa. Martin-Kilcher 2011, 50–52. Zanier 2009b; Zanier 2009c, 91–92. Zanier 2009b, 270–272, 276, 277, Cat. Nos. 3.7.9–3.7.11; Zanier 2009c, 91, ig. 3: 1–6; Zanier 1997, ig. 1.24: 2, 6–8. The published inds from Döttenbichl include a socketed arrowhead with a single barb (Zanier 2006, ig. 1.24: 4) that is similar to Ses64 močno oprla prav na gradivo z Gradu pri Reki in neposredne okolice ter na našo datacijo teh najdb v čas Oktavijanovih ilirskih vojn.65 V zvezi z najdišči iz zahodne Slovenije bi torej sklicevanje na najdbe z območja prelaza Septimer in tesni Crap Ses ter njihovo datacijo v 4. desetletje pr. Kr. pomenilo »sklepanje v krogu«. Rimske vojaške akcije ob poti iz Italije čez prelaz Septimer in tesen Crap Ses so se torej začele v 4. desetletju pr. Kr. in so se kasneje, npr. 15 pr. Kr., najverjetneje nadaljevale.66 Za stolpe ob Wallenseeju, v katerih so bile med drugim najdene trirobe puščične osti tipa Zanier Ia,67 ki jim pripadajo tudi puščične osti z Gradu pri Reki68 in z Gradišča v Cerknem (t. 4: 1–7) ter podobni pilumi z eno zalustjo, kot ju poznamo z Gradu pri Reki69 (sl. 10) Martin-Kilcherjeva domneva, da so bili zgrajeni okoli leta 30 pr. Kr. in kmalu po vojaških pohodih čez Alpe v letih 16/15 pr. Kr. opuščeni.70 Poleg tega meni, da je morda del orožja iz daritvenega mesta na Döttenbichlu pri Oberammergauu, ki leži blizu glavne poti iz severne Italije čez prelaz Reschenpass k zgornjemu toku Donave, iz predavgustejske ali zgodnjeavgustejske dobe,71 Werner Zanier pa vse rimsko orožje s tega najdišča povezuje z rimskim vojaškim pohodom čez Alpe leta 15 pr. Kr.72 Ostanke vojaških spopadov iz zahodne Slovenije z najdbami z Döttenbichla povezujejo trirobe puščične osti tipa Zanier Ia, katapultne konice s tulastim nastavkom in žebljički z značilnim vzorcem križa in štirih bunčic na spodnji strani;73 zadnji po našem mnenju jasno kažejo, da je del rimskih vojaških najdb s tega najdišča starejši od (srednje)avgustejske dobe (glej argumentacijo spodaj). Zanimiv je tudi pregled pojavljanja posameznih tipov orožja oziroma vojaške opreme z obravnavanih najdišč na drugih najdiščih. Katapultne konice z masivno piramidalno konico in tulastim nastavkom so značilne za poznorepublikansko dobo, v času principata pa imajo manj masivne konice.74 Katapultne konice s piramidalno konico s trnastim nastavkom 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 Martin-Kilcher 2011, 41–43. Istenič 2005a. Martin-Kilcher 2011, 45–50. Zanier 1988. Istenič 2005a, sl. 3: 1–16. Istenič 2005a, sl. 3: 28–29. Martin-Kilcher 2011, 45–50, sl. 20a. Martin-Kilcher 2011, 50–52. Zanier 2009b; Zanier 2009c, 91–92. Zanier 2009b, 270–272, 276, 277, kat. št. 3.7.9–3.7.11; Zanier 2009c, 91, sl. 3: 1–6; Zanier 1997, sl. 1.24: 2, 6–8. Z Döttenbichla je objavljena tudi puščična ost z eno zalustijo in tulcem (Zanier 2006, sl. 1.24: 4), ki je podobna puščični osti z Gradišča v Cerknem, čeprav se v podrobnostih razlikujeta. Npr. Horvat 2002, t. 14; Sievers 2001, t. 79: 567–574; Poux 2008, 354–357. Figure 10. Iron parts of pila: 1, 2 from Grad near Reka (ater Istenič 2005a, ig. 3: 28, 29); 3 from the watchtower in Schänis-Biberlikopf (ater Roth-Rubi et al. 2004, pl. 7: B 38); 4, 5 from the watchtower in Filzbach-Vordemwald at Lake Wallensee (ater Roth-Rubi et al. 2004, pl. 4: F 64, F 65). Tri-bladed barbed arrowheads: 6–11 from the watchtower in Schänis-Biberlikopf (ater Roth-Rubi et al. 2004, pl. 7: B 39, B 40). Scale = 1 : 2 (drawing I. Murgelj). Slika 10. Železne konice pilumov: 1, 2 Grad pri Reki (po Istenič 2005a, sl. 3: 28, 29); 3 stolp na Biberlikopfu (po Roth-Rubi et al. 2004, t. 7: B 38); 4, 5 stolp v Voremwaldu pri Filzbachu ob Wallenseeju (po RothRubi et al. 2004, t. 4: F 64, F 65). Trokrilne puščične osti: 6–11 iz stolpa na Biberlikopfu pri kraju Schänis ob Wallenseeju (po Roth-Rubi et al. 2004, t. 7: B 39, B 40). M = 1 : 2 (risba I. Murgelj). 55 military inds from Döttenbichl predates the (Middle) Augustan period (for argumentation see below). imajo le že navedene primerjave na najdišču Andagoste in na območju Crap Ses.75 he following paragraphs discuss the presence at other sites of Roman military inds like those from the Posočje sites. Trirobe puščične osti, kakršne so med najdbami z Gradišča v Cerknem in Gradu pri Reki z okolico, so znane s srednje- in poznoavgustejskih najdišč76 in, kot smo že omenili, iz Döttenbichla77 in iz verjetno zgodnjeavgustejskega stolpa na Biberlikopfu pri kraju Schänis ob Wallenseeju (sl. 10: 6–11).78 Na njihovo uporabo v zgodnjeavgustejski dobi kaže tudi dejstvo, da so med najdbami, ki jih povezujejo z rimsko osvojitvijo opida La Loma v severni Španiji (Santibáñez de la Peña, Palencia) med kantabrijskimi vojnami.79 he socketed iron catapult-bolts with large pyramidal heads are typical of the Late Republican period, while those from the Principate have smaller heads.74 he only parallels for the tanged iron catapult-bolts come from the already mentioned Andagoste and the Crap Ses area.75 he tri-bladed tanged iron arrowheads that match those from the Posočje sites are known from Middle and Late Augustan sites,76 from Döttenbichl77 and from the probably Early Augustan watchtower in Schänis-Biberlikopf at Lake Wallensee (ig. 10: 6–11).78 heir use in the Early Augustan period is corroborated by the fact that they appear among the inds related to the Roman conquest of the oppidum at La Loma in northern Spain (Santibáñez de la Peña, Palencia) during the Cantabrian wars.79 he already mentioned tanged pila with single barbs from the watchtower in Filzbach-Vordemwald at Lake Wallensee and the similar pilum (the tang does not survive) from the watchtower at Biberlikopf, also at Lake Wallensee, are the only known parallels for the pila from Grad near Reka80 (ig. 10: 1–5). Both watchtowers most probably date to the Early Augustan period.81 he single-barbed tanged iron arrowheads from Vrh gradu near Pečine (pl. 5: 24, 25) and Grad near Reka and its environs82 have close matches among the inds from Alesia, though it is not clear whether those belonged to the Gauls or the Romans.83 Puščični konici z eno zalustjo in trnom z Vrh gradu pri Pečinah (t. 5: 24, 25) in Gradu pri Reki z okolico82 imata dobre primerjave med najdbami iz Alezije, kjer pa ni jasno, ali so galske ali rimske.83 Podobne puščične osti z eno zalustjo in tulcem, kot je bila najdena na Gradišča v Cerknem (t. 3: 19), so med rimskim orožjem iz časa galskih vojn, pa tudi še avgustejske dobe in 1. stoletja po Kr.84 Puščični osti z zalustima in tulcem z Gradišča v Cerknem (t. 3: 17, 18) imata analogije med najdbami s prelaza Goldegg v Avstriji, ki niso ozko datirane, vendar Stefanie Martin-Kilcher domneva, da so iz druge polovice 1. st. pr. Kr.85 Parallels to the socketed single-lobed arrowhead from Gradišče in Cerkno (pl. 3: 19) can be found among the Roman weapons from the time of the Gallic wars, the Augustan period and the 1st century AD.84 Geografsko najbližje primerjave za enostavne asimetrične konice z Gradišča v Cerknem (t. 4: 8–25) in z Gradu pri Reki,86 ki so morda puščične osti, so na Gradu pri Šmihelu.87 he two-bladed socketed arrowheads from Gradišče in Cerkno (pl. 3: 17, 18) have parallels among the inds from Svinčeni želodi, najdeni na Gradu pri Reki z okolico88 in Vrh gradu pri Pečinah (t. 6; 7: 1–9), so po obliki precej 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 56 Že omenjena piluma z eno zalustjo in ploščatim nasadiščem iz stolpa v Vordemwaldu pri Filzbachu in podoben pilum z eno zalustjo, pri katerem nasadišče ni ohranjeno, iz stolpa na vzpetini Biberlikopf – oba stolpa verjetno sodita med zgodnjeavgustejske stolpe ob Wallensee80 – so zaenkrat edine primerjave za osti pilumov z Gradu pri Reki81 (sl. 10: 1–5). 84 the arrowhead from Gradišče in Cerkno, with certain diference in details. E.g. Horvat 2002, pl. 14; Sievers 2001, pl. 79: 567–574; Poux 2008, 354–357. Ocháran Larrondo, Unzueta Portilla 2002, ig. 2: 2–4; Rageth 2009, 272, Cat. Nos. 3.5.8, 3.5.9. Zanier 1988, 6. Zanier 2009c, 91, ig. 3: 2–6; Zanier 2009b, 275, Cat. No. 3.7.10. Martin-Kilcher 2011, 45–50, ig. 20a. Morillo Cerdán 2014, 138, 140, ig. 4. Istenič 2005a, ig. 3: 28, 29. Martin-Kilcher 2011, 45–50, ig. 20a. Istenič 2005a, ig. 3: 17–21. Sievers 2001, 171, pl. 83: 685–703. Sievers 2001, 177, pl. 82: 644–652; Poux 2008, 360, 363–365. 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 Ocháran Larrondo, Unzueta Portilla 2002, sl. 2: 2–4; Rageth 2009, 272, kat. št. 3.5.8, 3.5.9. Zanier 1988, 6. Zanier 2009c, 91, sl. 3: 2–6; Zanier 2009b, 275, kat. št. 3.7.10. Martin-Kilcher 2011, 45–50, sl. 20a. Morillo Cerdán 2014, 138, 140, sl. 4. Martin-Kilcher 2011, 45–50, sl. 20a. Istenič 2005a, sl. 3: 28, 29. Istenič 2005a, sl. 3: 17–21. Sievers 2001, 171, t. 83: 685–703. Sievers 2001, 177, t. 82: 644–652; Poux 2008, 360, 363–365. Martin-Kilcher 2011, 52–53, sl. 23, op. 107. Istenič 2005a, 79, sl. 3: 22–27. Horvat 2002, 129–143, t. 16: 1–2, 4, 6–7, 10–20. Istenič 2005a, sl. 4: 13–20. the Goldegg Pass in Austria. hese are not precisely dated, although Stefanie Martin-Kilcher presumes them to be from the second half of the 1st century BC.85 enotni – pripadajo vretenastim želodom oblike Völling IIa in IIb – kar jih povezuje npr. z želodi iz Alezije in drugih sočasnih ali mlajših najdišč.89 he geographically closest matches for the simple tanged bodkins with asymmetrical heads from Gradišče in Cerkno (pl. 4: 8–25) and Grad near Reka,86 which may have been used as arrowheads, are known from Grad near Šmihel.87 Najpomembnejša značilnost večine železnih okovnih žebljičkov obuval, ki so zastopani na vseh treh obravnavanih najdiščih (t. 2: 5–14; 5: 9–21; Istenič 2005a, sl. 5: 5–13), je vzorec na njihovi spodnji strani;90 ta je s štirimi rebri razdeljena na štiri enaka polja, v vsakem od njih pa je izbočena bunkica. Večina najdišč s takimi žebljički je povezana s Cezarjevim delovanjem v Galiji oziroma z obuvali njegovih vojakov.91 Enaki žebljički so med površinskimi najdbami z najdišča Barda-Roba nad dolino Nadiže, severovzhodno od Čedada (Cividale; rimski Forum Iulii). Druge površinske najdbe s tega najdišča vključujejo poznorepublikanske novce (najmlajši je denarij skovan 79 pr. Kr.) in svinčene želode, ki jih glede na obliko lahko datiramo v konec 2. ali začetek 1. stoletja pr. Kr.,92 mlajših najdb iz 1. st. pr. Kr. ali začetka 1. st. po Kr. pa ni ali pa so zelo redke.93 Številne take žebljičke so našli na prizorišču spopada med Rimljani in domačini pri Andagosteju (datacija: med 44 in 30 pr. Kr.)94 in na najdiščih, povezanih s spopadi med kantabrijskimi vojnami (29–19 pr. Kr.) v severni Španiji.95 Na razmeroma kratek čas uporabe takih žebljičkov kaže dejstvo, da jih ni med najdbami iz legijskega tabora v Dangstettnu, niti v mlajših avgustej- he oblong lead slingshot from Grad near Reka and its environs88 and from Vrh gradu near Pečine (pls. 6; 7: 1–9) belongs to the spindle-shaped slingshot of the Völling IIa and IIb forms, which connects it to the slingshot from Alesia and other contemporary or later sites.89 he key feature of most iron hobnails found at the three Posočje sites (pls. 2: 5–14; 5: 9–21; Istenič 2005a, ig. 5: 5–13) is the characteristic pattern on the underside:90 divided with a cross into four equal parts, each of which bears an embossed dot. Most of the parallels for such hobnails come from sites connected with Caesar’s military activities in Gaul, more precisely with his soldiers’ footwear.91 Such hobnails are also known among the scattered inds collected at Barda-Roba, a site located above the Natisone (Nadiža) valley, north-east of Cividale (Roman Forum Iulii). Other inds from this site include Late Republican coins (the latest a denarius minted in 79 BC) and lead slingshot, the form of which suggests a date in the late 2nd or early 1st century BC.92 It seems there are no (or extremely few) later inds from the 1st century BC or early 1st century AD.93 Numerous hobnails of the same type were found 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 Martin-Kilcher 2011, 52–53, ig. 23, note 107. Istenič 2005a, 79, ig. 3: 22–27. Horvat 2002, 129–143, pl. 16: 1–2, 4, 6–7, 10–20. Istenič 2005a, ig. 4: 13–20. Cf. Poux 2008, 369–371; Laharnar 2011, 316–362, 372. Poux (2008, 378–381) believes that apart from the pattern on the underside, Late Republican hobnails are characterised, by their size and the conical shape of the head. The hobnails from the three Posočje sites conirm his observation as far as the size is concerned, but not the shape, because they include hobnails with a low and rounded head. Brouquier-Reddé, Deyber 2001, 303–305, pl. 93: 138 D 4-4; Poux 2008, 376–381, igs. 53, 54; for the military camp from Caesar’s time near Hermeskeil in the area of the Treveri see: http://www.sueddeutsche.de/wissen/archaeologie-indeutschland-roemisches-militaerlager-aus-der-zeit-caesars-entdeckt-1.1464467. Tagliaferri 1986a, 121–126, 132, pl. 22; Tagliaferri 1986b, 148– 150; cf. Laharnar 2011, 342, 351). Eleven iron hobnails are mentioned from this site, but are not published with a drawing, photo or detailed description (Tagliaferri 1986a, 125; Tagliaferri 1986b, 149). The photographs kindly sent to me by Fabio Pagano, director of the Museo di Cividale, clearly show that at least six bear the typical pattern of a cross and four embossed dots on the underside (the rust on the other ive prevented us from determining the pattern based on photos alone). Serena Vitri (2007, 160–161) mentions fragments of a segmental cuirass (lorica segmentata) and sporadic traces of human presence at the site until the Late Roman period. Excavations on the slope of the Roba hill revealed La Tène ob- Prim. Poux 2008, 369–371; Laharnar 2011, 316–362, 372. Poux (2008, 378–381) meni, da sta poleg omenjega značilnega vzorca na spodnji strani za poznorepublikanske okovne žebljičke značilni njihova velikost in konična oblika glavice. Žebljički iz cerkljanskih najdišč potrjujejo njegovo domnevo glede velikosti, ne pa glede oblike, kajti med njimi so tudi žebljički z nizko in zaobljeno glavico. 91 Brouquier-Reddé, Deyber 2001, 303–305, t. 93: 138 D 4-4; Poux 2008, 376–381, sl. 53, 54; za vojaški tabor iz Cezarjevega časa pri Hermeskeilu na območju Treverov glej: http:// www.sueddeutsche.de/wissen/archaeologie-in-deutschland-roemisches-militaerlager-aus-der-zeit-caesarsentdeckt-1.1464467. 92 Tagliaferri 1986a, 121–126, 132, t. 22; Tagliaferri 1986b, 149– 148–150; prim. Laharnar 2011, angl. 342, 351/sl. 361, 369). 11 železnih okovnih žebljičkov obuval s tega najdišča v objavi ni objavljenih s sliko, fotograijo ali podrobnim opisom (Tagliaferri 1986a, 125; Tagliaferri 1986b, 149), iz fotograij, ki mi jih je prijazno poslal Fabio Pagano, direktor muzeja v Čedadu (Museo di Cividale) pa je razvidno, da je na spodnji strani najmanj šestih žebljičkov značilen odtis štirih reber in štirih izbočenih bunčic (žebljički so zarjaveli, zato je po fotograijah nemogoče ugotoviti, kakšna je spodnja stran preostalih žebljičkov). 93 Serena Vitri (2007, 160–161) omenja del oklepa (lorica segmentata) in sporadično obiskovanje najdišča do poznorimske dobe. Na pobočju vzpetine Roba pa so poleg latenske predmetov našli rimsko keramiko in novce, ki pa v objavi niso ožje časovno opredeljeni (Casagrande, Pessina, Righi 2003). 94 Ocháran Larrondo, Unzueta Portilla 2002, sl. 2: 11, 12; Ocháran Larrondo, Unzueta Portilla 2006, 475–476, 480, 482, 484, sl. 121: 11–12). 95 Rodríguez Morales et al. 2012, 160, sl. 8; Fernández Vega et al. 2012, 240, št. 1, sl. 15. 89 90 57 at Andagoste, a site of a military conlict dated between c. 44 and 30 BC,94 but also on sites in northern Spain related to the Cantabrian wars (29–19 BC).95 he relatively brief use of these hobnails is indicated by their absence in the fortress at Dangstetten (dated between 20/15 and 9/7 BC) and later military installations of the Augustan period. his makes them very useful markers of the period from Caesar’s Gallic wars at the latest (possibly from the irst two decades of the 1st century BC, if Barda-Roba is taken into consideration) to around 20 BC.96 Similar hobnails, although only with embossed dots (no cross) on the underside,97 also come from sites dating to the time of the Gallic wars, 98 but remained in use – albeit on average smaller – throughout the Augustan period and later.99 he iron inger-rings from Gradišče in Cerkno (pl. 2: 4) and Grad near Reka and its environs100 were probably signet rings, which represent common inds in Roman military contexts.101 he Alesia type brooches, three of which were found at Grad near Reka,102 are a Roman invention of the Caesarean period. hey are characterised by two important new features: a new mechanism, i.e. a hinge instead of the spring which had characterised all previous types of brooches, and a new material, i.e. brass (copper-zinc alloy), which the Romans began producing and using around 60 BC. he Alesia brooches are so far the earliest group of Roman objects made primarily of brass. he numerous brooches of this type from Alesia show that they were used by Roman soldiers to fasten their cloaks.103 he three Posočje sites yielded ive Jezerine brooches (more precisely the Jezerine II subgroup) (pls. 1: 2, 3; 5: 6 and two as yet unpublished pieces from Grad near Reka104). hey it the proposed dating of the sites as the fourth decade BC 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 58 jects, Roman pottery and coins, but the inds are not narrowly dated in the publication (Casagrande, Pessina, Righi 2003). Ocháran Larrondo, Unzueta Portilla 2002, ig. 2: 11, 12; Ocháran Larrondo, Unzueta Portilla 2006, 475–476, 480, 482, 484, sl. 121: 11–12). Rodríguez Morales et al. 2012, 160, ig. 8; Fernández Vega et al. 2012, 240, No. 1, ig. 15. Poux (2008, 378–379) wrongly presumes that hobnails with a typical pattern of a cross and dots were in use until around the year 0. Istenič 2005a, ig. 5: 1–4. Brouquier-Reddé, Deyber 2001, 303–305, pl. 93: 138 A4-10; Poux 2008, 376–381, ig. 53. Poux 2008, 380, ig. 56. National Museum of Slovenia, Inv. Nos. R 26450, R 26660, R 26661 and possibly R 26694; cf. Istenič 2014, ig. 17. Cf. Brouquier-Reddé, Deyber 2001, 300, 301, pl. 93: 76–82; Fingerlin 1986, 54: 9, 471: 4, 550: 31; Fingerlin 1998, 723: 6, 957: 6; Sander 1992, 146, pl. 33: 54, 55. skih vojaških taborih. So torej odličen časovni pokazatelj obdobja od vključno Cezarjevih galskih vojn, ali – glede na najdišče Barda-Roba morda od prvih dveh desetletij 1. stoletja pr. Kr. – do okrog 20 pr. Kr.96 Podobni žebljički, ki pa imajo na spodnji strani odtisnjene le bunčice,97 so prav tako zastopani že na najdiščih iz časa galskih vojn,98 vendar so bili taki žebljički, ki pa so v povprečju manjši, v uporabi še v celi avgustejski dobi in kasneje.99 Železni prstani (t. 2: 4 in primerki z Gradu pri Reki z okolico100), ki so verjetno bili pečatni, imajo dobre primerjave med najdbami, ki jih povezujejo z rimsko vojsko.101 Fibule skupine Alezija, ki so na Gradu pri Reki z okolico zastopani s tremi primerki,102 so rimska iznajdba Cezarjeve dobe. Zanje sta značilni dve pomembni novosti: način zapiranja, tj. tečaj namesto peresovine (vsi starejši tipi sponk imajo peresovino), in nov material, tj. medenina (zlitina bakra in cinka), ki so jo Rimljani začeli izdelovati in uporabljati okrog 60 pr. Kr. Fibule skupine Alesia so zaenkrat najstarejša skupina rimskih predmetov, za katero so (v Italiji) praviloma uporabljali medenino. Številne zaponke te skupine iz Alezije kažejo, da so jih nosili rimski vojaki; z njimi so zapenjali plašče.103 Primerkov ibul skupine Jezerine (natančneje Jezerine II) je bilo na obravnavanih najdiščih pet (t. 1: 2, 3; 5: 6 in dve neobjavljeni ibuli z Gradu pri Reki104) in se časovno dobro vključujejo v datacijo teh najdišč v 4. desetletje pr. Kr. (glej pogl. Gradišče v Cerknem). Rimski izvor primerkov iz čiste medenine (t. 1: 3; 5: 6) je jasen, pri drugih, ki so iz rdeče litine (ibuli z Gradu pri Reki) ali iz brona 105 (t. 2: 2) pa glede na zgodnjo datacijo domnevamo enako. Primerjava rimskih vojaških najdb z obravnavanih najdišč z najdbami iz zaključka republikanske in začetka cesarske dobe torej kaže na njihovo datacijo v čas po galskih vojnah in pred srednjeavgustejsko dobo. Največ skupnih točk imajo s predmeti s prizorišča vojaškega spopada med Rimljani in domačini na najdišču Andagoste, ki je po novcih datirano med pribl. 44 in 30 pr. Kr., ter z območja prelaza 96 97 98 99 100 101 Poux (2008, 378–379) napačno domneva, da so bili okovni žebljički z značilnim vzorcem križa in bunčic na spodnji strani v uporabi do okrog leta 0. Istenič 2005a, sl. 5: 1–4. Brouquier-Reddé, Deyber 2001, 303–305, t. 93: 138 A4-10; Poux 2008, 376–381, sl. 53. Poux 2008, 380, sl. 56. Narodni muzej Slovenije, inv. št. R 26450, R 26660, R 26661 in morda tudi R 26694; prim. Istenič 2014, sl. 17. Prim. Brouquier-Reddé, Deyber 2001, 300, 301, t. 93: 76–82; Fingerlin 1986, 54: 9, 471: 4, 550: 31; Fingerlin 1998, 723: 6, 957: 6; Sander 1992, 146, t. 33: 54, 55. 102 Istenič 2005a, sl. 5: 14, 15; Istenič 2005b, t. 1: 1, 8, 11. Istenič 2005a, ig. 5: 14, 15; Istenič 2005b, pl. 1: 1, 8, 11. 103 Istenič 2005b; Istenič, Šmit 2007. National Museum of Slovenia, Inv. Nos. R 26582 and R 26583 (Cf. Istenič 2014, ig. 17). 104 Istenič 2005b; Istenič, Šmit 2007. Narodni muzej Slovenije, inv. št. R 26582 in R 26583 (prim. Istenič 2014, sl. 17). Rezultati analiz zlitine še niso objavljeni. 105 (see chapter on Gradišče in Cerkno). heir early date suggests they came from Italy (two gunmetal brooches from Grad near Reka and the bronze105 brooch pl. 2: 2); the Roman origin of two brooches (pls. 1: 3; 5: 6) is further indicated by the pure brass of which they were made. he comparison of the inds from the three sites under discussion with the others from the end of the Republican and beginning of the Imperial period suggests a date between the end of the Gallic wars and the onset of the Middle Augustan period. he three Posočje sites show strong links with the battleield site at Andagoste, dated from the numismatic evidence to between c. 44 and 30 BC, as well as with the site at the Septimer Pass and the inds from the Crap Ses Gorge below it, dated – primarily by comparison with the inds from Grad near Reka and Andagoste – to the fourth decade BC. Considering the broader historical context, it was vital for the Romans to pacify the hinterland of the Soča (Isonzo) valley, which includes the Tolmin-Cerkno area, before campaigning further to the south-east, i.e. at the beginning of Octavian’s Illyrian wars (35/33 BC). his is also suggested by Appian’s mention of the Carni among the tribes that Octavian defeated in the Illyrian wars. Conclusion he sites at Grad near Reka and its environs, Gradišče in Cerkno and Vrh gradu near Pečine revealed traces of Roman military activity from the fourth decade BC, probably from the beginning of the Illyrian wars (35 BC). he most varied assemblage of Roman weapons is known from Grad near Reka, consisting of tri-bladed tanged arrowheads, single-barbed tanged arrowheads, tanged catapult-bolts, socketed catapult-bolts, simple tanged bodkins with asymmetrical heads, tanged pila with single-barbs and lead slingshot.106 By comparison, the inds from Gradišče in Cerkno are missing pila, single-barbed tanged arrowheads and lead slingshot, but include single-barbed and two-bladed socketed arrowheads (pl. 3: 17–19). he multitude of Roman artillery missiles (such as catapult-bolts), lead slingshot and arrowheads on both sites clearly indicates a Roman military attack. According to the available evidence, Roman weapons from Vrh gradu near Pečine comprise only lead slingshot and some arrowheads, which casts some doubt upon its interpretation as the site of a Roman military attack. Common to all three sites are the hobnails bearing a pattern of a cross and embossed dots on the underside. he Roman army probably arrived at the sites of Gradišče in Cerkno and Grad near Reka from the north, i.e. from Baška grapa via Bukovo. hey would presumably have ar105 106 Results of the alloy analyses have not yet been published. Istenič 2005a, igs. 3–5. Septimer in pod njim ležeče tesni Crap Ses, ki jih – v glavnem prav na podlagi primerjav z najdbami z Gradu pri Reki in Andagosteja – datirajo v 4. desetletje pr. Kr. Glede na zgodovinsko situacijo so Rimljani morali osvojiti tolminsko-cerkljansko območje, preden so posegli dalje proti jugovzhodu, torej najkasneje na začetku Oktavijanovih ilirskih vojn (35/33). S tem se sklada Apijanova omemba Karnov med ljudstvi, ki jih je Oktavijan premagal med ilirskimi vojnami. Sklep Na Gradu pri Reki z okolico, Gradišču v Cerknem in Vrh gradu pri Pečinah so se ohranili sledovi rimskega vojaškega delovanja v 4. desetletju pr. Kr., verjetno na začetku ilirskih vojn (35 pr. Kr.). Največ različnih tipov rimskega orožja poznamo z Gradu pri Reki z okolico: asimetrični konici pilumov, trirobe puščične osti in puščične osti z eno zalustijo, enostavne asimetrične konice, katapultne konice s trnom in katapultne konice s trnom ter svinčene želode.106 Med najdbami z Gradišča v Cerknem je ohranjena večina tipov orožja, ki so znani z Gradu pri Reki, poleg tega pa še puščični konici z dvema zalustima in tulcem ter puščična konica z eno zalustijo in tulcem (t. 3: 17–19), manjkajo pa konice pilumov, puščične osti z eno zalustijo in trnom ter svinčeni želodi. Obilica rimskih izstrelkov na teh dveh najdiščih jasno kaže, da gre za sledove rimskega vojaškega napada. Na Vrh gradu pri Pečinah je po nam dostopnih podatkih rimsko orožje zastopano samo s svinčenimi želodi, dvema puščičnima konicama s tulcem in dvema puščičnima konicama z eno zalustijo, zato narave navzočnosti rimskih vojakov na tem najdišču ni mogoče zanesljivo opredeliti kot vojaški napad. Vsem trem najdiščem so skupni okovni žebljički z reliefnim vzorcem križa in bunčic na spodnji strani. Verjetni dostop do Gradišča v Cerknem in Gradu pri Reki je bil s severa, tj. iz Baške grape preko Bukovega. Povezava z Italijo je vodila verjetno iz Forum Iulii, ki je postal municipij v Cezarjevem času, in naprej po dolini Nadiže107 ali čez druge prehode, ki od tam vodijo v Breginjski kot108 ter naprej v dolino Soče pri Kobaridu, kjer je bil v tem času morda emporij,109 in še naprej čez hriboviti svet vzhodno ob Soči do Baške grape. Čez Baško grapo in Cerkljansko ter Poljansko dolino je kasneje verjetno vodila pot, ki je severovzhodno Italijo povezovala z osrednjo Slovenijo in 106 107 108 109 Istenič 2005a, sl. 3–5. Uporabo poti ob tej reki v zgodnjem 1. st. pr. Kr. kažejo najdbe z najdišča Barda-Roba (prim. op. 92). Med sledove rimske vojske v obdobju med ok. 60 in 30/15 pr. Kr. v Breginjskem kotu sodijo okovni žebljički z značilnim motivom križa in bunčic na spodnji strani z najdišča Sedlo – Gradec (Mlinar, Gerbec, Laharnar 2014, 24–25, 38, kat. št. 37) in s Sv. Helene pri Podbeli (Narodni muzej Slovenije, inv. št. R 26913). Laharnar, Štular, Mlinar, v tem zborniku. 59 rived here from Forum Iulii, which became a municipium in Caesar’s time, along the valley of the Natisone (Nadiža)107 or other routes leading to Breginjski kot108 and onwards to the valley of the River Soča at Kobarid, possibly at that time the site of an emporium,109 and eastwards across hilly terrain along the Soča River to Baška grapa. Later, a route probably led via Baška grapa, the Cerkno area and Poljanska dolina (the Poljane Valley), connecting north-eastern Italy with central Slovenia and also Carinthia, with a centre in Virunum (Magdalensberg). At the intersection of this route and the one that led northwards from Emona, a settlement at the location of the present-day town of Kranj was established in the Middle Augustan period.110 tudi Koroško s središčem v Virunumu (Magdalensberg / Štalenska Gora). Na križišču te poti s tisto, ki je vodila iz Emone na sever, je v srednjevagustejski dobi nastala rimska naselbina v Kranju.110 Iz Slovenije poznamo zanesljive sledove vojaškega spopada zgodnjerimske dobe le še z Gradu pri Šmihelu. Tam so ob koncu 19. stoletja v obzidju prazgodovinskega gradišča odkopali rimsko orožje iz sredine 2. stoletja pr. Kr.,111 v zadnjih desetletjih pa so na gradišču in njegovih pobočjih našli svinčene pračne izstrelke ter osti katapultnih izstrelkov in druge izstrelke enakih oblik, kot so bili najdeni v obzidju.112 he only other site in Slovenia to yield clear traces of a military conlict from the Early Roman period is that at Grad near Šmihel. here, Roman weapons from the mid2nd century BC were unearthed in the rampart of the prehistoric hillfort at the end of the 19th century,111 while lead slingshot, iron catapult-bolts and other missiles of the same types as those found in the rampart have come to light in recent decades in the hillfort and on its slopes.112 Translation: Andreja Maver Language editing: David Limon 107 108 109 110 111 112 60 The use of a road along this river in the early 1st century BC is indicated by the inds from the Barda-Roba site (cf. note 92). Traces of the Roman army in the period spanning from roughly 60 and 30/15 BC in the Breginjski kot area include hobnails with a typical pattern of a cross and embossed dots on the underside from the sites at Sedlo – Gradec (Mlinar, Gerbec, Laharnar 2014, 24–25, 38, Cat. No. 37) and Sv. Helena near Podbela (National Museum of Slovenia, Inv. No. R 26913). Laharnar, Štular, Mlinar, in this book. Sagadin, in this book. Horvat 1997; Horvat 2002. Laharnar, in this book. On battleield archaeology see e.g. Schlachtfeldarchäologie 2009 and Laharnar 2010, with references. 110 111 112 Sagadin, v tem zborniku. Horvat 1997; Horvat 2002. Laharnar, v tem zborniku. O arheologiji bojišč glej npr. Schlachtfeldarchäologie 2009 in Laharnar 2010, s citirano literaturo. CATALOGUE OF COINS KATALOG NOVCEV Alenka Miškec Alenka Miškec Coins, individual inds. he names of emperors are followed by denomination (S = sestertius, As = as, AE = a bronze coin, the number indicates its size, D = denarius, Dp = dupondius, Tetr = tetradrachm), the date (c. = century), the mint (MobM = mobile mint, Lug = Lugdunum, Aq = Aquileia), standard bibliography and mintmark. he list gives the collection (NMS = National Museum of Slovenia), inventory number, measurements (dim. = dimensions, Φ = diameter, wt. = weight) and condition of coins. Novci, posamične najdbe. Pod posameznimi vladarji si sledijo podatki o nominalni vrednosti novca (S = sestercij, As = as, AE = bronast novec, številka označuje njegovo velikost, D = denarij, Dp = dupondij, Tetr = tetradrahma), dataciji kovanja (st. = stoletje), kovnici (PKov = potujoča kovnica, Lug = Lugdunum, Aq = Aquileia), standardni literaturi in priznaku kovnice. V seznamu so navedeni mesto hranjenja (NMS = Narodni muzej Slovenije), inventarne številke, mere (dim. = dimenzije, Φ = premer, t. = teža) in stopnja ohranjenosti novcev. Grad near Reka Grad pri Reki Rome / Rim Republic / Republika 1 D 105 BC / pr. Kr. Roma RRC 316/1 2 D 56 BC / pr. Kr. Roma RRC 425/1 4 As 1. pol. 2. st. pr. Kr. / 1st half of the 2nd c. BC Roma RRC ? 5 As 89 BC / pr. Kr. Roma RRC 344/4b Roma RIC II/1 980 Roma RIC II ? Roma RIC III 807 Roma RIC III ? Roma RIC III 664 - RIC IV/1 - (ad 885) 3- Vespasianus 6 D 77–78 Hadrianus 7 As 117–138 Antoninus Pius 8 Dp 145–161 M. Aurelius 9 S 161–180 Commodus (Divus M. Aurelius) 10 As from / od 180 Septimius Severus (Iulia Domna) 11 As after / po 196 1. Private collection. Wt.: 3,9 g. Φ: 20 mm. Axis: 7. Very well preserved. 2 NMS, LJ 489. Obverse: punch-marks. Wt.: 3,61 g. Dim.: 18 × 19 mm. Axis: 5. Excellently preserved. Kos, Šemrov 1990, no. 282; FMRSl III 4-1. 3. NMS, LJ 12348. Wt.: 19,65 g. Φ: 30,5 mm. Axis: 7. Worn. FMRSl IV 2-1. 4. Private collection. Halved. Wt.: 8,48 g. Axis: 6. Well preserved. FMRSl V 2-1. 5. Private collection. Wt.: 10,83 g. Dim.: 30 × 27 mm. Axis: 6. Well preserved. 6. Private collection. Wt.: 3,06 g. Φ: 17 mm. Axis: 6. Very well preserved. FMRSl V 2-2. 7. NMS, LJ 12347. Wt.: 6,9 g. Dim.: 25,5 × 26,5 mm. Worn. FMRSl IV 2-2. 1. Zasebna zbirka. T.: 3,9 g. Φ: 20 mm. Položaj pečata: 7. Zelo lepo ohranjen. 2. NMS, LJ 489. Averz: vtiski. T.: 3,61 g. Dim.: 18 × 19 mm. Položaj pečata: 5. Odlično ohranjen. Kos, Šemrov 1990, št. 282; FMRSl III 4-1. 3. NMS, LJ 12348. T.: 19,65 g. Φ: 30,5 mm. Položaj pečata: 7. Izrabljen. FMRSl IV 2-1. 4. Zasebna zbirka. Polovičen. T.: 8,48 g. Položaj pečata: 6. Dobro ohranjen. FMRSl V 2-1. 5. Zasebna zbirka. T.: 10,83 g. Dim.: 30 × 27 mm. Pol. peč.: 6. Dobro ohranjen. 6. Zasebna zbirka. T.: 3,06 g. Φ: 17 mm. Položaj pečata: 6. Zelo lepo ohranjen. FMRSl V 2-2. 7. NMS, LJ 12347. T.: 6,9 g. Dim.: 25,5 × 26,5 mm. Izrabljen. FMRSl IV 2-2. 61 8. Private collection. Wt.: 13,2 g. Φ: 26 mm. Axis: 12. Very well preserved. 9. NMS, LJ 59816. Identiied according to portrait. Wt.: 14,74 g. Dim.: 27 × 28 mm. Axis: 12. Worn. 10. NMS, LJ 59815. Fragmentary. Wt.: 6,11 g. Axis: 6. Well preserved. 11. NMS, LJ 59814. Cast, imitation, limesfalsa. Wt.: 3,06 g. Dim.: 22,5 × 22 mm. Axis: 12. Well preserved. 8. Zasebna zbirka. T.: 13,2 g. Φ: 26 mm. Položaj pečata: 12. Zelo lepo ohranjen. 9. NMS, LJ 59816. Določitev po portretu. T.: 14,74 g. Dim.: 27 × 28 mm. Položaj pečata: 12. Izrabljen. 10. NMS, LJ 59815. Fragmentiran. T.: 6,11 g. Položaj pečata: 6. Dobro ohranjen. 11. NMS, LJ 59814. Ulitek, imitacija, limes falsa. T.: 3,06 g. Dim.: 22,5 × 22 mm. Položaj pečata: 12. Dobro ohranjen. Gradišče in Cerkno Gradišče v Cerknem Greeks / Grki Italia Bruttium Rhegium 1 AE 270–203 BC / pr. Kr. Rhegium SNG 1963 Celts / Kelti Eastern Celts / Vzhodnokeltsko kovanje Early coins of Philip II of Macedon / Zgodnji pokovi Filipa II. Noricum Norican group / Noriška skupina C3/COPO 2 Tetr 1st c. BC / 1. st. pr. Kr. - TKN - Rome / Rim Republic / Republika 3 As 194–190 BC / pr. Kr. Roma RRC 132/3 4 As 1st half of the 2nd c. BC / 1. pol. 2. st. pr. Kr. Roma RRC ? 5 As 102 BC / pr. Kr. Roma RRC 322/2 1. NMS, LJ 85015. Wt.: 6,26 g. Dim.: 20 × 21 mm. Axis: 12. Very well preserved. 2. Private collection. Wt.: 9,73 g. Φ: 22,5 mm. Axis: 4. Very well preserved. 3. NMS, LJ 85016. Wt.: 32,07 g. Dim.: 32,5 × 32 mm. Axis: 5. Well preserved. 4. NMS, LJ 49442. Halved. Wt.: 12,71 g. Axis: 6. Worn. FMRSl VI 4-1. 5. Elementary school, Cerkno. Excellently preserved. FMRSl III 2-1. 62 1. NMS, LJ 85015. T.: 6,26 g. Dim.: 20 × 21 mm. Pol. peč.: 12. Zelo lepo ohranjen. 2. Zasebna zbirka. T.: 9,73 g. Φ: 22,5 mm. Položaj pečata: 4. Zelo lepo ohranjen. 3. NMS, LJ 85016. T.: 32,07 g. Dim.: 32,5 × 32 mm. Položaj pečata: 5. Dobro ohranjen. 4. NMS, LJ 49442. Polovičen. T.: 12,71 g. Pol. peč.: 6. Izrabljen. FMRSl VI 4-1. 5. Osnovna šola Cerkno. Odlično ohranjen. FMRSl III 2-1. Vrh gradu near Pečine Vrh gradu pri Pečinah Rome / Rim Republic / Republika 1 D 45 BC / pr. Kr. Roma RRC 472/1 2 As 169–158 BC / pr. Kr. Roma RRC 176/1 4 As 1st half of the 2nd c. BC / 1. pol. 2. st. pr. Kr. Roma RRC ? 5 As 148 BC / pr. Kr. Roma RRC 214/2a 6 D 36 BC / pr. Kr. MobM/PKov RRC 540/2 Lug RIC II/1 1181 3- Vespasianus 7 S 72 Indeterminable / Nedoločljiv 8 As 1.–2. c. / st. Roma RIC ? 9 As 2. c. / st. Roma RIC ? Honorius 10 AE 3 408–423 Roma RIC X 1355 SMRT 11 AE 3 408–423 Aq RIC X 1356 AQP 12 AE 3 408–423 Aq RIC X 1358 AQS 13 AE 3 408–423 ? RIC X ? ? 14 AE 3 408–423 ? RIC X ? ? 1. Private collection. Wt.: 3,35 g. Dim.: 19 × 20 mm. Axis: 12. Very well preserved. FMRSl IV 7-1. 2. NMS, LJ 12173. Wt.: 27,03 g. Dim.: 33,5 × 32 mm. Axis: 5. Very well preserved. FMRSl III 10-3. 3. NMS, LJ 8351. Wt.: 18,7 g. Dim.: 30 × 28 mm. Axis: 6. Worn. FMRSl III 10-1. 4. NMS, LJ 8350. Wt.: 12,5 g. Dim.: 29 × 30 mm. Axis: 6. Worn. FMRSl III 10-2. 5. NMS, LJ 8353. Wt.: 22,25 g. Dim.: 27,5 × 28 mm. Axis: 7. Well preserved. FMRSl III 10-4. 6. Private collection. Wt.: 3,8 g. Dim.: 18,5 × 19,5 mm. Axis: 6. Very well preserved. FMRSl IV 7-2. 7. NMS, LJ 8436. Wt.: 20,69 g. Φ: 34 mm. Axis: 6. Well preserved. FMRSl IV 7-3. 8. Private collection. Wt.: 5,9 g. Dim.: 20 × 24 mm. Very badly worn. 9. LJ 8352. Wt.: 8,94 g. Dim.: 26 × 24 mm. Very badly worn. FMRSl IV 7-5. 10. Private collection. Wt.: 2,04 g. Φ: 14 mm. Axis: 12. Very well preserved. FMRSl VI 7-1. 11. Tolmin Museum. Wt.: 2,28 g. Φ: 15 mm. Axis: 12. Excellently preserved. 12. Private collection. Wt.: 3,14 g. Φ: 18 mm. Axis: 5. Very well preserved. FMRSl IV 7-4. 13. Tolmin Museum. Wt.: 2,1 g. Dim.: 15,5 × 16 mm. Axis: 12. Well preserved. 14. NMS, LJ 49441. Wt.: 1,29 g. Dim.: 14 × 16 mm. Axis: 6. Well preserved. FMRSl VI 7-2. 1. Zasebna zbirka. T.: 3,35 g. Dim.: 19 × 20 mm. Položaj pečata: 12. Zelo lepo ohranjen. FMRSl IV 7-1. 2. NMS, LJ 12173. T.: 27,03 g. Dim.: 33,5 × 32 mm. Položaj pečata: 5. Zelo lepo ohranjen. FMRSl III 10-3. 3. NMS, LJ 8351. T.: 18,7 g. Dim.: 30 × 28 mm. Položaj pečata: 6. Izrabljen. FMRSl III 10-1. 4. NMS, LJ 8350. T.: 12,5 g. Dim.: 29 × 30 mm. Položaj pečata: 6. Izrabljen. FMRSl III 10-2. 5. NMS, LJ 8353. T.: 22,25 g. Dim.: 27,5 × 28 mm. Položaj pečata: 7. Dobro ohranjen. FMRSl III 10-4. 6. Zasebna zbirka. T.: 3,8 g. Dim.: 18,5 × 19,5 mm. Položaj pečata: 6. Zelo lepo ohranjen. FMRSl IV 7-2. 7. NMS, LJ 8436. T.: 20,69 g. Φ: 34 mm. Položaj pečata: 6. Dobro ohranjen. FMRSl IV 7-3. 8. Zasebna zbirka. T.: 5,9 g. Dim.: 20 × 24 mm. Zelo močno izrabljen. 9. NMS, LJ 8352. T.: 8,94 g. Dim.: 26 × 24 mm. Zelo močno izrabljen. FMRSl IV 7-5. 10. Zasebna zbirka. T.: 2,04 g. Φ: 14 mm. Položaj pečata: 12. Zelo lepo ohranjen. FMRSl VI 7-1. 11. Muzej Tolmin. T.: 2,28 g. Φ: 15 mm. Položaj pečata: 12. Odlično ohranjen. 12. Zasebna zbirka. T.: 3,14 g. Φ: 18 mm. Položaj pečata: 5. Zelo lepo ohranjen. FMRSl IV 7-4. 13. Muzej Tolmin. T.: 2,1 g. Dim.: 15,5 × 16 mm. Položaj pečata: 12. Dobro ohranjen. 14. NMS, LJ 49441. T.: 1,29 g. Dim.: 14 × 16 mm. Položaj pečata: 6. Dobro ohranjen. FMRSl VI 7-2. 63 BIBLIOGRAPHY / LITERATURA ADAM, A. M., FEUGÈRE, M. 1982, Un aspect de l’artisanat du bronze dans l’arc alpin oriental et en Dalmatie au Ier s. av. J.-C. Les ibules du type dit “de Jezerine”. – Aquileia nostra 53, 130–188. BISHOP, M. C., COULSTON, J. C. N. 2006, Roman Military Equipment. From the Punic Wars to the Fall of Rome. – Oxford. BOŽIČ, D. 1999, Tre insediamenti minori del gruppo protostorico di Idrija pri Bači dell’Isontino. – In/V: S. Santoro Bianchi (ed./ur.), Studio e conservazione degli insediamenti minori romani in area alpina, Atti dell’incontro di studi, Forgaria del Friuli, 20 settembre 1997, Bologna, 71–79. BOŽIČ, D. 2011, Prazgodovinske najdbe s Tonovcovega gradu in železnodobna kultna mesta v Posočju / Prehistoric inds from Tonovcov grad and Iron Age cult places in the Posočje area. – In/V: Z. Modrijan, T. Milavec, Poznoantična utrjena naselbina Tonovcov grad pri Kobaridu, Najdbe / Late Antique fortiied settlement Tonovcov grad near Kobarid, Finds, Opera Instituti Archaeologici Sloveniae 24, Ljubljana, 239–277. BROUQUIER-REDDÉ, V., DEYBER, A. 2001, Fourniment, harnachement, quincaillerie, objets divers. – In/V: M. Reddé, S. von Schnurbein (eds./ur.), Alésia 2 – Le matériel, Mémoires de l’Académie des inscriptions et belles-lettres 22, Paris, 293–362. CASAGRANDE, D., PESSINA, A., RIGHI, G. 2003, San Pietro al Natisone, loc. Monte Roba. – In/V: G. Bandelli, S. Vitri (eds./ur.), I Celti in Friuli: archeologia, storia e territorio, III. 2003, Aquileia nostra 74, 665–672. DEMETZ, S. 1999, Fibeln der Spätlatène- und frühen römischen Kaiserzeit in den Alpenländern. – Frühgeschichtliche und Provinzialrömische Archäologie 4, Rahden. DRNIĆ, I. 2013, Fibule tipa Jezerine s prostora jugoistočne Panonije / Fibulae of the Jezerine-type from southeastern Pannonia. – Prilozi Instituta za arheologiju u Zagrebu 30, 45–68. FMRSl I: P. Kos, Die Fundmünzen der römischen Zeit in Slowenien I. – Berlin 1988. FMRSl III: P. Kos, A. Šemrov, Die Fundmünzen der römischen Zeit in Slowenien III. – Berlin 1995. FMRSl IV: A. Šemrov, Die Fundmünzen der römischen Zeit in Slowenien IV. – Berlin 1998. FMRSl V: A. Šemrov, Die Fundmünzen der römischen Zeit in Slowenien V. – Mainz am Rhein, 2004. GASPARI, A. 2009, 30. Swords with scabbards. – In/V: P. Turk et al. (eds./ur.), Ljubljanica – a River and its Past, Ljubljana, 246– 247 [= 30. Meči z nožnicami. – In/V: P. Turk et al. (eds./ur.), Ljubljanica – kulturna dediščina reke, Ljubljana 2009, 222–223]. GROTE, K. 2005, Römerlager Hedemünden. Vor 2000 Jahren. Römer an der Werra. Ein herausragendes archäologisches Kulturdenkmal und seine Funde. – Sydekum-Schriften zur Geschichte der Stadt Münden 34, Hann. Münden. GUŠTIN, M. 1991, Posočje in der jüngeren Eisenzeit. – Katalogi in monograije 27, Ljubljana [summary in Slovene / povzetek v slovenščini]. HARNECKER, J. 1997, Katalog der römischen Eisenfunde von Haltern. – Bodenaltertümer Westfalens 35, Mainz am Rhein. HARNECKER, J., MYLO, D. 2011, Kalkriese 5. Katalog der römischen Funde vom Oberesch. Die Schnitte 23 bis 39. – RömischGermanische Forschungen 69, Darmstadt, Mainz 2011. HORVAT, J. 1997, Roman Republican weapons from Šmihel in Slovenia. – In/V: M. Feugère (ed./ur.), L’équipement militaire et l’armament de la république (IVe–Ier s. avant J.-C.), Journal of Roman Military Equipement Studies 8, 105–120. ERICE LACABE, R. 1995, Las fíbulas del Nordeste de la Península Ibérica. Siglos I A.E. al IV D.E. – Zaragoza. HORVAT, J. 2002, he Hoard of Roman Republican Weapons from Grad near Šmihel / Zaklad rimskega republikanskega orožja z Gradu pri Šmihelu pod Nanosom. – Arheološki vestnik 53, 117–192. FERNÁNDEZ VEGA, P. A., BOLADO DEL CASTILLO, R., CALLEJO GÓMEZ, J., MANTECÓN CALLEJO, L. 2012, El Castro de Las Rabas (Cervatos, Cantabria) y las Guerras Cántabras: resultados de las intervenciones arqueológicas de 2009 y 2010. – Munibe 63, 213–253. ISTENIČ, J. 2005a, Evidence for a very late Republican siege at Grad near Reka in Western Slovenia. – “Archäologie der Schlachtfelder – Militaria aus Zerstörungshorizonten”, Carnuntum Jahrbuch 2005, Wien, 77–87 [summary in German / povzetek v nemščini]. FEUGÈRE, M. 1985, Les ibules en Gaule méridionale. De la conquête à la in du Ve s. ap. J.-C. – Revue Archéologique de Narbonaise, Supplément 12, Paris. ISTENIČ, J. 2005b, Brooches of the Alesia group in Slovenia / Fibule skupine Alesia v Sloveniji. – Arheološki vestnik 56, 187–212. ISTENIČ, J. 2014, Rimske zgodbe s stičišča svetov. – Ljubljana. FINGERLIN, G. 1986, Dangstetten I. Katalog der Funde (Fundstellen 1 bis 603). – Forschungen und Berichte zur Vor- und Frühgeschichte in Baden-Württemberg 22, Stuttgart. FINGERLIN, G. 1998, Dangstetten II. Katalog der Funde (Fundstellen 604–1358). – Forschungen und Berichte zur Vor- und Frühgeschichte in Baden-Württemberg 69, Stuttgart. 64 ISTENIČ, J., ŠMIT, Ž. 2007, he beginning of the use of brass in Europe with particular reference to the southeastern Alpine region. – In/V: S. La Niece, D. R. Hook, P. T. Craddock (eds./ ur.), Metals and mines, Studies in archaeometallurgy, Selected papers from the conference Metallurgy: A Touchstone for Cross-cultural Interaction held at the British Museum 28–30 April 2005 to celebrate the career of Paul Craddock during his 40 years at the British Museum, London, 140–147. IVANIŠEVIĆ, V., KAZANSKI, M., MASTYKOVA, A. 2006, Les nécropoles de Viminacium à l’époque des grandes migrations. – Monographies 22, Paris. KOS, P., ŠEMROV, A. 1990, Rimski republikanski novci / Münzen der römischen Republik. – Situla 28, Zbirka Numizmatičnega kabineta Narodnega muzeja 1, Ljubljana. LAHARNAR, B. 2010, Arheologija bojišč rimske dobe (Roman Battleield Archaeology). – Arheo 27, 73–80 [summary in English / povzetek v angleščini]. LAHARNAR, B. 2011, Roman lead slingshots (glandes plumbeae) in Slovenia / Rimski svinčeni izstrelki za pračo (glandes plumbeae) iz Slovenije. – Arheološki vestnik 62, 339–374. LAHARNAR, B. 2012, Notranjska med prazgodovino in antiko (he Notranjska region [SW Slovenia] between prehistory and antiquity). – Unpublished Ph. D. thesis / Neobjavljena doktorska disertacija, Oddelek za arheologijo, Filozofska fakulteta Univerze v Ljubljani [summary in English / povzetek v angleščini]. LAHARNAR, B., MLINAR, M. 2011, K Minervi in Hefajstu na Vrh gradu. – EPIcenter 12/1–2, 24–25. LAHARNAR, B., MLINAR, M. 2014, Prazgodovinski srebrni daritveni ploščici s Šentviške planote. – Keria, Studia Latina et Graeca 16/1, 9–20. MARTIN-KILCHER, S. 2011, Römer und gentes Alpinae im Konlikt – archäologische und historische Zeugnisse des 1. Jahrhunderts v. Chr. – In/V: G. Moosbauer, R. Wiegels (eds./ ur.), Fines imperii-imperium sine ine? Römische Okkupations- und Grenzpolitik im frühen Principat. Beiträge zum Kongress “Fines imperii-imperium sine ine?” Osnabrück vom 14. bis 18. september 2009, Osnabrücker Forschungen zu Altertum und Antike-Rezeption 14, Rahden, 27–62. MELLER, H. 2002, Die Fibeln aus dem Reitia-Heiligtum von Este (Ausgrabungen 1880–1916). Studien zu den Spätlatèneformen / Le ibule dal santuario di Reitia a Este (scavi 1880–1916). Studio delle forme del tardo La Tène. – Studien zu vor- und frühgeschichtlichen Heiligtümern 2, Il santuario di Reitia a Este 1, Mainz am Rhein. MLINAR, M., CREVATIN, F. 2012, Laminetta d’argento con iscrizione venetica proveniente da Vrh gradu sull’altipiano di Šentviška planota in Slovenia occidentale. – V/In: V. Orioles (ur./ed.), Per Roberto Gusmani, Linguistica storica e teoretica, Studi in ricordo 2/1, Udine, 287–294. MÜLLER, M. 2002, Die römischen Buntmetallfunde von Haltern. – Bodenaltertümer Westfalens 37, Mainz. OCHARÁN LARRONDO, J. A. 2006, La Batalla de Andagoste (Cuartango, Alava). – http://www.euskonews.com/0333zbk/ gaia33302es.html. OCHARÁN LARRONDO, J. A., UNZUETA PORTILLA, M. 2002, Andagoste (Cuartango, Álava). Un nuevo escenario de las guerras de conquista en el norte de Hispania. – In/V: A. Morillo Cerdán (ed./ur.), Arqueología militar romana en Hispania, Anejos de Gladius 5, Madrid, 311–325. OCHARÁN LARRONDO, J. A., UNZUETA PORTILLA, M. 2006, IX. El campo de batalla de Andagoste (Álava). – In/V: M. P. García Bellido (ed./ur.), Los campamentos romanos en Hispania (27 a.C.–192 d.C.), El abastecimiento de moneda, Anejos de Gladius 9, Madrid, 473–492. PAVLIN, P. 2014, Starejšeželeznodobni košarasti obeski, okrašeni z vodoravnimi črtami / Early Iron Age basket-shaped pendants with horizontal line decoration. – In/V: S. Tecco Hvala (ed./ur.), Studia praehistorica in honorem Janez Dular, Opera Instituti Archaeolgici Sloveniae 30, 341–354. POUX, M. 2008, L’empreinte du militaire tardo-républicain dans les faciès mobiliers de La Tène inale. – In/V: M. Poux (ed./ ur.), Sur les traces de César, Militaria tardo-républicains en contexte gaulois, Collection Bibracte 14, Glux-en-Glenne, 299–432. RAGETH, J. 2004, Frührömische Militaria aus dem Oberhalbstein GR – Belege für den Alpenfeldzug? – Jahrbuch der Schweizerischen Gesellschaft für Ur- und Frühgeschichte 87, 297–303. RAGETH, J. 2005, Weitere frührömische Militaria und andere Funde aus dem Oberhalbstein GR – Belege für den Alpenfeldzug. – Jahrbuch der Schweizerischen Gesellscahft für Ur- und Frühgeschichte 88, 302–312. RAGETH, J. 2009, Römische und keltische Funde aus dem Crap-Ses-Gebiet. – In/V: 2000 Jahre Varusschlacht, 1. Imperium, Stuttgart, 270–272. RAGETH, J. 2011, Belege zum Alpenfeldzug aus dem Oberhalbstein GR. – In/V: C. Ebnöther, R. Schatzmann (eds./ur.), Oleum non perdidit, Festschrift für Stefanie Martin-Kilcher zu ihrem 65. Geburtstag, Antiqua 47, Basel, 59–69. RIC II: H. Mattingly, E. A. Sydenham, he Roman Imperial Coinage. Vol. II: Vespasian to Hadrian. – London, 1926. MLINAR, M., GERBERC, T., LAHARNAR, B. 2014, Kot nekoč. Breginjski kot v arheoloških dobah. Katalog razstave. – Tolmin. RIC II/1: A. Carradice, T. V. Buttrey, he Roman Imperial Coinage. Vol. II, Part 1, From AD 69–96: Vespasian to Domitian. – London, 2007. MORILLO CERDÁN, Á. 2014, Arqueología de la conquista del Norte peninsular. Nuevas interpretaciones sobre las campañas del 26–25 a.C. – In/V: F. Cadiou, M. Navarro Caballero (eds./ur.), La guerre et ses traces, Conlits et sociétés en Hispanie à l’ époque de la conqête romaine (IIIe–1er s. a.C.), Mémoires 37, Bordeaux, 133–148. RIC III: H. Mattingly, E. A. Sydenham, he Roman Imperial Coinage. Vol. III: Antoninus Pius to Commodus. – London, 1930. RIC IV/1: H. Mattingly, E. A. Sydenham, he Roman Imperial Coinage. Vol. IV, Part I: Pertinax to Geta. – London, 1936. 65 RIC X: J. P. C. Kent, he Roman Imperial Coinage. Vol. X: he Divided Empire and the Fall of the Western Parts 395–491. – London, 1994. RODRÍGUEZ MORALES, J., FERNÁNDEZ MONTORO, J. L., SÁNCHEZ SÁNCHEZ, J., BENÍTEZ DE LUGO ENRICH, L. 2012, Los clavi caligarii o tachuelas de cáliga. Elementos identiicadores de las calzadas Romanas. – Lucentum 31, 147–164. ROTH-RUBI, K. 2002, Why Dangstetten? – In/V: P. Freeman et al. (eds./ur.), Limes XVIII, Poceedings of the XVIIIth International Congress of Roman Frontier Studies, held in Amman, Jordan, September 2000, BAR International Series 1084, 509–514. ROTH-RUBI, K. 2006, Dangstetten III. Das Tafelgeschirr aus dem Militärlager von Dangstetten. – Forschungen und Berichte zur Vor- und Frühgeschichte in Baden-Württemberg 103, Stuttgart. ROTH-RUBI, K., SCHLATENBRAND OBRECHT, V., SCHINDLER, M. P., ZACH, B. 2004, Neue Sicht auf die “Walenseetürme”. – Jahrbuch der Schweizerischen Gesellscahft für Urund Frühgeschichte 87, 33–70. RRC: M. H. Crawford, Roman Republican Coinage. – London, 1974. SANDER, A. 1992, Katalog der Kleinfunde. Die Grabungen 1962–1986. – In/V: J.-S. Kühlborn, Das Römerlager in Oberaden III, Die Ausgrabungen im nordwestlichen Lagerbereich und weitere Baustellenuntersuchungen der Jahre 1962–1988, Bodenaltertümer Westfalens 27, Münster, 135–173. Schlachtfeldarchäologie 2009: H. Meller (ed./ur.), Schlachtfeldarchäologie / Battleield archaeology. 1. Mitteldeutscher Archäologentag vom 09. bis 11. Oktober 2008 in Halle (Saale). – Tagungen des Landesmuseums für Vorgeschichte Halle 2, Halle 2009. SIEVERS, S. 1997, Armes. – In/V: P. Rouillard (ed./ur.), Antiquités de l’Espagne, Paris, 58–67. SIEVERS, S. 2001, Les armes d’Alésia. – In/V: M. Reddé, S. von Schnurbein (eds./ur.), Alésia, 2: Le matériel, Mémoires de l’Académie des inscriptions et belles-lettres 22, Paris, 121–291. SNG: N. Breitenstein (ed./ur.), Sylloge Nummorum Graecorum Dänemark. he Royal Collection of Coins and Medals Danish National Museum. Italy – Part III – Lucania: Poseidonia-Bruttium. – Copenhagen, 1942. TAGLIAFERI, A. 1986a, Coloni e legionari romani nel Friuli Celtico. Una ricerca archeologica per la storia. 1: Testi. – Pordenone. TAGLIAFERI, A. 1986b, Coloni e legionari romani nel Friuli Celtico. Una ricerca archeologica per la storia. 2: Documenti. – Pordenone. 66 TERŽAN, B. 1973, Valična vas. – Arheološki vestnik 24, (1975), 660–729. TEßMANN, B. 2007, Körbchenanhänger im Süden – Göritzer Bömmeln im Norden. Eine vergleichende Studie zu einem späthallstattzeitlichen Anhängertyp. – In/V: M. Blečić et al. (eds./ur.), Scripta praehistorica in honorem Biba Teržan, Situla 44, Ljubljana, 667–694. TKN: R. Göbl, Typologie und Chronologie der keltischen Münzprägung in Noricum. – Denkschriften / Österreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften, Philosophisch-historische Klasse 113 = Veröffentlichungen der Kommission für Numismatik 2, Wien, 1973. VITRI, S. 2007, Monete preromane dalle Valli del Natisone / Predrimski novci iz Nadiških dolin. – In/V: G. Banchig, St. Magnani, A. Pessina (eds./ur.), Terre d’incontro, Contatti e scambi lungo le Valli del Natisone e dell’Isonzo dall’antichita al medioevo, Atti della giornata internazionale di studi, S. Pietro al Natisone, 26 novembre 2005 / Kraji srečanj, Stiki in izmenjave vzdolž Nadiških in Soške doline od antike do srednjega veka, Zapiski z mednarodnega študijskega dne v Špetru, 26. novembra 2005, Cividale del Friuli, 154–171. VUGA, D. 1970, Cerkno. – Varstvo spomenikov 15, 147. ZANIER, W. 1988, Römische dreilügelige Pfeilspitzen. – Saalburg Jahrbuch 44, 5–27. ZANIER, W. 1997, Ein einheimischer Opferplatz mit römischen Wafen der frühesten Okkupation (15–10 v. Chr.) bei Oberammergau. – In/V: W. Groenman-van Waateringe et al. (eds./ur.), Roman Frontier Studies 1995, Proceedings of the XVIth International Congress of Roman Frontier Studies, Oxbow Monograph 91, Oxford, 47–52. ZANIER, W. 2006, Das Alpenrheintal in den Jahrzehnten um Christi Geburt. – Münchner Beiträge zur Vor- und Frühgeschichte 59, München. ZANIER, W. 2009a, Funde vom Septimierpass. – In/V: 2000 Jahre Varusschlacht, 1. Imperium, Stuttgart, 272–273. ZANIER, W. 2009b, Römische und einheimische Funde vom Opferplatz Döttenbichl, Oberammergau. – In/V: 2000 Jahre Varusschlacht, 1. Imperium, Stuttgart, 273–276. ZANIER, W. 2009c, Römische Wafenfunde vom Alpenfeldzug 15 v. Chr. – In/V: H. Meller (ed./ur.), Schlachtfeldarchäologie / Battleield Archaeology 1, Tagungen des Landesmuseums für Vorgeschichte Halle 2, Halle, 89–97. Plate 1. Gradišče in Cerkno. 1, 7, 8 iron; 2–6 copper alloy. Scale = 1 : 2 (drawing I. Murgelj). Tabla 1. Gradišče v Cerknem. 1, 7, 8 železo; 2–6 bakrova zlitina. M = 1 : 2 (risba I. Murgelj). 67 Plate 2. Gradišče in Cerkno. 1 gunmetal; 2 bronze; 3 brass; 4–32 iron. Scale = 1 : 2 (drawing I. Murgelj). Tabla 2. Gradišče v Cerknem. 1 rdeča litina; 2 bron; 3 medenina; 4–32 železo. M = 1 : 2 (risba I. Murgelj). 68 Plate 3. Gradišče in Cerkno. Iron. Scale = 1 : 2 (drawing I. Murgelj). Tabla 3. Gradišče v Cerknem. Železo. M = 1 : 2 (risba I. Murgelj). 69 Plate 4. Gradišče in Cerkno. Iron. Scale = 1 : 2 (drawing I. Murgelj). Tabla 4. Gradišče v Cerknem. Železo. M = 1 : 2 (risba I. Murgelj). 70 Plate 5. Vrh gradu near Pečine. 2 silver; 3, 4–6, 8 copper alloys; 1, 3, 9–25 iron. Scale = 1 : 2 (drawing I. Murgelj). Tabla 5. Vrh gradu pri Pečinah. 2 srebro; 3, 4–6, 8 bakrove zlitine; 1, 3, 9–25 železo. M = 1 : 2 (risba I. Murgelj). 71 Plate 6. Vrh gradu near Pečine. Lead. Scale = 1 : 2 (drawing I. Murgelj). Tabla 6. Vrh gradu pri Pečinah. Svinec. M = 1 : 2 (risba I. Murgelj). 72 Plate 7. Vrh gradu near Pečine. 1–9 lead; 10–12 iron. Scale = 1 : 2 (drawing I. Murgelj). Tabla 7. Vrh gradu pri Pečinah. 1–9 svinec; 10–12 železo. M = 1 : 2 (risba I. Murgelj). 73 GRAVES WITH WEAPONS GROBOVI Z OROŽJEM Z FROM VERDUN NEAR VERDUNA PRI STOPIČAH STOPIČE Danilo Breščak Danilo Breščak Abstract Izvleček he Late La Tène and Early Roman cemetery in Verdun near Stopiče, in the Dolenjska region, includes thirteen graves with military equipment. he latter comprise swords, helmets, shield parts, spearheads and parts of military belts. Na grobišču iz poznega latena in rimske dobe z Verduna pri Stopičah na Dolenjskem je 13 grobov z orožjem oz. vojaško opremo, ki vključuje meče, čelade, dele ščitov, sulične osti in dele vojaških pasov. Med drugimi grobnimi pridatki postopoma prevladajo predmeti iz italskih delavnic, ki jih pozneje deloma zamenjajo po italskih vzorih v domačih delavnicah narejeni predmeti. Keywords: Verdun, Celto-Roman cemetery, Late La Tène period, Early Roman period, Roman weapons 1 Introduction he Celto-Roman cemetery at Verdun near Stopiče is located roughly 6 km south-east of Novo mesto. It is isolated from the main Roman communication routes; the road from Emona to Siscia led north of the Krka river, roughly following the route of the modern motorway (ig. 1). he cemetery includes graves with Late La Tène and Early Roman weapons and is, as such, comparable with the Ključne besede: Verdun, keltsko-rimsko grobišče, pozni laten, zgodnja rimska doba, rimsko orožje 1 Uvod Keltsko-rimsko grobišče na Verdunu pri Stopičah, 6 km jugovzhodno od Novega mesta na Dolenjskem, leži odmaknjeno od glavnih komunikacij. Rimska cesta Emona–Siscia je vodila severno od Krke, približno po trasi sedanje avtoceste (sl. 1). Skupaj z grobišči Novo mesto BeFigure 1. Geographic location of the cemetery at Verdun near Stopiče in the Dolenjska region (M. Belak). Slika 1. Geografska lega grobišča Verdun pri Stopičah na Dolenjskem (izdelava M. Belak). 75 Figure 2. Verdun near Stopiče. Plan of the cemetery with marked warrior graves (F. Aš and M. Pršina). Slika 2. Verdun pri Stopičah. Načrt grobišča z označenimi vojaškimi grobovi (izdelava F. Aš in M. Pršina). cemeteries at Novo mesto-Beletov vrt,1 Strmec above Bela Cerkev2 and Mihovo.3 Burial at Mihovo took place from the Early to the Late Iron Ages and further on into the Roman period, at Novo mesto-Beletov vrt from the Early Iron Age to the 4th century AD,4 on Strmec from the Late La Tène (LT D) to the Roman period5 and at Verdun from the late phase of the Late La Tène (LT D2) to the 2nd century AD. he archaeological excavations at Verdun were conducted from 1983 to 1991 and revealed 254 cremation graves. Most (75 %) were simple rectangular, oval or circular pit-graves without stone lining; 11 % were stone burial-containers, 9 % were graves with a dry-stone lining and 5 % with a mortarbound stone lining. Stone-lined graves were characteristic from the mid-1st century AD onwards. A large portion of them was robbed in Antiquity. In form, the graves from Verdun correspond to the standard picture of the Late La Tène–Roman period cemeteries in the Dolenjska region.6 1 2 3 4 5 76 6 Knez 1992; Božič 2008. Božič 1999, 193, with references. Šribar 1968–1969; Windl 1975; Dular 2008. Božič 2008, 116–117. Božič 1999, 193–194. Cf. Knez 1968; Breščak 1985b. letov vrt z okolico,1 Strmec nad Belo Cerkvijo2 in Mihovo3 sestavlja skupino grobišč, ki vključujejo grobove s poznolatenskim in zgodnjerimskim orožjem. Na Mihovem se tradicija pokopavanja nadaljuje iz starejše v mlajšo železno dobo in naprej v rimsko obdobje, na grobišču Novo mesto Beletov vrt z okolico od starejše železne dobe do 4. st. n. št.,4 na grobišču Strmec nad Belo Cerkvijo od poznega latena (LT D) v rimsko dobo5 in na Verdunu od mlajše stopnje poznega latena (LT D2) do 2. st. n. št. Na njivah s toponimom Za cesto na Verdunu je bilo med letoma 1983 in 1991 izkopanih 254 posamično vkopanih žganih grobov. Prevladujoč način pokopa (75 %) so grobovi v preprosti pravokotni, ovalni ali okrogli grobni jami brez posebne konstrukcije. 11 % je grobov v kamnitih skrinjah, 9 % grobov ima konstrukcijo iz suhega zidu, 5 % pa je grobnic s konstrukcijo iz zidu, pri katerem kamne povezuje malta. Kamnite grobne konstrukcije so značilne za čas od sredine 1. st. n. št. naprej; med njimi je bil velik odstotek grobov, ki so bili izropani že v antiki. Verdunske 1 2 3 4 5 Knez 1992; Božič 2008. Božič 1999, 208, z navedeno lit. Šribar 1968–1969; Windl 1975; Dular 2008. Božič 2008, 116–117. Božič 1999, 208. he graves with weapons from Verdun have not yet been published in detail.7 hey were presented to the public in Novo mesto, Stopiče,8 Venice,9 Ljubljana,10 and currently form part of the permanent exhibition in the regional museum (Dolenjski muzej) in Novo mesto.11 2 Graves with weapons hirteen grave groups include one or more items of military equipment, namely swords, helmets, spearheads, as well as parts of shield bosses and military belts. Knives, in contrast, are considered primarily as implements. All thirteen graves were cremations without stones lining the pit. he burial-pits were rather large in the ground plan, measuring almost 2 × 2 m. hey represent 5.5 % of all the graves in the cemetery. Chronologically, they can be attributed to three time spans: late phase of the Late La Tène (LT D2/Mokronog IIIb),12 the Augustan period, and the period from the reign of Tiberius to and including the reign of Nero. oblike grobov se vklapljajo v standardno podobo grobov poznolatensko-rimskega obdobja na Dolenjskem.6 Grobovi z orožjem z Verduna so deloma že bili predstavljeni v strokovnih objavah7 in na razstavah v Novem mestu in Stopičah,8 v Benetkah9 in Ljubljani10 ter so na ogled na stalni razstavi v Dolenjskem muzeju v Novem mestu.11 2 Grobovi z orožjem V 13 grobovih je med pridatki z enim ali več primerki zastopano orožje, tj. meč, sulična ost, deli ščitne grbe in čelada. Nožev nismo uvrstili med orožje, saj so v prvi vrsti orodje. Vseh 13 grobov sodi v skupino preprostih žganih grobov brez posebne konstrukcije. Njihovi tlorisi so razmeroma veliki, največji meri malo manj kot 2 × 2 m. Obsegajo 5,5 % vseh grobov. Časovno sodijo v tri skupine: mlajšo stopnjo poznega latena (LT D2/Mokronog IIIb),12 avgustejsko dobo ter v dobo od vlade cesarja Tiberija do vključno Nerona. 2.1 Grobovi stopnje LT D2 2.1 Graves of LT D2 Dated to the LT D2/Mokronog IIIb is Grave 37 (pls. 10– 11; pl. 12: 1–2).13 Its goods comprise ceramic vessels, two brooches and a belt buckle, as well as a sword in its scabbard (pl. 11: 6), a shield boss and a spearhead (pl. 12: 1, 2). All three items of weaponry are characteristic of the Mokronog IIIb phase.14 he objects were made in the La Tène tradition,15 with the exception of the Roman amphorae, but also the sword and its scabbard, which show clear Roman inluence.16 Based on the brooch17 and on the absence of Roman objects, the same date can probably be attributed to Grave 98 (pl. 19: 4–10), in which a spearhead represents the sole piece of weaponry. Grave 37 further revealed a bronze brooch with two knobs on the bow (pl. 11: 5), which corresponds to Type A 237a, after Garbsch. Demetz ascribed it to Subtype A237a3(b), characterised by openwork decoration of two squares and V mlajši del stopnje LT D2/Mokronog IIIb sodi grob 37 (t. 10–11; t. 12: 1–2).13 Poleg keramičnih posod, dveh ibul in pasne spone so bili v njem najdeni meč v nožnici (t. 11: 6), ščitna grba in sulična ost (t. 12: 1, 2). Vsi trije kosi orožja so značilni za stopnjo Mokronog IIIb.14 V grobu najdeni predmeti so bili, razen amfor, narejeni v latenski tradiciji,15 le pri meču in nožnici so očitni rimski vplivi.16 Iz istega obdobja je glede na ibulo17 in odsotnost rimskih predmetov verjetno grob 98 (t. 19: 4–10), v katerem ni drugega orožja kot sulična ost. Bronasta ibula z gumboma na loku iz groba 37 (t. 11: 5) ustreza tipu A 237a po Garbschu. Demetz jo je uvrstil v podtip A237a3(b) z dvema predrtinama in luknjico na nogi.18 Garbsch je v tip 237a vključil tudi pet ibul iz Bele Cerkve in dve iz Novega mesta,19 kjer sta bili pozneje najdeni še dve ibuli, obe fragmentirani.20 Na podlagi risb ugota6 7 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Preliminary publications: Breščak 1985a; Breščak 1986; Breščak 1987; Breščak 1988; Breščak 1990a; Breščak 1990b; Breščak 2000. Breščak 1989; Breščak 2002. The Celts, 728, 730, cat. nos. 340, 372. Breščak, Gregl 2002. Križ, Stipančić, Škedelj Petrič 2009, 163–164, 332–337, 9.2. For the nomeclature of the chronological phases cf. Božič 2008, 144–148. Božič 1992, 198; Božič 1999, 199; Božič 2008, 53–54, 122. Božič 1999, 199. Cf. Božič 1999, 199–200. Istenič 2010. Type Kostrzewski N-a; Horvat, in these book. 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Prim. Knez 1968; Breščak 1985b. Breščak 1985a; Breščak 1986; Breščak 1987; Breščak 1988; Breščak 1990a; Breščak 1990b; Breščak 2000. Breščak 1989; Breščak 2002. The Celts, 728, 730, kat. št. 340, 372. Breščak, Gregl 2002. Križ, Stipančić, Škedelj Petrič 2009, 163–164, 332–337, 9.2. Glede poimenovanj časovnih stopenj prim. Božič 2008, 144–148. Božič 1992, 198; Božič 1999, 211; Božič 2008, 53–54, 122. Božič 1999, 211. Prim. Božič 1999, 211–212. Istenič 2010. Tip Kostrzewski N-a; Horvat, v tem zborniku. Demetz 1999, 49–51, 231–232, seznam 6. Garbsch 1965, 43–44, št. 1, 4, 8, 10, 13–15. Knez 1992, gr. 55, 129, t. 18: 7, 46: 6. 77 a circle on the foot.18 In addition to this brooch, Garbsch included into his Type 237a ive brooches from Bela Cerkev and two from Novo mesto;19 the latter site later yielded another two brooches of the same type, both fragmented.20 he drawings of these brooches reveal the bows to be of a round section; only the bow of the brooch from Grave 37 at Verdun is rhombic in section. he latter was cast in a mould; the thin incisions running along the length of the bow were probably made after casting. he early form of the bronze ring belt buckle with a vertical knob has two prongs on the loop,21 while the Verdun example from Grave 37 (pl. 11: 3) is a later version with the side prongs prolonged and formed into kidney-shaped side loops.22 Grave 37 revealed a single complete ceramic vessel (pl. 10: 3), all others were already fragmented when deposited in the grave. It is possible to distinguish between the vessels that came into the grave directly and those that had irst been placed onto the pyre and burnt together with the remains of the deceased. he irst group is represented by a vessel on a high foot (pl. 10: 3) and a biconical vessel (pl. 11: 2). Placed directly into the grave was also a part of an amphora (pl. 11: 1), in which the belt buckle was placed. Other pottery was presumably intentionally broken and burnt on the pyre during cremation; its fragments were placed into the grave together with the cremated remains of the deceased. Grave 37 also revealed fragments belonging to at least one amphora; one of them is a fragment of the body with the lower part of the handle (pl. 11: 1). Small, light yellowish rim fragments with a shallow groove below the rim are suggestive of Lamboglia 2 or Dressel 6A amphorae. he presence of the amphora in itself indicates the spread of the Italic inluence. When dealing with fragments only, it is diicult to distinguish between Types Lamboglia 2 and Dressel 6A. Both are wine amphorae produced in the Adriatic region. Lamboglia 2 was developed at the end of the 2nd century BC and transformed into Type Dressel 6B by the third decade BC.23 he ribbed vessel on a high foot (pl. 10: 3) represents a ceramic form that is typical of the last phase of the Mokronog group, i.e. Mokronog IIIb/LT D2.24 It was thrown on the potter’s wheel. he upper part shows ive ribs, visible both on the exterior and the interior. At Verdun, another such vessel was found in Grave 1, while other examples are 18 19 20 21 22 23 78 24 Demetz 1999, 49–51, 231–232, list 6. Garbsch 1965, 43–44, nos. 1, 4, 8, 10, 13–15. Knez 1992, Gr. 55, 129, pls. 18: 7, 46: 6. E.g. in Grave 169 at Beletov vrt: Knez 1992, pl. 60: 1. Božič 1999, 200. Horvat, Bavdek 2009, 83–84. Božič 2008, 123; Grahek 2013, 207. vljamo, da so loki vseh naštetih ibul okroglega preseka, le ibula iz groba 37 na Verdunu ima lok rombičnega preseka. Izdelana je bila v kalupu. Po vrhu loka tečeta drobna vreza, ki dajeta vtis dodatne proilacije. Bronasta obročasta pasna spona z navpično postavljenim gumbom ima pri starejši obliki na obročku dva roglja,21 v verdunskem primeru (t. 11: 3) pa gre za mlajšo različico: roglja ob straneh sta podaljšana in sta prerasla v ledvičasto oblikovana stranska obročka; temu primerno je podaljšan del spone med trnom in obročkom.22 V grob 37 je bila dana le ena cela keramična posoda, vse druge so bile vanj odložene fragmentirane. Razlikujemo lahko posode, ki so prišle v grob skupaj s pijačo in hrano, ter odlomke posod, ki so verjetno prišli v grob skupaj z žganino z grmade. V prvo skupino sodita siva pokalna posoda na nogi (t. 10: 3) ter siva bikonična posoda z ozkim ustjem in odlomljenima ročajema (t. 11: 2). Namerno je bilo v grob dan tudi del amfore (t. 11: 1), v katerega je bila položena pasna spona. Za druge keramične odlomke domnevamo, da so ostanki ob sežigu pokojnika namerno razbitih posod, ki so v grob prispeli skupaj z žganino iz ustrine. V grobu 37 so odlomki najmanj ene amfore, med drugim del ostenja s spodnjim delom ročaja (t. 11: 1). Skromni odlomki ustja iz svetlorumenkaste keramike kažejo nekoliko spuščen spodnji rob, značilen za ustja Lamboglia 2 oziroma amfore Dressel 6A. Navzočnost amfor nakazuje širjenje italskega vpliva. Kadar so ohranjeni zgolj odlomki amfor, je težko ločiti obliki Lamboglia 2 in Dressel 6A. Gre za amfore za vino, ki izvirajo iz jadranskega okolja. Oblika Lamboglia 2 se je razvila konec 2. st. pr. n. št. in se do 3. desetletja pr. n. št. preoblikovala v obliko Dressel 6A.23 Narebrena posoda na nogi (pokal) t. 10: 3 predstavlja obliko keramičnih izdelkov, ki so značilni za najmlajšo kronološko stopnjo mokronoške skupine, tj. Mokronog IIIb/LT D2.24 Na notranji strani so posebno pri dnu izraziti sledovi izdelave na lončarskem vretenu. Vrhnji del je razčlenjen v pet izrazito reliefnih reber; srednje in zgornje rebro sta širši, druga ožja. Posode tega tipa so bile na Verdunu še v grobu 1, sicer pa so zastopane na Beletovem vrtu v Novem mestu, na Mihovem in Strmcu pri Beli Cerkvi, dobro pa so dokumentirane tudi v poznolatenskih naselbinskih plasteh Stične.25 21 22 23 24 25 Npr. v grobu 169 z Beletovega vrta: Knez 1992, t. 60: 1. Božič 1999, 211. Horvat, Bavdek 2009, 83–84. Božič 2008, 123; Grahek 2013, 207. Grahek 2013, 95, 225. known from the cemeteries at Novo mesto-Beletov vrt, Mihovo and Strmec above Bela Cerkev, as well as from the Late La Tène settlement layers of the Stična hillfort.25 Fewer parallels are available for the grey biconical vessel on pl. 11: 2. Four vessels of a generally comparable form are known from the cemetery at Novo mesto-Beletov vrt, though they difer substantially in details.26 Similar vessels are also known from a Late La Tène layer of the Stična hillfort.27 Hand-built jars with a thickened, in some examples pronouncedly everted rim, and a combed surface (pl. 10: 5) are relatively common grave goods at Verdun (pls. 1: 3; 7: 2; 8: 6; 20: 5). At Stična, such jars were found primarily in the La Tène layers.28 2.2 Graves of the Middle- and Late Augustan periods Graves 1 and 41 (pls. 1–6; pl. 12: 3–7; pls. 13–16) date to the Augustan period and revealed the most complete sets of military equipment at the cemetery. hey comprise a Mainz-type sword (with parts of its scabbard; pls. 2: 10, 13: 1–4), a Weisenau-type helmet (pls. 4–6; 14–16), a shield boss and a long shield handgrip (pls. 3: 1, 2; 13: 7); Grave 1 further contained mounts of a military belt (pl. 2: 5).29 he graves also revealed ladles of Radnóti Type 40 (pls. 3: 3; 13: 6),30 amphorae, a two-handled jug and tableware, all imported from Italy. In colour and fabric, the amphora fragments from Grave 41 come closest to Type Dressel 6B. Fragments of such an amphora were also found in Grave 1 (pl. 2: 2, 3). Two-handled jugs such as that on pl. 13: 8 originate from Italy and were used to transport foodstufs (wine, dried fruit and others). At Magdalensberg, they were imported from the Early Augustan period onwards. he form was imitated by the pottery workshops in the area of presentday Slovenia, as well as the Croatian and Serbian parts of the Danube Basin.31 he closest parallel for the jug from Grave 41 comes from Magdalensberg.32 Also originating from Italy is the thin-walled beaker on pl. 13: 5.33 he production of this type of tableware in Italy began in the mid-1st century BC, while they were most widespread between 20 BC and AD 20.34 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 Grahek 2013, 95, 225. Knez 1992, pls. 24: 2, 30: 7, 33: 4, 46: 9. Grahek 2013, 89, 91, ig. 50: V 2. Grahek 2013, 82–84, ig. 48: L 34. On dates cf. Božič 1999, 199. Božič 2002, 425. Schindler-Kaudelka 1989, 41–42. Schindler-Kaudelka 1989, pl. 22: 47. Ricci 1985, Type 1/186, 278, pl. 90: 1, 2. Macchioro Malnati 2000, 181, no. 24, pl. 13: 24. Manj možnosti za primerjavo se ponuja za sivo bikonično posodo z ozkim ustjem in dvema (neohranjenima) ročajema (t. 11: 2). Na grobišču Novo mesto Beletov vrt so štiri posode sorodne osnovne oblike (bikonične posode z dvema ročajema), ki pa se v podrobnostih močno razlikujejo.26 Podobne posode so zastopane tudi na stiškem gradišču v poznolatenski plasti.27 Prostoročno izdelani lonci z odebeljenim, včasih izrazito izvihanim ustjem in metličastim ornamentom (t. 1: 3; 7: 2; 8: 6; 10: 5; 20: 5) so na grobišču na Verdunu razmeroma pogost pridatek. V Stični taki lonci izvirajo predvsem iz latenskih plasti.28 2.2 Grobovi srednje- in poznoavgustejskega časa V srednjeavgustejski oz. srednje-poznoavgustejski čas sodita grobova 1 in 41 (t. 1–6; t. 12: 3–7; t. 13–16), ki sta obenem grobova z najpopolnejšo vojaško opremo. Sestavljajo jo meč tipa Mainz z deli pripadajoče mu nožnice (t. 2: 10, 13: 1–4), železna čelada tipa Weisenau (t. 4–6; 14–16), ščitna grba in dolg ročaj ščita (t. 3: 1, 2; 13: 7) ter v grobu 1 tudi okovi vojaškega pasu (t. 2: 5).29 Grobova vsebujeta iz Italije uvožene bronaste zajemalke tipa Radnóti 40 (t. 3: 3; 13: 6)30 in prav tako iz Italije uvožene keramične posode: amfore, dvoročajni vrč in namizno posodje. Odlomki amfore iz groba 41 so po barvi in kvaliteti keramike najbliže tipu Dressel 6B. Odlomki enake amfore so bili najdeni v grobu 1 (t. 2: 2, 3), v katerem odlomek z nastavkom držaja nakazuje pripadnost tipu Dressel 6B. Rdeči dvoročajni vrči (t. 13: 8) izvirajo iz Italije. V njih so prevažali živila (vino, konservirano sadje idr.). Na Štalenski gori so jih uvažali od zgodnjeavgustejske dobe. Obliko so prevzele lončarske delavnice na območju sedanje Slovenije in v hrvaško-srbskem delu podonavskega ozemlja.31 Najboljša primerjava za vrč iz groba 41 je znana s Štalenske gore.32 Iz Italije izvira tudi čaša z visokim lijakastim vratom, t. i. tulipanasta čaša (t. 13: 5).33 Proizvodnja v severnoitalskem okolju se je začela v sredini 1. st. pr. n. št., najbolj razširjene pa so bile takšne čaše med 20 pr. n. št. in 20 n. št.34 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 Knez 1992, t. 24: 2, 30: 7, 33: 4, 46: 9. Grahek 2013, 89, 91, sl. 50: V 2. Grahek 2013, 82–84, sl. 48: L 34. Glede datacije prim. Božič 1999, 211. Božič 2002, 425. Schindler-Kaudelka 1989, 41–42. Schindler-Kaudelka 1989, t. 22: 47. Ricci 1985, tip 1/186, 278, t. 90: 1, 2. Macchioro Malnati 2000, 181, št. 24, t. 13: 24. 79 hin-walled cups such as that on pl. 1: 6, 735 date to the Augustan and Tiberian periods and were produced in the western Po Plain.36 Imported tableware further includes two small cups of ine grey clay, without a sigillata slip, from Grave 1 (pl. 1: 4, 5); they formally resemble the Consp. 17.3.1 terra sigillata cups. At Verdun, however, the graves of this period do not contain sigillata ware. K uvoženemu namiznemu posodju sodijo tudi skodelice tankih sten z žlebom na ostenju (t. 1: 6, 7).35 Sodijo v avgustejski in tiberijski čas ter prihajajo iz zahodnopadskega okolja.36 Mednje moramo uvrstiti še skodelici iz ino prečiščene mazave sive gline brez sigilatnega premaza iz groba 1 (t. 1: 4, 5), ki sta po obliki podobni sigilatnim skodelicam Consp. 17.3.1. Na Verdunu v grobovih tega obdobja sigilatnih posod še ni. Grave 112 is also dated to the Augusto-Tiberian period (pl. 21; pl. 22: 1–5). Its grave goods include a shield boss, a sword and parts of its scabbard, as well as a spearhead. V avgustejsko-tiberijski čas sodi grob 112 z umbom, mečem in deli njegove nožnice ter s sulično ostjo (t. 21; t. 22: 1–5). 2.3 Graves of the period between the beginning of Tiberius’ rule and roughly the end of Nero’s rule 2.3 Grobovi iz obdobja od vlade cesarja Tiberija do okrog konca Neronove vlade Most of the graves with weapons from Verdun date to this period, namely Grave 84 (pls. 17–18; pl. 19: 1–3) with a sword, a shield boss and handgrip of rectangular section, and a spearhead with a facetted socket, Grave 136 (pls. 25–26) with a sword and part of a shield boss handgrip of rectangular section, Grave 146 (pl. 29: 1) with a fragment of a shield boss and a fragment of a brooch as the sole goods, Grave 228 (pls. 27–28) with a short socketed spearhead and a long spearhead with a facetted socket, Grave 24 (pls. 8–9) and possibly Graves 14 (pl. 7: 1) and 246 (pl. 29: 2–5) with a single spearhead respectively, as well as Grave 131 (pl. 22: 6–7; pls. 23–24), some of the weapons from which were old at deposition. Iz tiberijskega do vključno neronskega časa je večina grobov z orožjem: gr. 84 (t. 17–18; t. 19: 1–3) z mečem, umbom z ročajem pravokotnega preseka in sulično ostjo s fasetiranim tulcem, gr. 136 (t. 25–26) z mečem in delom ročaja umba pravokotnega preseka, gr. 146 (t. 29: 1), v katerem sta odlomek umba in ibule edina predmeta, gr. 228 (t. 27–28) s kratko sulično ostjo z okroglim tulcem in dolgo sulično ostjo s fasetiranim tulcem ter gr. 24 (t. 8–9) in morda grobova 14 (t. 7: 1) in 246 (t. 29: 2–5) s po eno sulično ostjo, ter gr. 131 (t. 22: 6–7; t. 23–24), v katerem orožje vključuje predmete, ki so bili ob pokopu že izrazito stari. he weapons in these graves consist of two short swords of the Mainz type (Gr. 84: pl. 18: 3; Gr. 136: pl. 25: 10), three shield bosses (Gr. 84: pl. 18: 1–2; Gr. 136: pl. 25: 7; Gr. 146: pl. 29: 1), four spearheads (Gr. 14: pl. 7: 1; Gr. 84: pl. 17: 10; Gr. 131: pl. 24: 2; Gr. 246: pl. 29: 4) and weapons that were old already in the Tiberio-Neronian period: a sword in its scabbard with a brass openwork mount and a shield boss of a form typical of the Mokronog IIIb phase (Gr. 131: pl. 24: 1a, 1b, 3), as well as two spearheads with a socket of a round section (Gr. 228: pl. 28: 3; Gr. 24: pl. 9: 10), which seem to be typical of the Middle- to Late Augustan period. his shows that individual pieces of weaponry remained in use longer, possibly being handed down from father to son, in the case of Grave 131 probably even from grandfather to grandson. A new form in these graves is the Radnóti 44 bronze ladle (pl. 25: 9), which was lathe-inished as opposed to earlier forms that were not. hese graves also revealed the irst imports of the Po valley terra sigillata and thin-walled tableware, the latter including an Aco beaker (pl. 17: 4). Med orožjem sta dva kratka meča tipa Mainz (gr. 84: t. 18: 3; gr. 136: t. 25: 10), tri ščitne grbe (gr. 84: t. 18: 1–2; gr. 136: t. 25: 7; gr. 146: t. 29: 1), štiri sulične osti (gr. 14: t. 7: 1; gr. 84: t. 17: 10; gr. 131: t. 24: 2; gr. 246: t. 29: 4) in za tiberijsko-neronsko dobo stare oblike orožja: meč v nožnici s predrtim okovom iz medenine in ščitna grba oblike, značilne za stopnjo Mokronog IIIb (gr. 131: t. 24: 1a, 1b, 3), ter sulični osti z okroglim tulcem (gr. 228: t. 28: 3; gr. 24: t. 9: 10), značilni za srednje-poznoavgustejski čas. Očitno so torej posamezni kosi orožja ostali dlje v uporabi, morda je prehajalo z očeta na sina, v primeru meča iz groba 131 verjetno celo na vnuka. Nova je oblika bronaste zajemalke Radnóti 44 (t. 25: 9), ki je v primerjavi z zgodnejšimi oblikami že dodelana na stružnici, predvsem pa je očiten import padske terre sigillate in keramike tankih sten, med katere lahko prištejemo tudi čašo tipa Aco (t. 17: 4). Amfore oz. njihovi odlomki so bili najdeni v grobovih 14, 131 in 136. Zastopani so tipi Dressel 6B (gr. 136), Dressel 2–4 (gr. 131: t. 23: 7) in Dressel 7–11 (gr. 14: t. 7: 5). Amphorae or their fragments were found in Graves 14, 131 and 136. hey are of Types Dressel 6B (Gr. 136), Dressel 2–4 (Gr. 131: pl. 23: 7) and Dressel 7–11 (Gr. 14: pl. 7: 5). 35 80 36 Ricci 1985, Type 2/232, 286, pl. 92: 2; Schindler-Kaudelka 1975, Forms 28 and 68, 61–64, 84–87, pls. 7, 13–14. Tassinari 1998, 40; Ricci 1985, 286. 35 36 Ricci 1985, tip 2/232, 286, t. 92: 2; Schindler-Kaudelka 1975, obliki 28 in 68, 61–64, 84–87, t. 7, 13–14. Tassinari 1998, 40; Ricci 1985, 286. Two-handled jugs are well represented (pls. 22: 7; 26: 4; 27: 2; 29: 2). Similarly as amphorae, they indicate Italic inluence. Dvoročajni vrči so na Verdunu dobro zastopani tudi v najmlajši skupini grobov z orožjem (t. 22: 7; 26: 4; 27: 2; 29: 2). Tako kot amfore kažejo na italski vpliv. Terra sigillata ware was found in Graves 24, 84, 131, 136 (and altogether in ten graves of the cemetery). It is represented by eleven plates and cups, which are of importance for the dating of the graves. he Consp. 4.4 cup with a CESTI stamp in a rectangular frame and the Consp. 27 cup with an in planta pedis CELER stamp37 date Grave 24 into the (Early) Tiberian period. he Consp. 8.1/13.2 cup and the Consp. 18.2 plate with a PRIMI/ONIS stamp in a square frame38 represent very old goods in Grave 84. he Consp. 20.4 plate with an in planta pedis ATICI stamp and the two Consp. 26/27 cups39 suggest that Grave 131 dates to the Late Tiberian period. he two Consp. 27 cups with an in planta pedis CELER and ALB stamp, respectively, as well as the two Consp. 3.2/3 plates with a FIDVS stamp40 indicate a Tiberio-Claudian date for Grave 136. Sigilatne posode so zastopane v grobovih 24, 84, 131, 136 (na celem grobišču pa v desetih grobovih) s skupaj enajstimi posodicami, tj. krožniki in skodelicami. Pomembne so za datacijo grobov. Skodelica oblike Consp. 4.4 s pečatom CESTI v pravokotnem okviru in skodelica oblike Consp. 27 s pečatom CELER i.p.p.37 kažeta na datacijo groba 24 v (zgodnje)tiberijski čas. Skodelica oblike Consp. 8.1/13.2 in krožnik oblike Consp. 18.2 s pečatom PRIMI/ ONIS v kvadratu38 iz groba 84 sodita med izrazito stare pridatke tega groba. Krožnik Consp. 20.4 s pečatom ATICI in planta pedis ter skodelici Consp. 26/2739 govorijo za datacijo groba 131 v poznotiberijski čas. Skodelice Consp. 27 s pečati CELER in ALB in planta pedis in krožnika Consp. 3.2/3 s pečatom FIDVS40 datirajo grob 136 v tiberijsko-klavdijski čas. Apart from the two-handled jugs that appear from the Middle- to Late Augustan period onwards, the ceramic goods of the latest group of graves at Verdun also include single-handled jugs. he grave goods further comprise jars with a ribbed cylindrical neck. hese often appear in combination with a thin-walled beaker or cup, which led Knez to interpret them as part of a drinking set, when discussing the cemetery at Novo mesto-Beletov vrt, where they are associated with a cup in 26 graves.41 he earliest jars of this type in the Dolenjska region were found in the graves of the Tiberio-Claudian period.42 Med keramičnim inventarjem mlajše skupine grobov so poleg dvoročajnih vrčev, ki so zastopani že v srednje-poznoavgustejskem obdobju, še enoročajni vrči. Med najdbami so tudi lonci s cilindričnim narebrenim vratom. Pogosto so v kombinaciji s čašo ali skodelico tankih sten, zato jih je Knez na Beletovem vrtu, kjer se s skodelico pojavijo v 26 primerih, označil za pivski servis.41 Najstarejši lonci tega tipa na Dolenjskem so iz tiberijsko-klavdijskih grobov.42 V dveh razmeroma bogatih grobovih tiberijsko-klavdijskega obdobja sta mlajši različici bronastih zajemalk: zajemalka tipa Radnóti 44 v grobu 136 (t. 25: 9)43 in zajemalka iz groba 131 (t. 23: 9), ki je ni mogoče opredeliti po Radnótijevi tipologiji.44 Two relatively rich graves of the Tiberio-Claudian period yielded late versions of bronze ladles: a Radnóti 44 type ladle in Grave 136 (pl. 25: 9)43 and a ladle in Grave 131 (pl. 23: 9) that could not be classiied according to the Radnóti typology.44 3 Orožje 3 Weapons 3.1 Meči 3.1 Swords Najstarejša meča in pripadajoči jima nožnici sodita v isto skupino in sta bila najdena v grobovih 37 in 131. V grobu 131 sta meč in nožnica skupaj s ščitno grbo izrazito stara predmeta, saj grob glede na sigilatno posodje ni starejši od (pozno)tiberijske dobe.45 he earliest swords in their scabbards belong to the same group and come from Graves 37 and 131. he sword and its scabbard and the shield boss from Grave 131 are decidedly old items in comparison to other items from the grave; the terra sigillata ware shows that the grave could not predate the (Late) Tiberian period.45 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 Conspectus 58, 100; OCK nos. 540, 532. Conspectus 66, 74, 82; OCK no. 1527. Conspectus 86, 98–101; OCK no. 341. Conspectus 56, 100; OCK nos. 61, 532, 832. Knez 1992, 88. Petru 1969, 198. For closest analogy in Slovenia see: Breščak 1982, pl. 9: 84. Radnóti 1938. Istenič 2010, 140, n. 4. Nožnice s predrtim okrasom na okovu iz bakrove zlitine ali srebra, s težiščem razširjenosti na keltskih in germanskih območjih, izhajajo iz keltske tradicije, del okrasnih 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 Conspectus 58, 100; OCK št. 540, 532. Conspectus 66, 74, 82; OCK št. 1527. Conspectus 86, 98–101; OCK št. 341. Conspectus 56, 100; OCK št. 61, 532, 832. Knez 1992, 88. Petru 1969, 198. Najboljša analogija v Sloveniji: Breščak 1982, t. 9: 84. Radnóti 1938. Istenič 2010, 159, op. 14. 81 Scabbards with copper alloy or silver openwork plates have their roots in the Celtic tradition and are most widespread in the Celtic and Germanic areas. In contrast, part of the decorative motifs on the openwork plates, as well as the long pronounced blade tips and the use of pure brass clearly show Roman inluence and suggest that the production and distribution of these weapons, dated between 40/30 and 15 BC, was in the Roman hands. he greatest number of these items was found in the areas of the Treveri and Taurisci tribes. Grave groups with these swords and scabbards (except Gr. 131 from Verdun – see above) show that the armament of the men buried in these graves was traditional, as only the swords and their scabbards reveal some clear Roman elements combined with the predominating La Tène ones. hey appear to have been used by the leading men who cooperated with the Romans.46 he graves of the Middle-Late Augustan (Grs. 1 and 41), Augusto-Tiberian (Gr. 112) and Tiberio-Claudian periods (Grs. 84 and 136) all revealed Mainz type swords. he swords from Graves 1, 84 and 112 were bent according to the Celtic burial ritual. he comparison of their lengths shows the late swords to be shorter (Gr. 1: 70.2 cm; Gr. 112: 71 cm; Gr. 84: 69.3 cm; Gr. 136: 64.5 cm). 3.2 Helmets he iron helmet of Type Weisenau from Grave 1 (pls. 4–6) is badly damaged and missing the upper part of the bowl and the brow-guard. he edges of the cheek and neck-guards are lined with a thin sheet of bronze, while a bronze sheet decorates the front rim. he rivets on the cheek and neck-guards have decorative enamelled heads. he same type helmet from Grave 41 (pls. 14–16) is less damaged; it seems to have been protected by a patina that most likely formed in ire. here are two other helmets of this type in Slovenia; one was found in the cemetery in Idrija pri Bači,47 while the other one, of unknown provenance, is held in the National Museum of Slovenia in Ljubljana. Geographically closest to Verdun, however, are the two Weisenau type helmets from the River Kupa (found near Sisak, Croatia).48 Another two helmets, made of bronze, were unearthed in the fortress at Burnum in Croatia.49 motivov predrtega okrasa, dolge in izrazite konice rezil dela mečev ter predvsem uporaba čiste medenine pa jasno kažejo rimske vplive. Ti nakazujejo, da sta bili izdelava in distribucija tega orožja, datirani med 40/30 in 15 pr. n. št., rimski. Največ takih nožnic je bilo odkritih pri Treverih in Tavriskih. Grobne celote (z izjemo gr. 131 z Verduna – glej zgoraj) kažejo, da je bila njihova oborožitev tradicionalna, le nožnice in meči kažejo poleg prevladujočih latenskih tudi nedvomne rimske elemente. Zdi se, da so jih uporabljali njihovi vodilni možje, ki so sodelovali z Rimljani.46 V grobovih srednje-poznoavgustejske (gr. 1 in 41), avgustejsko-tiberijske (gr. 112) oz. tiberijsko-klavdijske (gr. 84 in 136) dobe so meči tipa Mainz. Meči iz grobov 1, 84 in 112 so bili po keltskem obrednem običaju ob pokopavanju zviti. Primerjava dolžine mečev kaže, da so mlajši meči krajši (gr. 1: 70,2 cm; gr. 112: 71 cm; gr. 84: 69,3 cm; gr. 136: 64,5 cm). 3.2 Čelade Železna čelada tipa Weisenau iz groba 1 (t. 4–6) je močno poškodovana, saj ji manjkata vrhnji del oglavja in čelni ščitnik. Lični in zatilni ščitniki so obrobljeni s tenko bronasto pločevino, na čelnem izrezu pa je pritrjen bronast ornamentalni trak. Na ličnih in zatilnem ščitniku so gumbi, v katere je bil vložen emajl. Čelada istega tipa iz groba 41 (t. 14–16) je manj poškodovana; zdi se, da je bila zaščitena s patino, ki je nastala najverjetneje zaradi delovanja ognja. V Sloveniji sta znani čeladi tega tipa še z grobišča na Idriji pri Bači,47 Narodni muzej v Ljubljani hrani tako čelado z neznanega najdišča. Nam najbliže na Hrvaškem sta bili čeladi tipa Weisenau najdeni v strugi Kolpe pri Sisku,48 primerka bronastih izvedenk tega tipa pa sta bila najdena v legijskem taboru Burnum na Hrvaškem.49 Verdunski čeladi skupaj s primerkom z Idrije pri Bači sodita med najstarejše primerke tipa Weisenau. Waurick je opozoril, da vzhodnokeltska čelada z grobišča Idrija pri Bači in čelada tipa Port z Reke pri Cerknem nakazujeta možnost izdelave čelad tipa Weisenau na območju Slovenije.50 Menil je tudi, da so čelade tipa Weisenau v zgodnjem obdobju (do vključno sredine 1. st.) nosili vojaki pomožnih enot, ne pa legionarji. 3.3 Ščitne grbe he helmets from Verdun and Idrija pri Bači rank among the earliest examples of the Weisenau type. In connection with that, Waurick notes that the Eastern Celtic helmet from Idrija pri Bači and the Port type helmet from Reka near Cerkno suggest the possibility of these helmets be- Po mnenju Dragana Božiča51 železne ščitne grbe z Verduna predstavljajo tri razvojne stopnje, ki ustrezajo zgoraj 46 46 47 48 82 49 Istenič 2010. Guštin 1991, pl. 16: 1. Radman-Livaja 2004, 71–75, cat. nos. 127, 128, igs. 14–16, pls. 26, 27. Radman-Livaja 2010, 144, cat. nos. 1–3. 47 48 49 50 51 Istenič 2010. Guštin 1991, t. 16: 1. Radman-Livaja 2004, 71–75, kat. 127, 128, sl. 14–16, t. 26, 27. Radman-Livaja 2010, 144, kat. 1–3. Waurick 1988, 354–356. Ustna informacija. ing produced on the territory of present-day Slovenia.50 He also believes that the Weisenau type helmets were worn by the soldiers of auxiliary units rather than legionaries until the mid-1st century AD. 3.3 Shield bosses In the opinion of Dragan Božič,51 the shield bosses from Verdun show three stages of development, which correspond with the above-proposed chronological division of the Verdun graves with weapons (Chapters 2.1–2.3). he earliest are round shield bosses of Type Verdun Grave 37 (pl. 12: 2).52 Such bosses are also known from two graves in the cemetery on Strmec above Bela Cerkev (Košak B cemetery, Grave 1; Červan A cemetery, Grave 5)53 and from the much later (Late Tiberian) Grave 131 at Verdun (pl. 24: 3). hree of these graves (Verdun Grs. 37 and 131, Strmec above Bela Cerkev, Košak, Gr. 1) also contained Late La Tène swords in associated scabbards with brass openwork plates (cf. Chapter 3.1). he lange of Type Verdun Grave 37 shield boss shows a stepped transition into an inwardly inclined straight neck, which then has a stepped transition into the boss cone that is rounded towards the apex and not exceptionally high. he boss was attached to a wooden board of the shield with ive or six conical-headed rivets. he handgrips have not survived. In section, the shield bosses of Type Verdun Grave 37 correspond extremely well to the earlier shield bosses of Type Beletov vrt Grave 169 (Mokronog IIIa/LT D1)54, but are smaller.55 he shield bosses from the Middle- to Late Augustan Graves 1 and 41, as well as that from Grave 112 belong, according to Božič, to the shield bosses of Type Verdun Grave 1.56 Apart from Verdun, they were also found in the cemeteries on Strmec hill above Bela Cerkev,57 Polhov Gradec58 and Reka near Cerkno.59 hey are characterised by a narrow and straight lange that has a simple transition into a low cylindrical neck and then into the cone with either a rounded or a pointed apex. he bosses were attached to the shield board with ive to eight rivets with wide and hollow hemispherical heads. he handgrips are long and have either a hemispherical or a triangular section. he shield bosses of the Verdun Grave 84 type are characteristic of the Tiberian and later periods.60 hey have a 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 Waurick 1988, 354–356. Oral communication. Božič 1999, 211. Božič 1992, 104, 137, 198, pls. 20: 3, 27: 11. Cf. Knez 1992, pl. 61: 2. Božič 1999, 211; Božič 2008, 122. Božič 1992, 205, list 12, 205; oral communication. Božič 1992, pls. 17: 6, 22: 2a, b. Ložar 1938, 95, nos. 32–34, ig. 22d–f; Slabe 1974, 204, no. A1. Guštin 1991, pls. 33: 15, 34: 2. Dragan Božič, oral communication. (pogl. 2.1–2.3) nakazani časovni delitvi verdunskih grobov z orožjem. Najstarejše so okrogle ščitne grbe vrste Verdun, grob 37 (t. 12: 2).52 Znane so iz dveh grobov s Strmca nad Belo Cerkvijo (grobišče Košak B, grob 1, in grobišče Červan A, grob 5)53 ter iz veliko mlajšega (poznotiberijskega) groba 131 z Verduna (t. 24: 3). V treh od naštetih grobov (Verdun gr. 37 in 131 ter Strmec nad Belo Cerkvijo, Košak, gr. 1) so v grobovih tudi poznolatenski meči v nožnicah s predrtimi medeninastimi okovi (prim. pogl. 3.1). Krajec ščitnih grb vrste Verdun grob 37 stopnjasto preide v navznoter nagnjen raven odsek, ki se stopničasto razširi v kaloto; ta je zaobljena proti vrhu in ni zelo visoka. Grba je bila na lesen ščit pritrjena s petimi ali šestimi žeblji s konično skovanimi glavami. Prečke ročaja niso ohranjene. Ščitne grbe vrste Verdun, grob 37, po preseku povsem ustrezajo ščitnim grbam vrste Beletov vrt, grob 169,54 stopnje Mokronog IIIa/ LT D1, vendar so manjše od njih.55 Ščitni grbi iz srednje-poznoavgustejskih grobov 1 in 41 z Verduna ter grba iz groba 112 sodijo po Božiču k ščitnim grbam vrste Verdun, grob 1.56 Razen z Verduna jih poznamo z grobišč Strmec nad Belo Cerkvijo,57 Polhov Gradec58 in Reka pri Cerknem.59 Njihove značilnosti so ozek in raven krajec, ki brez stopnice preide v nizek valjast del, ta pa v kaloto, na vrhu zaobljeno ali stožčasto. Na ščit so bile pritrjene s petimi do osmimi žeblji s polkrožnimi širokimi votlimi glavami. Pripadajoči jim ročaji so dolgi in imajo polkrožen ali trikoten presek. Za tiberijsko in mlajša obdobja so značilne ščitne grbe vrste Verdun, grob 84.60 Zanje je značilna višja in stožčasta kalota ter pritrditev na leseni del ščita z žeblji s široko glavo. Razen v grobu 84 je bila na Verdunu najdena še v grobu 146 (t. 29: 1). 3.4 Sulične osti Sulična ost iz groba 37 (t. 12: 1) je dolga, list ima rombični presek, tulasto nasadilo pa okrogel presek. Srednje-poznoavgustejska grobova 1 in 41 nimata suličnih osti, ki pa so zastopane v šestih grobovih najmlajše skupine (gr. 14, 24, 84, 131, 228 in 246). Dolge sulične osti z dolgim listom in razmeroma kratkim fasetiranim tulcem so bile najdene v najmlajši skupini verdunskih grobov z orožjem (gr. 84, 131, 228 in 14). 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 Božič 1999, 199. Božič 1992, 104, 137, 198, t. 20: 3, 27: 11. Prim. Knez 1992, t. 61: 2. Božič 1999, 211; Božič 2008, 122. Božič 1992, 205, seznam 12, 205; ustno. Božič 1992, t. 17: 6, 22: 2a, b. Ložar 1938, 95, št. 32–34, sl. 22d–f; Slabe 1974, 204, št. A1. Guštin 1991, t. 33: 15, 34: 2. D. Božič, ustna informacija. 83 higher cone and are attached to the wooden board with wide-headed rivets. Apart from Grave 84, such a shield boss was also found in Verdun’s Grave 146 (pl. 29: 1). 3.4 Spearheads he spearhead from Grave 37 (pl. 12: 1) is long; its blade has a rhombic section and its socket a round one. No spearheads were found in the Middle- to Late Augustan Graves 1 and 41, while they were present in six graves of the latest group (Grs. 14, 24, 84, 131, 228 and 246). his group of graves with weapons also revealed long spearheads with long blades and relatively short and facetted sockets (Grs. 84, 131, 228 and 14). 4 Conclusion he analysis of the grave goods in the warrior graves from Verdun showed a development in individual weapon forms. he habit of deposing weapons into graves became unusual after the inclusion of the area into the Roman state; it is found to have continued primarily in the traditionally Celtic milieus. It was an expression of the local population upholding their material and spiritual traditions, which is also observable in other grave goods. he graves show a gradual introduction of Italic goods that inluenced local habits, beliefs and crafts, particularly pottery production, which provided increasing numbers of vessels made from Italic models. his gradual process can be observed in both male and female graves, which were not included in the article. he last male graves with weapons at Verdun date to the reign of Nero. his suggests that Romanisation at Verdun ends around the middle of the second half of the 1st century AD. Acknowledgements In preparing my contribution for the meeting, I was aided by Dragan Božič (Institute of Archaeology, Slovenian Academy of Sciences and Arts), who provided helpful discussions and ofered advice on the literature; Andrej Šemrov (National Museum of Slovenia), who identiied the coins; Jana Horvat (Institute of Archaeology, Slovenian Academy of Sciences and Arts); and Janka Istenič (National Museum of Slovenia), who edited the submitted contribution, as well as by my colleagues from the Institute for the Protection of Cultural Heritage of Slovenia, Regional Oice Novo mesto, namely Franci Aš, who rendered the plates in digital form; Marko Pršina, who prepared the Power Point presentation; Anđelka Fortuna Saje, who drew the small inds and rendered the plates, and Mateja Belak (Institute of Archaeology, Slovenian Academy of Sciences and Arts), who made the map. Sincere thanks to all. 84 4 Zaključek Analiza pridatkov vojaških grobov z Verduna pokaže razvoj posameznih oblik. Pokopavanje z orožjem je v obdobju po vključitvi ozemlja v sklop rimske države izjema, zaznana zlasti v tradicionalnih keltskih okoljih. Navezanost lokalnega prebivalstva na lastno tradicionalno materialno in duhovno izročilo se kaže tudi v drugih grobnih pridatkih. Ti kažejo na postopno prodiranje italskih dobrin, ki so vplivale na spremembo navad, verovanja, pa tudi na domače obrti, zlasti na lokalne lončarske obrate, ki so vse bolj prevzemali italske oblike. To vse se kaže tudi v inventarjih ženskih grobov, ki pa v tem pregledu niso bili zajeti. Romanizacija, o kateri je dejansko beseda, se je sredi druge polovice 1. stoletja zaključila, moških grobov z orožjem na grobišču Verdun po obdobju vlade cesarja Nerona ni bilo več. Zahvala Ob pripravi referata na simpoziju in pri nastanku tega članka so mi pomagali: Dragan Božič (IzA SAZU) z dragocenimi konzultacijami in nasveti glede literature, Andrej Šemrov (Narodni muzej Slovenije), ki je opredelil novce, Jana Horvat (IzA SAZU) in Janka Istenič (Narodni muzej Slovenije) z ureditvijo članka ter sodelavci iz ZVKDS OE Novo mesto: Franci Aš pri računalniški obdelavi tabel, Marko Pršina pri pripravi PPS-prezentacije, Anđelka Fortuna Saje je avtorica arheoloških risb in oblikovalka tabel, Mateja Belak (IzA SAZU) je izdelala karto. Vsem iskrena zahvala. CATALOGUE61 KATALOG61 Grave 1 (pls. 1–6) Simple cremation grave. he rectangular grave-pit, measuring 180 × 190 cm, was hewn into the bedrock. It revealed a sandy ill along the south-eastern side and an up to 15 cm thick layer of cremated remains with a number of fragments of various ceramic vessels elsewhere. Grob 1 (t. 1–6) Preprost žgani grob. Pravokotna grobna jama velikosti 180 × 190 cm je bila vsekana v skalno osnovo. Ob jugovzhodni stranici je bilo peščeno zasutje, v drugih dveh tretjinah groba pa je bila do 15 cm debela plast žganine, pomešana z množico odlomkov različnih keramičnih posod. 1. Iron helmet of Weisenau type, bronze piping on the neckguard and cheek-pieces, bronze sheet on the rim on the front of the bowl. Rec. h. 20.8 cm, w. 33.5 cm; neck-guard w. 9.4 cm, cheek-piece h. 14.6 cm, w. 3.7 cm. Inv. No. A 1486 (pls. 4–6). 2. Iron sword, bent. L. 70.2 cm, w. 5.3 cm. Inv. No. A 1487 (pl. 2: 10). 3. Iron shield boss (d. 18 cm, h. 9.6 cm) and handgrip (l. 39 cm, th. 0.8 cm. Inv. No. A 1488 (pl. 3: 1–2). 4. Iron knife. Surv. l. 21.3 cm. Inv. No. A 1489 (pl. 2: 6). 5. Iron razor. Surv. l. 10.7 cm. Inv. No. A 1490 (pl. 3: 4). 6. Bronze ladle. Surv. h. 13.3 cm. Inv. No. A 1491 (pl. 3: 3). 7. Four bronze military belt-plates, one of them survives only in fragments. L. 4.7, 4.2 and 4.4 cm. Inv. No. A 1492 (pl. 2: 5). 8. Bronze Almgren 236c type brooch. L. 4 cm. Inv. No. A 1493 (pl. 2: 9). 9. Bronze Almgren 67 type brooch. L. 7.4 cm. Inv. No. A 1494 (pl. 2: 8). 10. Bronze ring from sword scabbard. W. 2.2 cm. Inv. No. A 1495 (pl. 2: 7). 11. Grey biconical jar, rim does not survive. D. 36.2 cm. Colour 2.5YR 5/1. Inv. No. A 1496 (pl. 1: 1). 12. Vessel with a reddish-brown slip. H. 31 cm. Colour 7.5YR 6/4. Inv. No. A 1497 (pl. 2: 4). 13. Grey cup. H. 5.5 cm. Colour 2.5YR 6/1. Inv. No. A 1498 (pl. 1: 4). 14. Grey cup. H. 6.1 cm. Colour 2.5YR 6/1. Inv. No. A 1499 (pl. 1: 5). 15. Grey beaker. H. 6.1 cm. Colour 2.5YR 5/1. Inv. No. A 1500 (pl. 1: 7). 16. Grey beaker. H. 6.1 cm. Colour 2.5YR 5/1. Inv. No. A 1501 (pl. 1: 6). 17. Upper part of a brownish-red lid. H. 4.1 cm. Colour 7.5YR 6/4. Inv. No. A 1502 (pl. 2: 1). 18. Hand-built grey-brown jar, coarse ware, surface combed. H. 17.6 cm. Colour 2.5YR 6/2. Inv. No. A 1503 (pl. 1: 3). 19. Fragments of a jar, grey coarse ware. Colour 7.5YR 5/1. Inv. No. A 1504. 20. Fragments of a red jug. Colour 7.5YR 6/8. Inv. No. A 1505. 21. Upper part of a reddish-brown jar. Rim d. 16 cm. Colour 7.5YR 6/3. Inv. No. A 1506 (pl. 1: 2). 22. Fragments of a Dressel 6B type amphora. Surv. h. of handle 15 cm. Inv. No. A 1508 (pl. 2: 2–3). 23. Fragments of a greyish-brown beaker, incised decoration. Colour 2.5YR 5/1. Inv. No. A 1509. 24. Animal bones. Inv. No. A 1510. 1. Železna čelada tipa Weisenau z ličnima in zatilnim ščitnikom; močno deformirana. Čelni del je okrašen z bronasto pločevino z valovnico, lični in zatilni ščitnik pa z bronasto obrobo. V. 20,8 cm, š. 33,5 cm, š. vratnega ščitnika 9,4 cm, v. ličnega ščitnika 14,6 cm, š. ličnega ščitnika 3,7 cm. Inv. št. A 1486 (t. 4–6). 2. Železen meč, zvit. D. 70,2 cm, š. 5,3 cm, d. ročajnega jezika 15,3 cm. Inv. št. A 1487 (t. 2: 10). 3. Železna grba in ročaj ščitne grbe. Ščitna grba: pr. 18 cm, v. 9,6 cm; ročaj: d. ročaja 39 cm, deb. 0,8 cm. Inv. št. A 1488 (t. 3: 1–2). 4. Železen nož. Ohr. d. 21,3 cm. Inv. št. A 1489 (t. 2: 6). 5. Železna britev. Ohr. d. 10,7 cm. Inv. št. A 1490 (t. 3: 4). 6. Bronasta zajemalka z vrezanim okrasom na hrbtni strani ročaja. Ohr. v. 13,3 cm. Inv. št. A 1491 (t. 3: 3). 7. Štirje bronasti okovi vojaškega pasu, okrašeni s koncentričnimi krogi; v vogalih in sredini luknje od zakovic; trije okovi so celi, od enega pa so ohranjeni le odlomki. D. okovov 4,7, 4,2 in 4,4 cm. Inv. št. A 1492 (t. 2: 5). 8. Bronasta ibula, tip Almgren 236c. D. 4 cm. Inv. št. A 1493 (t. 2: 9). 9. Bronasta ibula, tip Almgren 67. D. 7,4 cm. Inv. št. A 1494 (t. 2: 8). 10. Bronasti obroček, del nožnice meča. Pr. 2,2 cm. Inv. št. A 1495 (t. 2: 7). 11. Siv bikoničen lonec, ustje ni ohranjeno. Pr. 36,2 cm. Barva 2,5YR 5/1. Inv. št. A 1496 (t. 1: 1) 12. Rdečerjavo premazana narebrena posoda na nogi (pokal). V. 31 cm. Barva 7,5YR 6/4. Inv. št. A 1497. (t. 2: 4). 13. Siva skodelica. V. 5,5 cm. Barva 2,5YR 6/1. Inv. št. A 1498 (t. 1: 4). 14. Siva skodelica. V. 6,1 cm, pr. 11,9 cm. Barva 2,5YR 6/1. Inv. št. A 1499 (t. 1: 5). 15. Siva čaša. V. 6,1 cm. Barva 2,5YR 5/1. Inv. št. A 1500 (t. 1: 7). 16. Delno ohranjena siva čaša. V. 6,1 cm. Barva 2,5YR 5/1. Inv. št. A 1501 (t. 1: 6). 17. Zgornji del rjavordečega pokrova. V. 4,1 cm, pr. 9,9 cm. Barva 7,5YR 6/4. Inv. št. A 1502 (t. 2: 1). 18. Grob, prostoročno izdelan sivorjav lonec z metličastim okrasom. V. 17,6 cm. Barva 2,5YR 6/2. Inv. št. A 1503 (t. 1: 3). 19. Odlomki sivega, grobega lonca z ravnim ustjem. Barva 7,5YR 5/1. Inv. št. A 1504. 20. Odlomki rdečega vrča z močno proiliranim ustjem. Barva 7,5YR 6/8. Inv. št. A 1505. 21. Odlomki rdečerjavega bikoničnega lonca z izvihanim ustjem. Pr. ustja 16 cm. Barva 7,5YR 6/3. Inv. št. A 1506 (t. 1: 2). 22. Odlomki ročaja in zaključka noge amfore Dressel 6B. Ohr. v. ročaja 15 cm, ohr. v. dna 9,2 cm. Barva 10YR 6/4. Inv. št. A 1508 (t. 2: 2–3). Grave 14 (pl. 7) Simple cremation grave. he large rectangular grave-pit, measuring 170 × 180 cm, 62 cm in depth, was hewn into the bedrock. 61 61 All inds are kept in the Dolenjska Museum Novo mesto. Pottery colours are described with codes based on the Munsell Soil Color Charts, 1994. Abbreviations: h. = height, l. = length, w. = width, d. = diameter, th. = thickness, surv. = surviving, rec. = reconstructed. Vse najdbe so inventarizirane v inventarni knjigi A Arheološkega oddelka Dolenjskega muzeja v Novem mestu, oznake barv pri keramiki pa so povzete po barvni skali Munsell Soil Color Charts, 1994. Okrajšave za dimenzije inventarja: v. = višina, ohr. v. = ohranjena višina, r. v. = rekonstruirana višina, d. = dolžina, ohr. d. = ohranjena dolžina, š. = širina, pr. = premer, r. pr. = rekonstruirani premer. 85 It had a partly earthen and partly sandy ill. he grave was probably partially robbed. 1. Iron spearhead, bent. L. 32 cm. Inv. No. A 1624 (pl. 7: 1). 2. Fragments of a Dressel 7–11 type amphora. H. of the drawn fragment 15 cm. Colour 10YR 8/2. Inv. No. A 1620 (pl. 7: 5). 3. Fragments of the lower part of a grey jar. Bottom d. 9.8 cm. Colour 10YR 5/1. Inv. No. A 1621 (pl. 7: 4). 4. Fragments of a black jar, coarse ware. Surv. h. 4.5 cm. Colour 5YR 2.5/1. Inv. No. A 1622 (pl. 7: 3). 5. Fragments of a brown small jar, coarse ware. Surv. h. 5 cm. Colour 7.5YR 5/4. Inv. No. A 1623 (pl. 7: 2). Grave 24 (pls. 8–9) Simple cremation grave. he rectangular grave-pit, measuring 109 × 105 cm, 85 cm in depth, was hewn into the bedrock. 1. Reddish-brown jug. H. 43.2 cm. Colour 7.5YR 7/4. Inv. No. A 1645 (pl. 8: 7). 2. Brown platter. H. 6 cm. Colour 7.5YR 4/2. Inv. No. A 1646 (pl. 9: 4). 3. Terra sigillata platter, rectangular stamp CESTI. D. 17.8 cm. Colour 5YR 7/6, slip 2.5YR 4/8. Inv. No. A 1647 (pl. 8: 5). 4. Terra sigillata cup, stamp CELER in planta pedis. D. 11.9 cm. Colour 5YR 7/6, slip 2.5YR 4/8. Inv. No. A 1648 (pl. 8: 2). 5. Grey thin-walled cup. D. 10.2 cm. Colour 10YR 5/1. Inv. No. A 1649 (pl. 8: 1). 6. Fragments of a small grey jar. Surv. h. 3.1 cm, rec. d. 11.3 cm. Colour 10YR 7/1. Inv. No. A 1650. 7. Upper part of a lid. Rec. h. 13.5 cm. Colour 10YR 6/1. Inv. No. A 1651 (pl. 9: 2). 8. Fragments of a brownish-red jar, coarse ware, surface combed. Rec. h. 13.5 cm. Colour 7.5YR 6/6. Inv. No. A 1652 (pl. 8: 6). 9. Rim fragments of a black jar. H. 4.3 cm. Colour 7.5YR 4/1. Inv. No. A 1653. 10. Fragments of a light-brown jar with incised decoration, coarse ware. Colour 10YR 7/2. Inv. No. A 1654. 11. Fragments of a grey jar. Rec. rim d. 12.4 cm. Colour 10YR 5/1. Inv. No. A 1655 (pl. 9: 3). 12. Rim fragment of a grey dish. H. 2.4 cm, w. 3 cm. Colour 10YR 7/3. Inv. No. A 1656. 13. Rim and wall fragments of a black beaker. Surv. h. 1.7 cm. Colour 5YR 2.5/1. Inv. No. A 1657 (pl. 9: 1). 14. Lower part of a red jug. Surv. h. 10.4 cm. Colour 7.5YR 7/6. Inv. No. A 1658 (pl. 8: 3). 15. Body and handle fragments of a red jug. H. 19 cm. Colour 7.5YR 7/6. Inv. No. A 1659 (pl. 8: 4). 16. Rim and neck fragment of a brown biconical jar. Colour 10YR 7/4. Inv. No. A 1660. 17. Bronze Almgren 68 type brooch. L. 4.1 cm. Inv. No. A 1661 (pl. 9: 6). 18. Bronze brooch in the form of a bird. L. 3 cm. Inv. No. A 1662 (pl. 9: 5). 19. Upper part of an iron stilus with a bronze top. L. 7.1 cm. Inv. No. A 1663 (pl. 9: 8). 20. Iron spearhead. Surv. l. 12.2 cm, w. 2.7 cm. Inv. No. A 1664 (pl. 9: 10). 21. Iron spatula. L. 15.4 cm. Inv. No. A 1665 (pl. 9: 9). 22. Small iron nail. H. 1.6 cm. Inv. No. A 1666 (pl. 9: 7). 86 Grave 37 (pls. 10–11; pl. 12: 1–2) he dark patch of the grave was easily distinguishable from the surrounding loamy earth. he simple sub-square grave-pit was dug into sterile clay and in the east hewn into crumbly bedrock. 23. Odlomki sivorjave čaše z vtisnjenim grobim ornamentom. Barva 2,5YR 5/1. Inv. št. A 1509. 24. Odlomki živalskih kosti. Inv. št. A 1510. Grob 14 (t. 7) Preprost žgani grob. Velika pravokotna grobna jama velikosti 170 × 180 cm, globoka 62 cm, je bila vsekana v skalno osnovo. Zasutje groba je bilo deloma zemljeno, deloma peščeno. Grob je bil verjetno delno izropan. 1. Uvita železna sulična ost z ozkim listom rombičnega preseka in fasetiranim tulcem. Rek. d. 32 cm, š. 3,5 cm. Inv. št. A 1624 (t. 7: 1). 2. Odlomki ročaja in ostenja amfore oblike Dressel 7–11. V. ostenja 15 cm. Barva 10YR 8/2. Inv. št. A 1620 (t. 7: 5). 3. Odlomki spodnjega dela sivega lonca. Pr. dna 9,8 cm. Barva 10YR 5/1. Inv. št. A 1621 (t. 7: 4). 4. Odlomki črnega grobega lonca. Ohr. v. 4,5 cm. Barva 5YR 2,5/1. Inv. št. A 1622 (t. 7: 3). 5. Odlomki ustja in ostenja grobega rjavega lončka. Ohr. v. 5 cm. Barva 7,5YR 5/4. Inv. št. A 1623 (t. 7: 2). Grob 24 (t. 8–9) Preprost žgani grob. Pravokotna grobna jama velikosti 109 × 105 cm, globoka 85 cm, je bila vsekana v skalno osnovo. 1. Rdečkastorjav enoročajni vrč s proiliranim ustjem. V. 43,2 cm. Barva 7,5YR 7/4. Inv. št. A 1645 (t. 8: 7). 2. Rjav krožnik. V. 6 cm. Barva 7,5YR 4/2. Inv. št. A 1646 (t. 9: 4). 3. Sigilaten krožnik s pečatom CESTI v pravokotnem polju. Pr. 17,8 cm. Barva 5YR 7/6, premaz 2,5YR 4/8. Inv. št. A 1647 (t. 8: 5). 4. Sigilatna skodelica s pečatom CELER in planta pedis. Pr. 11,9 cm. Barva 5YR 7/6, premaz 2,5YR 4/8. Inv. št. A 1648 (t. 8: 2). 5. Siva skodelica tankih sten. Pr. 10,2 cm. Barva 10YR 5/1. Inv. št. A 1649 (t. 8: 1). 6. Odlomki ustja sivega lončka. Ohr. v. 3,1 cm, r. pr. 11,3 cm. Barva 10YR 7/1. Inv. št. A 1650. 7. Zgornji del sivega pokrova. R. v. 13,5 cm. Barva 10YR 6/1. Inv. št. A 1651 (t. 9: 2). 8. Odlomki grobega rjavordečega lončka z metličastim okrasom. R. v. 13,5 cm. Barva 7,5YR 6/6. Inv. št. A 1652 (t. 8: 6). 9. Odlomki ustja črnega lončka. V. 4,3 cm. Barva 7,5YR 4/1. Inv. št. A 1653. 10. Odlomki grobega, svetlorjavega lončka z vtisnjenim okrasom. Barva 10YR 7/2. Inv. št. A 1654. 11. Odlomki sivega lonca s cilindričnim narebrenim vratom. R. pr. ustja 12,4 cm. Barva 10YR 5/1. Inv. št. A 1655 (t. 9: 3). 12. Odlomek ustja rjavega krožnika. V. 2,4 cm, š. 3 cm. Barva 10YR 7/3. Inv. št. A 1656. 13. Odlomki ustja in ostenja črne čaše. Ohr. v. 1,7 cm. Barva 5YR 2,5/1. Inv. št. A 1657 (t. 9: 1). 14. Spodnji del trebuha in dna rdečega vrča. Ohr. v. 10,4 cm. Barva 7,5YR 7/6. Inv. št. A 1658 (t. 8: 3). 15. Del ostenja in ročaj rdečega vrča. Ohr. v. 19 cm. Barva 7,5YR 7/6. Inv. št. A 1659 (t. 8: 4). 16. Del vratu rjavega bikoničnega lonca z izvihanim ustjem. Barva 10YR 7/4. Inv. št. A 1660. 17. Bronasta ibula, tip Almgren 68. D. 4,1 cm, v 2 cm. Inv. št. A 1661 (t. 9: 6). 18. Bronasta ibula v obliki goloba. D. 3 cm. Inv. št. A 1662 (t. 9: 5). 19. Zgornji del železnega stilusa z bronastim zaključkom. D. 7,1 cm. Inv. št. A 1663 (t. 9: 8). 20. Delno ohranjena železna sulična ost s tulcem okroglega preseka. Ohr. d. 12,2 cm, š. 2,7 cm. Inv. št. A 1664 (t. 9: 10). It was larger than others and measured 158 × 162 cm and up to 130 cm in depth. he east pit wall was lined with large sherds of an amphora. he ill of the grave revealed numerous pottery fragments, including large pieces of a red amphora. Under that were charred remains of two 10–12 cm-wide wooden boards (the only remains of a wooden construction in the cemetery). Under one of the boards was the ribbed vessel. Beside it was the crushed biconical jug. A thick layer of cremated remains with numerous amphora sherds and other pottery lay in the east part of the grave. he iron sword in its scabbard, spearhead, shield boss and animal bone remains were laid together along the southwest side of the grave. he pottery was placed in the centre and covered with a heap of the cremated remains of the deceased, onto which two brooches were laid. he ring belt buckle was laid onto an amphora fragment. Other ceramic goods came into the grave in fragments only. he grave group was undisturbed upon discovery. he iron objects were poorly preserved and corroded together. hey were prepared to be lifted from the grave and transported by irst entirely wrapping in gauze and then supporting by plaster bandages. he inds were sent to the workshops of the Römisch-Germanisches Zentralmuseum in Mainz, Germany for restoration. 1. Grey ribbed vessel. H. 30 cm. Colour 2.5YR 4/1. Inv. No. A 1749 (pl. 10: 3). 2. Partly surviving grey biconical jug with two handles. Rec. h. 26.4 cm. Colour 10YR 5/1. Inv. No. A 1750 (pl. 11: 2). 3. Fragments of a grey thin-walled beaker. Surv. h. 4.5 cm. Colour 10YR 6/1. Inv. No. A 1751 (pl. 10: 1). 4. Fragments of a hand-built brown jar, coarse ware, surface combed. Rec. d. of the bottom 14.8 cm. Colour 10YR 6/4. Inv. No. A 1752 (pl. 10: 2). 5. Partly surviving coarse hand-built brown jar, surface combed. Surv. h. 10.6 cm. Colour 10YR 5/4. Inv. No. A 1753 (pl. 10: 5). 6. Fragments of a hand-built brownish-black jar, coarse ware, surface combed. Surv. h. 9 cm. Colour 10YR 3/1. Inv. No. A 1754 (pl. 10: 4). 7. Amphora fragments. H. of the drawn fragment 12.8 cm. Colour 7.5YR 7/6. Inv. No. A 1755 (pl. 11: 1). 8. Animal bones. Inv. No. A 1756. 9. Iron sword in an iron and brass scabbard. L. 86.9 cm, w. 4.5 cm. Inv. No. A 1776 (pl. 11: 6a–c). 10. Iron spearhead. L. 40.3 cm. Inv. No. A 1777 (pl. 12: 1). 11. Iron shield boss. H. 10.4 cm, d. 20.5 cm. Inv. No. A 1778 (pl. 11: 2). 12. Iron brooch with a high bow and separately made spring. L. 8.5 cm. Inv. No. A 1779 (pl. 11: 4). 13. Bronze Almgren 237a type brooch. L. 10.7 cm. Inv. No. A 1780 (pl. 11: 5). 14. Bronze belt-buckle. L. 4.5 cm. Inv. No. A 1781 (pl. 11: 3). Grave 41 (pl. 12: 3–7; pls. 13–16) Simple cremation grave. he rectangular grave-pit, measuring 111 × 108 cm, 95 cm in depth, was dug into sterile loam. he patch of the grave was distinct. Amphora fragments lined the south side. he grave was half-illed with cremated remains. 1. Red two-handled jug. H. 36.4 cm. Colour 2.5YR 5/6. Inv. No. A 1760 (pl. 13: 8). 2. Grey thin-walled beaker. H. 9.3 cm. Colour 7.5YR 4/1. Inv. No. 1761 (pl. 13: 5). 21. Železna spatula. D. 15,4 cm. Inv. št. A 1665 (t. 9: 9). 22. Železen žebljiček. V. 1,6 cm. Inv. št. A 1666 (t. 9: 7). Grob 37 (t. 10–11; t. 12: 1–2) Pri grobu 37 nismo opazili, da bi imel na grobišču posebno mesto. Temnejša grobna lisa se je izrazito ločila od okoliške ilovnate površine, zato so bili robovi grobne jame lahko določljivi. Preprosto, skoraj kvadratno grobno jamo so vkopali v sterilno ilovnato podlago oz. na vzhodnem delu v krušljivo skalo. Velikost in globina nekoliko odstopata od ustaljenih mer, saj je merila 158 × 162 cm in segala do 130 cm globoko. Ob vzhodnem robu je bila grobna jama obložena z velikimi kosi razlomljene amfore. Že v zasutju groba smo odkrili precej odlomkov keramičnih posod, med njimi tudi večje kose rdeče amfore. Pod njimi smo naleteli na zoglenele ostanke dveh 10–12 cm širokih desk (edini ostanki lesene konstrukcije na celem grobišču). Tik pod eno od desk je ležal na bok zvrnjen velik narebreni pokal na nogi. Ob njem je bil močno zdrobljen bikoničen dvoročajni vrč (ročaja se nista ohranila). Na vzhodni strani groba je bila nasuta debela plast žganine s številnimi črepinjami amfore in drugih keramičnih posod. Ob jugozahodni stranici grobne jame so bili skupaj položeni železni meč v nožnici, sulična ost, ščitna grba in ostanki živalskih kosti. V sredino groba so med keramične pridatke na dno groba stresli kupček z ustrine pobranih ostankov sežganih kosti pokojnika in nanje položili bronasto in železno ibulo. V delu ustja amfore je ležala obročasta pasna spona. Drugi keramični pridatki so prišli v grob le v fragmentih. Grobna celota je bila ob odkritju nedotaknjena. Zaradi slabega stanja železnih predmetov, ki jih je rja sprijela med seboj, smo jih pripravili za dvig iz groba tako, da smo jih v celoti obdali s staničevino in jih povili z mavčnimi povoji. Tako smo predmete že na terenu pripravili za transport v delavnice Rimsko-germanskega osrednjega muzeja v Mainzu. 1. Siv, narebren pokal na nogi. V. 30 cm. Barva 2,5YR 4/1. Inv. št. A 1749 (t. 10: 3). 2. Delno ohranjen siv bikoničen dvoročajni vrč. R. v. 26,4. Barva 10YR 5/1. Inv. št. A 1750 (t. 11: 2). 3. Odlomki sive čaše tankih sten. Ohr. v. 4,5 cm. Barva 10YR 6/1. Inv. št. A 1751 (t. 10: 1). 4. Odlomki rjavega grobega lonca prostoročne izdelave z metličastim mrežastim okrasom. R. pr. dna 14,8 cm. Barva 10YR 6/4. Inv. št. A 1752 (t. 10: 2). 5. Delno ohranjen rjav grob lonček prostoročne izdelave z metličastim okrasom. Ohr. v. 10,6 cm. Barva 10YR 5/4. Inv. št. A 1753 (t. 10: 5). 6. Odlomki rjavočrnega, grobega lončka prostoročne izdelave z metličastim okrasom. Ohr. v. 9 cm. Barva 10YR 3/1. Inv. št. A 1754 (t. 10: 4). 7. Odlomki amfore. V. risanega odl. 12,8 cm. Barva 7,5YR 7/6. Inv. št. A 1755 (t. 11: 1). 8. Živalske kosti. Inv. št. A 1756. 9. Železen meč v železni in medeninasti nožnici, z ohranjenim okovom za obešanje na pas. D. 86,9 cm, š. 4,5 cm, d. ročaja 16,6 cm. Inv. št. A 1776 (t. 11: 6a–c). 10. Železna sulična ost. D. 40,3 cm, š. 4,3 cm, pr. tulca 2,5 cm. Inv. št. A 1777 (t. 12: 1). 11. Železna ščitna grba – umbo s petimi luknjicami na robu. V. 10,4 cm, pr. 20,5 cm. Inv. št. A 1778 (t. 11: 2). 12. Enodelna železna ibula z visokim lokom in spodvito tetivo. D. 8,5 cm. Inv. št. A 1779 (t. 11: 4). 13. Bronasta ibula, tip Almgren 237a. D. 10,7 cm. Inv. št. A 1780 (t. 11: 5). 87 3. Fragments of a brownish-red amphora (perhaps Dressel type 6B). Colour 7.5YR 6/6. Inv. No. A 1762. 4. Iron helmet of the Weisenau type, bronze piping partly survives. H. 14.2 cm, w. 18.6 cm. Inv. No. 1763 (pls. 14–16). 5. Iron shield boss. H. 8.7 cm, d. 16.5 cm. Inv. No. A 1764 (pl. 13: 7). 6. Iron sword. L. 71.3 cm, w. 6 cm. Inv. No. A 1765 (pl. 13: 1). 7. Part of a sword scabbard’s bronze transverse itment. Surv. l. 5 cm. Inv. No. A 1766 (pl. 13: 4). 8. Fragment of a sword scabbard’s bronze transverse itment. Surv. l. 1.2 cm. Inv. No. A 1767 (pl. 13: 3). 9. Bronze ring from a sword scabbard. D. 2 cm. Inv. No. A 1768 (pl. 13: 2). 10. Fragment of a ring as No. 9. Rec. d. 2 cm. Inv. No. A 1769 (pl. 12: 6). 11. Fragment of a bronze ring. D. 2.5 cm. Inv. No. A 1770. 12. Part of a bronze sword scabbard guttering. Surv. l. 4.2 cm. Inv. No. A 1771. 13. Bronze Almgren 237a type brooch. Surv. l. 8.9 cm. Inv. No. A 1772 (pl. 12: 7). 14. Iron nail. Surv. l. 3.5 cm. Inv. No. A 1773 (pl. 12: 3). 15. Iron nail. Surv. l. 6.1 cm. Inv. No. A 1774 (pl. 12: 4). 16. Iron nail. Surv. l. 5 cm. Inv. No. A 1775 (pl. 12: 5). 17. Bronze ladle. H. 15 cm. Inv. No. A 1782 (pl. 13: 6). 18. Pottery lid. Rec. d. 16.7 cm. Inv. No. A 1797. Grave 84 (pls. 17–18; pl. 19: 1–3) Simple cremation grave. he rectangular grave-pit, measuring 150 × 160 cm, was hewn into the bedrock. he cremated remains were strewn across the bottom of the pit. 88 1. Brownish-red biconical jar. H. 42 cm. Colour 10YR 4/1. Inv. No. A 1918 (pl. 17: 3). 2. Brown biconical jar with everted rim, only a part survives. Colour 10YR 7/4. Inv. No. A 1919. 3. Reddish-grey biconical jar, rouletting on the lower part. Rec. h. 25.6 cm. Colour 5YR 4/1. 2.5YR 7/6. Inv. No. A 1920 (pl. 19: 1). 4. Neck and rim fragment of a grey jar. Rim d. 9.2 cm. Colour 10YR 5/1. Inv. No. A 1921 (pl. 17: 5). 5. Fragment of the bottom of a hand-built brown jar, coarse ware. Colour 10YR 6/4. Inv. No. A 1922. 6. Fragments of a greyish-brown hand-built jar. Colour 10YR 6/4. Inv. No. A 1923. 7. Rim and body sherds of a terra sigillata cup. Rec. rim d. 14.4 cm. Colour 10YR 7/1, slip 2.5YR 4/6. Inv. No. A 1924 (pl. 19: 2). 8. Terra sigillata platter with a rectangular stamp PRIMI/ ONIS. D. 16.4 cm. Colour 5YR 7/6, slip 2.5YR 5/8. Inv. No. A 1925 (pl. 19: 3). 9. hin-walled beaker. Surv. h. 7.0 cm. Colour 7.5YR 6/4. Inv. No. A 2046 (pl. 17: 4). 10. Iron sword, bent, with two narrow channels down the blade. H. 69.3 cm, w. 5.1 cm. Inv. No. A 1927 (pl. 18: 3). 11. Iron spearhead. L. 45 cm, w. 4 cm. Inv. No. A 1928 (pl. 17: 10). 12. Iron handle and fragments of a shield boss. Shield boss: rec. d. 18.5 cm; handle: l. 45.6 cm. Inv. No. A 1929 (pl. 18: 1–2). 13. Iron knife. L. 17.2 cm. Inv. No. A 1930 (pl. 17: 1). 14. Razor, iron and bronze. Surv. l. 7.6 cm. Inv. No. A 1931 (pl. 17: 2). 15. Iron ring. D. 3.1–4.6 cm. Inv. No. A 1932 (pl. 17: 6). 16. Bronze coin (as), Tiberius, RIC 35, 15/16. Inv. No. A 1933 (pl. 17: 8). 17. Bronze coin (as), Tiberius/Divus Avgustus, RIC 81, 22/23– 30. Inv. No. A 1934 (pl. 17: 9). 14. Bronasta obročasta pasna spona z visokim trnom in peltastima odprtinama. D. 4,5 cm, š. 3,1 cm. Inv. št. A 1781 (t. 11: 3). Grob 41 (t. 12: 3–7; t. 13–16) Preprost žgani grob. Pravokotna grobna jama velikosti 111 × 108 cm, globoka 95 cm, je bila vkopana v sterilno ilovico. Grobna lisa je bila zelo izrazita. Na južnem robu je bila jama obložena z odlomki amfore. Grob je bil do polovice zasut z žganino. 1. Rdeč, trebušast dvoročajni vrč s proiliranim ustjem in rebrom pod njim. V. 36,4 cm. Barva 2,5YR 5/6. Inv. št. A 1760 (t. 13: 8). 2. Siva čaša z visokim lijakastim vratom). V. 9,3 cm. Barva 7,5YR 4/1. Inv. št. 1761 (t. 13: 5). 3. Odlomki rjavordeče amfore, po barvi in kvaliteti keramike verjetno tip Dressel 6B. Barva 7,5YR 6/6. Inv. št. A 1762. 4. Železna čelada tipa Weisenau z ličnima ploščama in zatilnim ščitnikom. V ušesnem izrezu je delno ohranjena bronasta ornamentalna obroba. V. 14,2 cm, š. 18,6 cm, š. zatilnega ščitnika 7,3 do 7,6 cm, v. ličnega ščitnika 14,8 cm, š. ličnega ščitnika 10,6 cm. Inv. št. 1763 (t. 14–16). 5. Železna ščitna grba. V. 8,7 cm, pr. 16,5 cm. Inv. št. A 1764 (t. 13: 7). 6. Železen meč. D. 71,3 cm, š. 6 cm, d. rezila 58,9 cm, d. ročaja 12,4 cm. Inv. št. A 1765 (t. 13: 1). 7. Del bronastega prečnega nosilnega okova nožnice. Ohr. d. 5 cm, š. 1 cm. Inv. št. A 1766 (t. 13: 4). 8. Odlomek bronastega nosilnega okova nožnice. Ohr. v. 1,2 cm, ohr. š. 2 cm. Inv. št. A 1767 (t. 13: 3). 9. Bronast nosilni obroček nožnice. Pr. 2 cm. Inv. št. A 1768 (t. 13: 2). 10. Odlomek enakega obročka kot št. 9. R. pr. 2 cm. Inv. št. A 1769 (t. 12: 6). 11. Odlomek bronastega obročka. Pr. 2,5 cm. Inv. št. A 1770. 12. Delno ohranjen bronast žlebni robni okov nožnice gladiusa. Ohr. d. 4,2 cm. Inv. št. A 1771. 13. Delno ohranjena bronasta ibula, tip A 237a. Ohr. d. 8,9 cm. Inv. št. A 1772 (t. 12: 7). 14. Železen žebelj s široko ploščato glavo. Ohr. d. 3,5 cm. Inv. št. A 1773 (t. 12: 3). 15. Železen žebelj s ploščato glavico. Ohr. d. 6,1 cm. Inv. št. A 1774 (t. 12: 4). 16. Železen žebelj. Ohr. d. 5 cm. Inv. št. A 1775 (t. 12: 5). 17. Bronasta zajemalka – simpulum z žličasto razširitvijo na koncu pokončnega ročaja. V. 15 cm, pr. 4, 5 cm. Inv. št. A 1782 (t. 13: 6). 18. Delno ohranjen keramičen pokrov. R. pr. 16,7, ohr.v. 3,5 cm. Inv. št. A 1797. Grob 84 (t. 17–18; t. 19: 1–3) Preprost žgani grob. Pravokotna grobna jama velikosti 150 × 160 cm je bila vsekana v skalno osnovo. Na dno groba je bila natresena žganina. 1. Rjavosiv bikoničen lonec z izvihanim ustjem in kanelurami na trebuhu. V. 42 cm. Barva 10YR 4/1. Inv. št. A 1918 (t. 17: 3). 2. Delno ohranjen rjav bikoničen lonec z izvihanim ustjem in rebrom pod njim. Barva 10YR 7/4. Inv. št. A 1919. 3. Delno ohranjen rdečesiv bikoničen lonec s cilindričnim narebrenim vratom in koleščkanim okrasom na trebuhu. R. v. 25,6 cm. Barva 5YR 4/1, 2,5YR 7/6. Inv. št. A 1920 (t. 19: 1). 4. Odlomek izvihanega ustja sivega lonca z rebrom na vratu. Pr. ustja 9,2 cm. Barva 10YR 5/1. Inv. št. A 1921 (t. 17: 5). 5. Odlomek dna grobega rjavega lonca prostoročne izdelave. Barva 10YR 6/4. Inv. št. A 1922. 6. Odlomki sivorjavega lonca prostoročne izdelave. Barva 10YR 6/4. Inv. št. A 1923. 18. Animal bones. Inv. No. A 1935. 19. Bronze Almgren 68 type brooch. L. 7.5 cm. Inv. No. A 2695 (pl. 17: 7). Grave 98 (pl. 19: 4–10) Simple cremation grave. Rectangular grave-pit, measuring 130 × 120 cm was hewn into the bedrock. Large stone were found beside a large jar in the centre of the pit. 1. Greyish-brown hand-built tripod-vessel, coarse ware. D. 23.4 cm. Colour 5YR 4/2. Inv. No. A 2008 (pl. 19: 7). 2. Grey small jar. H. 7.2 cm. Colour 5 YR 4/2. Inv. No. A 2009 (pl. 19: 9). 3. Grey jar. D. 19.9 cm. Colour 10YR 6/1. Inv. No. A 2010 (pl. 19: 5). 4. Grey jar, lower part does not survive. Rec. d. 30 cm. Colour 10YR 4/1. Inv. No. A 2011 (pl. 19: 10). 5. Fragments of a bowl, brown coarse ware. H. 8.6 cm. Colour 7.5YR 6/4. Inv. No. 2012 (pl. 19: 8). 6. Iron spearhead. L. 18.9 cm. Inv. No. A 2013 (pl. 19: 6). 7. Iron brooch of the Late La Tène scheme. L. 6.5 cm. Inv. No. A 2014 (pl. 19: 4). Grave 112 (pls. 20–21; pl. 22: 1–5) Simple cremation grave. Square grave-pit, measuring 120 × 120 cm, was hewn into the bedrock. A large heap of cremated remains was found in the centre of the pit, while the grave goods were lying along the edges. 1. Red two-handled vessel. H. 36.8 cm. Colour 5YR 6/8. Inv. No. A 2094 (pl. 20: 7). 2. Grey biconical jar. H. 36 cm. Colour 7.5YR 5/1. Inv. No. A 2095 (pl. 20: 4). 3. Grey thin-walled cup. D. 10 cm. Colour 2.5YR 6/1. Inv. No. A 2096 (pl. 20: 6). 4. Part of a grey small jar, coarse ware, surface combed. Rec. h. 9.5 cm. Colour 10YR 7/1. Inv. No. A 2097 (pl. 20: 5). 5. Part of a black vessel, coarse ware. Colour 10YR 3/1. Inv. No. A 2098. 6. Iron sword, bent, with two narrow channels down the blade. L. 71 cm, w. 5 cm. Inv. No. A 2099 (pl. 21: 1). 7. Iron sword-scabbard guttering with a bronze knob at the end. Surv. l. 42.7 cm. Inv. No. A 2100 (pl. 22: 4). 8. Iron shield boss. H. 7.6 cm, d. 18.5 cm. Inv. No. A 2101 (pl. 21: 2). 9. Iron spearhead. Surv. l. 26.5 cm. Inv. No. A 2102 (pl. 22: 5). 10. Five fragments of a bronze transverse itment from a sword scabbard. W. 1.1 cm. Inv. No. A 2103 (pl. 22: 3). 11. Four bronze rings from a sword scabbard. D. 2.2 cm (three rings) and 2 cm (one ring). Inv. No. A 2104 (pl. 22: 1). 12. Bronze belt-buckle. L. 3.2 cm. Inv. No. A 2105 (pl. 20: 3). 13. Bronze Almgren 67 type brooch. L. 6.1 cm. Inv. No. A 2106 (pl. 20: 2). 14. Fragment of a bronze transverse itment from a sword scabbard. W. 1.1 cm. Inv. No. A 2107 (pl. 22: 2). 15. Iron nail. Surv. l. 4.9 cm. Inv. No. A 2108 (pl. 20: 1). Grave 131 (pl. 22: 6–7; pls. 23–24) Simple cremation grave. Sub-square grave-pit, measuring 160 × 165 cm, was hewn into the bedrock. 1. Red two-handled vessel. H. 40.6 cm. Inv. No. A 2205 (pl. 22: 7). 2. Red jug. H. 27.4 cm. Colour 7.5YR 6/8. Inv. No. A 2206 (pl. 23: 6). 7. Odlomki ustja in ostenja sigilatne skodelice. R. pr. ustja 14,4 cm. Barva 10YR 7/1, premaz 2,5YR 4/6. Inv. št. A 1924 (t. 19: 2). 8. Sigilaten krožnik s pečatom PRIMI/ONIS v pravokotnem polju. Pr. 16,4 cm. Barva 5YR 7/6, premaz 2,5YR 5/8. Inv. št. A 1925 (t. 19: 3). 9. Delno ohranjen kozarec tankih sten, čaša Aco. Ohr. v. 7,0 cm. Barva 7,5YR 6/4. Inv. št. A 2046 (t. 17: 4). 10. Zvit železen meč. Vzdolž rezila potekata na vsaki strani po dva drobna kanalčka. D. 69,3 cm, š. 5,1 cm. Inv. št. A 1927 (t. 18: 3). 11. Železna sulična ost s fasetiranim tulcem in zakovico. D. 45 cm, š. 4 cm. Inv. št. A 1928 (t. 17: 10). 12. Delno ohranjena železna ščitna grba z zakovicami in pripadajočim ji ročajem. Ščitna grba: R. v. 9,6 cm, r. pr. 18,5 cm; ročaj: D. 45,6 cm. Inv. št. A 1929 (t. 18: 1–2). 13. Železen nož. D. 17,2 cm. Inv. št. A 1930 (t. 17: 1). 14. Delno ohranjena železna britev z ostankom bronaste platice, pritrjene z zakovico. Ohr. d. 7,6 cm, š. 2,1 cm. Inv. št. A 1931 (t. 17: 2). 15. Železen obroček kvadratnega preseka, s trnom. Pr. 3,1–4,6 cm. Inv. št. A 1932 (t. 17: 6). 16. Bronast novec (as), Tiberius, RIC 35, 15/16. Inv. št. A 1933 (t. 17: 8). 17. Bronast novec (as), Tiberius/Divus Avgustus, RIC 81, 22/23– 30. Inv. št. A 1934 (t. 17: 9). 18. Živalske kosti. Inv. št. A 1935. 19. Bronasta ibula, tip Almgreb 68. D. 7,5 cm. Inv. št. A 2695 (t. 17: 7). Grob 98 (t. 19: 4–10) Preprost žgani grob. Pravokotna grobna jama velikosti 130 × 120 cm je bila vsekana v skalno osnovo. V sredini je poleg večjega lonca stal večji kamen. 1. Delno ohranjena sivorjava groba trinožna skleda prostoročne izdelave z žlebljenjem na ostenju. Pr. 23,4 cm. Barva 5YR 4/2. Inv. št. A 2008 (t. 19: 7). 2. Delno ohranjen rjav lonček, okrašen z nizi vbodov. V. 7,2 cm. Barva 5 YR 4/2. Inv. št. A 2009 (t. 19: 9). 3. Delno ohranjen siv lonec. Pr. 19,9 cm. Barva 10YR 6/1. Inv. št. A 2010 (t. 19: 5). 4. Delno ohranjen kroglast siv lonec s tremi rebri pod izvihanim ustjem. R. pr. 30 cm. Barva 10YR 4/1. Inv. št. A 2011 (t. 19: 10). 5. Delno ohranjena groba rjava skleda z ravnim dnom. V. 8,6 cm. Barva 7,5YR 6/4. Inv. št. 2012 (t. 19: 8). 6. Poškodovana železna sulična ost z okroglim tulcem, na katerem je ohranjen žebljiček. List je kratek in ozek. D. 18,9 cm, š. 1,9 cm, pr. tulca 1,9 cm. Inv. št. A 2013 (t. 19: 6). 7. Železna ibula poznolatenske sheme z visokim lokom in spodvito tetivo. D. 6,5 cm, v. 3,4 cm. Inv. št. A 2014 (t. 19: 4). Grob 112 (t. 20–21; t. 22: 1–5) Preprost žgani grob. Kvadratna grobna jama velikosti 120 × 120 cm je bila vsekana v skalno osnovo. V sredini groba je bil nasut velik kup žganine, ob robovih pa so bili zloženi pridatki. 1. Rdeč dvoročajni vrč z močno proiliranim ustjem in rebrom pod njim. V. 36,8 cm. Barva 5YR 6/8. Inv. št. A 2094 (t. 20: 7). 2. Siv bikoničen lonec z izvihanim ustjem in rebrom na vratu. V. 36 cm, pr. 28 cm. Barva 7,5YR 5/1. Inv. št. A 2095 (t. 20: 4). 3. Siva skodelica tankih sten s kaneluro na trebuhu. Pr. 10 cm. Barva 2,5YR 6/1. Inv. št. A 2096 (t. 20: 6). 4. Delno ohranjen grob siv lonček z metličastim okrasom. R. v. 9,5 cm. Barva 10YR 7/1. Inv. št. A 2097 (t. 20: 5). 5. Delno ohranjena groba črna posoda. Barva 10YR 3/1. Inv. št. A 2098. 89 3. Terra sigillata platter, stamp ATICI in planta pedis. Pr. 16.8 cm. Colour 5YR 7/6, slip 2.5YR 5/8. Inv. No. A 2207 (pl. 22: 6). 4. Terra sigillata cup, illegible stamp in planta pedis. D. 11.1 cm. Colour 5YR 7/6, slip 2.5YR 5/8. Inv. No. A 2208 (pl. 23: 5). 5. Yellow thin-walled cup. D. 9.9 cm. Colour 10YR 8/6. Inv. No. A 2209 (pl. 23: 3). 6. Grey thin-walled cup. D. 9.9 cm. Colour 10YR 4/1. Inv. No. A 2210 (pl. 23: 4). 7. Iron sword in iron and brass scabbard. Surv. l. 84 cm. Inv. No. A 2211 (pl. 24: 1a–b). 8. Iron spearhead. Surv. l. 31.2 cm. Inv. No. A 2212 (pl. 24: 2). 9. Iron shield boss, three (of ive) nails survive. D. 19.7 cm. Inv. No. A 2213 (pl. 24: 3). 10. Two fragments of iron sheet. Inv. No. A 2214. 11. Bronze Almgren 236c type brooch. Surv. l. 7.3 cm. Inv. No. A 2215 (pl. 23: 2). 12. Bronze ladle with inscription M_RCI. R in punctile work, badly damaged. H. 12.7 cm. Inv. No. A 2216 (pl. 23: 1). 13. Tinned or silvered bronze military belt mounts. L. 1.3–1.5 cm, th. 0.4 cm. Inv. No. A 2217 (pl. 24: 4). 14. Fragments of a Dressel 2–4 type amphora, stamp NC (?) in a circular frame. Colour 7.5YR 6/4. Inv. No. A 2218 (pl. 23: 7). 15. Body and bottom sherds of a red jug. Inv. No. A 2219. 16. Body and bottom sherds of a red jar. Inv. No. A 2220. 17. Rim fragments of a reddish-brown jar with cylindrical ribbed neck. Inv. No. A 2221. Grave 136 (pls. 25–26) Simple cremation grave. Rectangular grave-pit was hewn into the bedrock and measured 180 × 170 cm. 90 1. Red two-handled vessel. H. 45 cm. Colour 5YR 6/8. Inv. No. A 2237 (pl. 26: 4). 2. Red jug. Surv. h. 18.4 cm. Colour 7.5YR 7/6. Inv. No. A 2238 (pl. 26: 6). 3. Grey jar, rouletting in the lower part. H. 17.6 cm. Colour 10YR 5/2. Inv. No. A 2239 (pl. 25: 6). 4. Grey thin-walled cup. H. 5.4 cm. Colour 10YR 5/1. Inv. No. A 2240 (pl. 25: 5). 5. Fragment of a vessel. D. of bottom 12 cm. Colour 7.5YR 7/4. Inv. št A 2241 (pl. 26: 5). 6. Lower part of a jug. D. of bottom 5.8 cm. Colour 10YR 7/1. Inv. No. A 2242 (pl. 25: 4). 7. Fragments of an amphora, presumably of a Dressel 6B type. Colour 5YR 6/8. Inv. No. A 2243. 8. Terra sigillata cup, stamp CELER in planta pedis. D. 11.8 cm. Colour 5YR 7/6, slip 2.5YR 4/8. Inv. No. A 2244 (pl. 26: 9). 9. Terra sigillata cup, illegible stamp. D. 11.6 cm. Colour 5YR 7/6, slip 2.5YR 4/8. Inv. No. A 2245 (pl. 26: 8). 10. Terra sigillata cup, stamp ALB in planta pedis. D. 7.9 cm. Colour 5YR 7/6, slip 2.5YR 5/8. Inv. No. A 1926 (pl. 26: 1). 11. Terra sigillata platter, stamp FIDVS in planta pedis. Pr. 18.5 cm. Colour 5YR 7/6, slip 2.5YR 5/8. Inv. No. A 2246 (pl. 26: 2). 12. Bronze ladle. H. 13.6 cm. Inv. No. A 2247 (pl. 25: 9). 13. Fragments of a terra sigillata platter. Rec. d. 17.8 cm. Colour 5YR 7/6, slip. YR 5/8. Inv. No. A 3302 (pl. 26: 3). 14. Bronze spatula. L. 15.5 cm. Inv. No. A 2248 (pl. 25: 8). 15. Bronze Almgren 68 type brooch. L. 3.7 cm. Inv. No. A 2249 (pl. 25: 1). 16. Iron razor. Surv. l. 10 cm. Inv. No. A 2250 (pl. 25: 3). 17. Fragment of a shield hand grip. Surv. l. 10.7 cm. Inv. No. A 2251 (pl. 25: 7). 18. Fragment of a bronze sheet. L. 2.6 cm. Inv. No. A 2252. 19. Iron sword. L. 64.5 cm. Inv. No. A 2253 (pl. 25: 10). 6. Zvit železen meč. Po sredini rezila sta dve drobni kaneluri, na koncu ročaja pa železna ploščica. D. 71 cm, š. 5 cm, d. ročaja 15 cm. Inv. št. A 2099 (t. 21: 1). 7. Delno ohranjena železna obroba nožnice z bronastim gumbom na zaključku. Ohr. d. 42,7 cm. Inv. št. A 2100 (t. 22: 4). 8. Železna ščitna grba – umbo. Na 3 cm širokem ravnem robu je osem žebljev z okroglo glavo, osrednji del pa je konično dvignjen. V. 7,6 cm, pr. 18,5 cm. Inv. št. A 2101 (t. 21: 2). 9. Delno ohranjena železna sulična ost z ozkim listom in okroglim tulcem. Ohr. d. 26,5 cm, š. lista 3,9 cm, pr. tulca 2,5 cm. Inv. št. A 2102 (t. 22: 5). 10. Pet odlomkov proiliranega bronastega okova za pripenjanje nožnice na pas. Š. 1,1 cm. Inv. št. A 2103 (t. 22: 3). 11. Štirje bronasti proilirani obročki za pripenjanje nožnice na pas. Pr. 2,2 cm (trije), 2 cm. Inv. št. A 2104 (t. 22: 1). 12. Bronasta pasna spona oblike D s trnom. D. 3,2 cm, š. 3,6 cm. Inv. št. A 2105 (t. 20: 3). 13. Delno ohranjena bronasta ibula, tip Almgren 67. D. 6,1 cm, v. 2,3 cm. Inv. št. A 2106 (t. 20: 2). 14. Odlomek bronastega okova za pripenjanje meča na pas. Š. 1,1 cm. Inv. št. A 2107 (t. 22: 2). 15. Delno ohranjen železen žebelj. Ohr. d. 4,9 cm. Inv. št. A 2108 (t. 20: 1). Grob 131 (t. 22: 6–7; t. 23–24) Preprost žgani grob. Grobna jama skoraj kvadratne oblike, velikosti 160 × 165 cm, je bila vsekana v skalno osnovo. 1. Rdeč dvoročajni vrč s proiliranim ustjem in vratom. V. 40,6 cm. Inv. št. A 2205 (t. 22: 7). 2. Trebušast rdeč enoročajni vrč s proiliranim ustjem. V. 27,4 cm. Barva 7,5YR 6/8. Inv. št. A 2206 (t. 23: 6). 3. Sigilaten krožnik z žigom ATICI in planta pedis. Pr. 16,8 cm. Barva 5YR 7/6, premaz 2,5YR 5/8. Inv. št. A 2207 (t. 22: 6). 4. Sigilatna skodelica z nečitljivim žigom in planta pedis. Pr. 11,1 cm. Barva 5YR 7/6, premaz 2,5YR 5/8. Inv. št. A 2208 (t. 23: 5). 5. Rumena skodelica tankih sten z žlebom na ramenu. Pr. 9,9 cm. Barva 10YR 8/6. Inv. št. A 2209 (t. 23: 3). 6. Siva skodelica tankih sten z vodoravnim žlebom na ramenu in vertikalno žlebljenim spodnjim delom trebuha. Pr. 9,9 cm. Barva 10YR 4/1. Inv. št. A 2210 (t. 23: 4). 7. Železen meč v nožnici, ki je na hrbtni strani iz železne, na zunanji iz medeninaste pločevine. Ohr. d. 84 cm, š. 4,8 cm. Inv. št. A 2211 (t. 24: 1a–b). 8. Delno poškodovana železna sulična ost s fasetiranim tulcem. Ohr. d. 31,2 cm, š. 3,5 cm, pr. tulca 2,2 cm. Inv. št. A 2212 (t. 24: 2). 9. Železna ščitna grba, od petih zakovic so ohranjene tri. Pr. 19,7 cm, v. 8,2 cm. Inv. št. A 2213 (t. 24: 3). 10. Dva kosa železne pločevine. Inv. št. A 2214. 11. Delno ohranjena bronasta ibula, tip Almgren 236c. Ohr. d. 7,3 cm, v. 2,9 cm. Inv. št. A 2215 (t. 23: 2). 12. Močno poškodovana zajemalka iz tenke bronaste pločevine z vtolčenim okrasom pod robom ustja in cedilcem na koncu pokončnega ročaja, na katerem je punciran napis M_RCI. R. v. 12,7 cm, v. ročaja 9,2 cm, pr. 6,4 cm. Inv. št. A 2216 (t. 23: 1). 13. Posrebreni bronasti elementi vojaškega pasu, ožji in širši. V. 1 cm, š. 0,4 cm, 1,3–1,5 cm. Inv. št. A 2217 (t. 24: 4). 14. Odlomki ustja, dvojnopaličastega ročaja in ostenja rdečerjave amfore oblike Dressel 2–4. Na ostenju je v okroglem vtisnjenem polju pečat NC (?). Pr. ustja 15,6 cm. Barva 7,5YR 6/4. Inv. št. A 2218 (t. 23: 7). 15. Odlomki dna in ostenja rdečega vrča. Inv. št. A 2219. 16. Odlomki dna in ostenja rdečega lonca. Inv. št. A 2220. 20. Iron penannular brooch. D. 4 cm. Inv. No. A 2254 (pl. 25: 2). 21. Dark blue glass beaker. H. 7.1 cm. Inv. No. A 2653 (pl. 26: 7). 17. Odlomki ustja rdečerjavega lonca s cilindričnim, narebrenim vratom. Inv. št. A 2221. Grave 146 (pl. 29: 1) Simple cremation grave. Rectangular grave-pit, measuring 100 × 70 cm, was dug into loamy soil. Grob 136 (t. 25–26) Preprost žgani grob. Pravokotna grobna jama velikosti 180 × 170 cm je bila vsekana v skalno podlago. 1. Two fragments of a bronze brooch, damaged by ire. Inv. No. A 2287. 2. Fragment of an iron shield boss with a nail. Surv. l. 10.2 cm. Inv. No. A 2288 (pl. 29: 1). 1. Rdeč dvoročajni trebušast vrč s proiliranim ustjem in dvema rebroma pod njim. V. 45 cm. Barva 5YR 6/8. Inv. št. A 2237 (t. 26: 4). 2. Rdeč enoročajni vrček. Ohr. v. 18,4 cm. Barva 7,5YR 7/6. Inv. št. A 2238 (t. 26: 6). 3. Siv lonec s cilindričnim narebrenim vratom, v spodnjem delu okrašen s koleščkanjem. V. 17,6 cm. Barva 10YR 5/2. Inv. št. A 2239 (t. 25: 6). 4. Siva skodelica tankih sten. V. 5,4 cm. Barva 10YR 5/1. Inv. št. A 2240 (t. 25: 5). 5. Odlomek noge rjavega pokala. Pr. dna 12 cm. Barva 7,5YR 7/4. Inv. št A 2241 (t. 26: 5). 6. Spodnji del trebuha in dno vrčka. Pr. dna 5,8 cm. Barva 10YR 7/1. Inv. št. A 2242 (t. 25: 4). 7. Odlomki amfore, domnevno tipa Dressel 6B. Barva 5YR 6/8. Inv. št. A 2243. 8. Sigilatna skodelica z žigom CELER in planta pedis. Pr. 11,8 cm. Barva 5YR 7/6, premaz 2,5YR 4/8. Inv. št. A 2244 (t. 26: 9). 9. Sigilatna skodelica z neberljivim žigom v sredini. Pr. 11,6 cm. Barva 5YR 7/6, premaz 2,5YR 4/8. Inv. št. A 2245 (t. 26: 8). 10. Sigilatna skodelica z žigom ALB in planta pedis. Pr. 7,9 cm. Barva 5YR 7/6, premaz 2,5YR 5/8. Inv. št. A 1926 (t. 26: 1). 11. Sigilaten krožnik z žigom FIDVS in planta pedis. Pr. 18,5 cm. Barva 5YR 7/6, premaz 2,5YR 5/8. Inv. št. A 2246 (t. 26: 2). 12. Bronasta zajemalka okrasom jajčnega niza pod robom ustja in s cedilcem na vrhu pokončnega ročaja. V. z ročajem 13,6 cm, v. posodice 6,4 cm, pr. 6,8 cm. Inv. št. A 2247 (t. 25: 9). 13. Odlomki sigilatnega krožnika. R. pr. 17,8 cm. Barva 5YR 7/6, premaz, YR 5/8. Inv. št. A 3302 (t. 26: 3). 14. Bronasta spatula z odebeljenim koncem. D. 15,5 cm. Inv. št. A 2248 (t. 25: 8). 15. Bronasta ibula, tip Almgren 68. D. 3,7 cm, v. 1,6 cm. Inv. št. A 2249 (t. 25: 1). 16. Delno ohranjena železna britev z zavitim in na koncu odebeljenim ročajem. Ohr. d. 10 cm. Inv. št. A 2250 (t. 25: 3). 17. Del dolgega železnega ročaja ščita pravokotnega preseka. Ohr. d. 10,7 cm, š. 2 cm. Inv. št. A 2251 (t. 25: 7). 18. Odlomek bronaste pločevine. D. 2,6 cm, š. 1,3 cm. Inv. št. A 2252. 19. Železen meč. D. 64,5 cm, š. 6 cm, d. trna 11,2 cm, š. 2 cm. Inv. št. A 2253 (t. 25: 10). 20. Delno ohranjena železna obročasta ibula rombastega preseka z zavitima koncema. Pr. 4 cm. Inv. št. A 2254 (t. 25: 2). 21. Čaša iz temnomodrega stekla. V. 7,1 cm. Inv. št. A 2653 (t. 26: 7). Grave 228 (pls. 27–28) Simple cremation grave. Rectangular grave-pit, measuring 170 × 130 cm, was hewn into the bedrock. Large ceramic vessels were found in three corners: a two-handled jug in the south-eastern, a single-handled jug in the north-western and a grey jar with a cylindrical neck in the north-eastern. A heavily burnt bronze coin was recovered towards the top of the layer of cremated remains. he sandy ill lined the side of the pit to a thickness of up to 20 cm, while the centre of the pit was illed with cremated remains and humus. he cremated remains included a number of sherds of various vessels, pieces of cremated bones and all the grave goods. 1. Red two-handled vessel. H. 52.8 cm. Colour 7.5YR 6/6. Inv. No. A 2503 (pl. 27: 2). 2. Red jug. H. 39.3 cm. Colour 7.5YR 6/6. Inv. No. A 2504 (pl. 28: 12). 3. Grey biconical jar. H. 18.5 cm. Colour 7.5YR 5/1. Inv. No. A 2505 (pl. 28: 11). 4. Grey small jar. H. 12 cm. Colour 10YR 5/3. Inv. No. A 2506 (pl. 28: 10). 5. Brown small jar, coarse ware, incised decoration. H. 13.5 cm. Colour 7.5YR 4/2. Inv. No. A 2507 (pl. 27: 8). 6. Red thin-walled beaker, barbotine decoration. H. 5.1 cm. Colour 7.5YR 7/6. Inv. No. A 2508 (pl. 27: 6). 7. Rim and bottom fragments of a grey jar with cylindrical ribbed neck. Colour 10YR 7/1. Inv. No. A 2509. 8. Grey thin-walled cup. D. 9.4 cm. Colour 10YR 6/1. Inv. No. A 2510 (pl. 27: 7). 9. Rim fragments of a grey jug. Colour 10YR 7/1. Inv. No. A 2511. 10. Rim fragment of a red two-handled vessel. Colour 7.5YR 7/8. Inv. No. A 2512. 11. Bronze coin (as), Claudius I. Inv. No. A 2513 (pl. 27: 3). 12. Bronze coin (as), Claudius I. Inv. No. A 2514 (pl. 27: 4). 13. Bronze coin (as), Nero. Inv. No. A 2515 (pl. 27: 5). 14. Bronze Almgren 68 type brooch. L. 3.8 cm. Inv. No. A 2516 (pl. 28: 7). 15. Bronze Almgren 68 type brooch. L. 3.8 cm. Inv. No. A 2517 (pl. 28: 6). 16. Bronze Almgren 68 type brooch. L. 5.9 cm. Inv. No. A 2518 (pl. 28: 9). 17. Bronze Almgren 68 type brooch. L. 6.5 cm. Inv. No. A 2519 (pl. 28: 8). 18. Part of an Almgren 68 type brooch. Surv. l. 4.4 cm. Inv. No. A 2520 (pl. 28: 5). 19. Iron knife. L. 15.3 cm. Inv. No. A 2521 (pl. 27: 1). 20. Iron spearhead, tip does not survive. Surv. l. 16.4 cm. Inv. No. A 2522 (pl. 28: 3). 21. Iron ring. D. 2.3 cm. Inv. No. A 2523 (pl. 28: 4). 22. Iron nail. H. 1.8 cm. Inv. No. A 2524 (pl. 28: 2). 23. Iron spearhead, tip does not survive. Surv. l. 35.4 cm. Inv. No. A 3303 (pl. 28: 1). Grob 146 (t. 29: 1) Preprost žgani grob. Grobna jama velikosti 100 × 70 cm je bila vkopana v ilovnato osnovo. 1. Odlomka v ognju poškodovane bronaste ibule. Inv. št. A 2287. 2. Odlomek železne ščitne grbe z zakovico. Ohr. d. 10,2 cm, v. 3 cm. Inv. št. A 2288 (t. 29: 1). Grob 228 (t. 27–28) Preprost žgani grob. Grobna jama velikosti 170 × 130 cm je bila vklesana v skalno osnovo. V treh vogalih so bile postavljene velike keramične posode: dvoročajni vrč v jugovzhodnem, enoročajni v severozahodnem in siv lonec s cilindričnim vratom v seve- 91 Grave 246 (pl. 29: 2–4) Simple cremation grave. A shallow rectangular grave-pit, measuring 125 × 95 cm, was dug into loamy soil. A small heap of selected bones and charcoal was found in the centre of the pit, with a spearhead and a knife laid on top. A red two-handled jug lay along the south side. he grave also revealed a remarkably well-preserved and slightly bent spearhead. 1. Red two-handled vessel, rim does not survive. D. 28.4 cm. Colour 7.5YR 7/6. Inv. No. A 2623 (pl. 29: 2). 2. Fragments of a black coarse ware jar with everted rim. Colour 7.5YR 3/1. Inv. No. A 2624. 3. Iron spearhead. L. 38.5 cm. Inv. No. A 2625 (pl. 29: 5). 4. Iron knife. L. 23.4 cm. Inv. No. A 2626 (pl. 29: 4). 5. Part of a bronze brooch. Surv. l. 1.6 cm. Inv. No. A 3304 (pl. 29: 3). Translation: Andreja Maver Language editing: Terry Troy Jackson rovzhodnem. Že povsem pri vrhu je bil v plasti žganine najden močno prežgan bronast novec. Zasutje grobne jame je bilo do 20 cm od roba peščeno, znotraj pa žganina oz. humus. V žganini je bilo precej odlomkov različnih keramičnih posod in drobcev sežganih kosti ter vsi drobni pridatki. 1. Rdeč dvoročajni vrč z rebrom pod robom. V. 52,8 cm. Barva 7,5YR 6/6. Inv. št. A 2503 (t. 27: 2). 2. Rdeč enoročajni vrč. V. 39,3 cm. Barva 7,5YR 6/6. Inv. št. A 2504 (t. 28: 12). 3. Siv bikoničen lonec z narebrenim vratom. V. 18,5 cm. Barva 7,5YR 5/1. Inv. št. A 2505 (t. 28: 11). 4. Siv kroglast lonček. V. 12 cm. Barva 10YR 5/3. Inv. št. A 2506 (t. 28: 10). 5. Rjav grob lonček z vtisnjenim ornamentom med vodoravnimi pasovi kanelurami. V. 13,5 cm. Barva 7,5YR 4/2. Inv. št. A 2507 (t. 27: 8). 6. Rdeča čaša tankih sten z barbotinskim okrasom. V. 5,1 cm. Barva 7,5YR 7/6. Inv. št. A 2508 (t. 27: 6). 7. Odlomki ustja in dna sivega lončka s cilindričnim, narebrenim vratom. Barva 10YR 7/1. Inv. št. A 2509. 8. Delno ohranjena siva skodelica tankih sten. Pr. 9,4 cm. Barva 10YR 6/1. Inv. št. A 2510 (t. 27: 7). 9. Odlomki ustja sivega vrčka. Barva 10YR 7/1. Inv. št. A 2511. 10. Odlomek ustja rdečega dvoročajnega vrča. Barva 7,5YR 7/8. Inv. št. A 2512. 11. Bronast novec – as, CLAUDIUS I. Inv. št. A 2513 (t. 27: 3). 12. Bronast novec – as, CLAUDIUS I. Inv. št. A 2514 (t. 27: 4). 13. Bronast novec – as, NERO. Inv. št. A 2515 (t. 27: 5). 14. Bronasta ibula, tip Almgren 68. D. 3,8 cm. Inv. št. A 2516 (t. 28: 7). 15. Bronasta ibula, tip Almgren 68. D. 3,8 cm. Inv. št. A 2517 (t. 28: 6). 16. Bronasta ibula, tip Almgren 68 (igla manjka, noga delno ohr.). D. 5,9 cm, v. 2,2 cm. Inv. št. A 2518 (t. 28: 9). 17. Bronasta ibula, tip Almgren 68 (igla delno ohr.). D. 6,5 cm. Inv. št. A 2519 (t. 28: 8). 18. Del loka in noge bronaste ibule, tip Almgren 68. Ohr. d. 4,4 cm. Inv. št. A 2520 (t. 28: 5). 19. Železen nož. D. 15,3 cm. Inv. št. A 2521 (t. 27: 1). 20. Železna sulična ost, konica ni ohranjena. D. 16,4 cm, š. 2,8 cm, pr. tulca 1,9 cm. Inv. št. A 2522 (t. 28: 3). 21. Železen obroček. Pr. 2,3 cm, š. 1,7 cm. Inv. št. A 2523 (t. 28: 4). 22. Železen žebljiček s široko kovano stožčasto glavo. V. 1,8 cm, pr. 1,1 cm. Inv. št. A 2524 (t. 28: 2). 23. Železna sulična ost s fasetiranim tulcem, konica ni ohr. Ohr. d. 35,4 cm, š. 4,4 cm, pr. tulca 2,4 cm. Inv. št. A 3303 (t. 28: 1). Grob 246 (t. 29: 2–4) Preprost žgani grob. Grobna jama velikosti 125 × 95 cm je bila plitvo vkopana v ilovnato osnovo. V centru groba je ležal kupček izbranih kosti in oglja, nanj pa sta bila položena sulica in nož. Ob južni stranici groba je stal rdeč vrč z dvema ročajema. Rahlo uvita sulica je zelo dobro ohranjena. 92 1. Rdeč dvoročajni vrč, ustje ni ohr. Pr. 28,4 cm. Barva 7,5YR 7/6. Inv. št. A 2623 (t. 29: 2). 2. Odlomki grobega črnega lonca z izvihanim ustjem. Barva 7,5YR 3/1. Inv. št. A 2624. 3. Železna sulična ost z osrednjim rebrom na listu. D. 38,5 cm, š. 4,9 cm, pr. tulca 2,4 cm. Inv. št. A 2625 (t. 29: 5). 4. Železen nož s ščitno ploščico na prehodu v ploščat nastavek ročaja. D. 23,4 cm, š. 3 cm. Inv. št. A 2626 (t. 29: 4). 5. Del loka in glave bronaste ibule. Ohr. d. 1,6 cm, v. 1,3 cm. Inv. št. A 3304 (t. 29: 3). BIBLIOGRAPHY / LITERATURA BOŽIČ, D. 1992, Mokronoška skupina latenske kulture v poznolatenskem obdobju. – Unpublished Ph. D. thesis / Neobjavljena doktorska disertacija, Oddelek za arheologijo, Filozofska fakulteta Univerze v Ljubljani. BOŽIČ, D. 1999, Die Erforschung der Latènezeit in Slowenien seit Jahr 1964 / Raziskovanje latenske dobe na Slovenskem po letu 1964. – Arheološki vestnik 50, 189–213. BOŽIČ, D. 2002, Il vasellame bronzeo romano: grandi bacili e piccoli mestoli-colini. – In/V: A. Giumlia-Mair (ed./ur.), I bronzi antichi, Produzione e tecnologia, Atti del XV Congresso Internazionale sui Bronzi Antichi, Monographies Instrumentum 21, Montagnac, 419–428. BOŽIČ, D. 2008, Late La Tène-Roman cemetery in Novo mesto. Ljubljanska cesta and Okrajno glavarstvo / Poznolatensko-rimsko grobišče v Novem mestu. Ljubljanska cesta in Okrajno glavarstvo. – Katalogi in monograije 39, Ljubljana. BREŠČAK, D. 1982, Antično bronasto posodje Slovenije. – Situla 22/1, Ljubljana [summary in English / povzetek v angleščini]. BREŠČAK, D. 1985a, Verdun pri Stopičah. Zgodnjerimska nekropola / Early Roman Cemetery. – Arheološki pregled 1985, (1986), 120–121. BREŠČAK D. 1985b, Oblike antičnih grobov na Dolenjskem. – In/V: Dolenjski zbornik 1985, Novo mesto, 33–60 [summary in English / povzetek v angleščini]. BREŠČAK, D. 1986, Verdun. – Varstvo spomenikov 28, 276. Conspectus formarum terrae sigillatae Italico mondo confectae. – Materialien zur römisch-germanischen Keramik 10, Bonn 1990. DEMETZ, S. 1999, Fibeln der Spätlatène- und frühen römischen Kaiserzeit in den Alpenländern. – Frühgeschichtliche und Provinzialrömische Archäologie, Materialien und Forschungen 4, Rahden. DULAR, J. 2008, Mihovo in severni obronki Gorjancev v prvem tisočletju pr. Kr. – Arheološki vestnik 59, 111–148 [summary in German / povzetek v nemščini]. GARBSCH, J. 1965, Die norisch-pannonische Frauentracht im 1. und 2. Jahrhundert. – Münchner Beiträge zur Vor- und Frühgeschichte 11, München. GRAHEK, L. 2013, Železnodobno gradišče Cvinger nad Virom pri Stični. Stratigraija in tipološko-kronološka analiza naselbinske keramike. – E-Monographiae Instituti Archaeologici Sloveniae 3/1, Ljubljana (http://iza.zrc-sazu.si/si/e_monograije/Sticna.html.) GUŠTIN, M. 1991, Posočje in der jüngeren Eisenzeit. – Katalogi in monograije 27, Ljubljana [summary in Slovene / povzetek v slovenščini]. HORVAT, J., BAVDEK, A. 2009, Okra. Vrata med Sredozemljem in Srednjo Evropo / Ocra. he gateway between the Mediterranean and Central Europe. – Opera Instituti Archaeologici Sloveniae 17, Ljubljana. ISTENIČ, J. 2010, Late La Tène scabbards with non-ferrous openwork plates / Poznolatenske nožnice s predrtim okrasnim okovom iz bakrove litine ali srebra. – Arheološki vestnik 61, 121–164. BREŠČAK, D. 1987, Verdun. – Varstvo spomenikov 29, 262. BREŠČAK, D. 1989, Verdun pri Stopičah. Arheološke raziskave antičnega grobišča 1983–1988. – Novo mesto. BREŠČAK, D. 1990a, Verdun pri Stopičah. – In/V: Arheološka najdišča Dolenjske, Arheo, Posebna številka, izdana ob 100-letnici arheoloških raziskav v Novem mestu, 13. 9. 1890 – 13. 9. 1990, Novo mesto, 99–102. BREŠČAK, D. 1990b, Antično grobišče na Verdunu pri Stopičah. Predhodno poročilo o izkopavanjih 1983–1987. –In/V: Dolenjski zbornik 1990, Novo mesto, 23–31. BREŠČAK, D. 2000, Arheološko izkopavanje na Kapitlju. – Rast XI/1, 31–33. BREŠČAK, D. 2002, Verdun pri Stopičah. Antično grobišče. – Zloženka razstave, Dolenjski muzej, Novo mesto. BREŠČAK, D., GREGL, Z. 2002, Antika / he Classical (Roman) Period. – In/V: N. Pirnat-Spahić, Ž. Škoberne (eds./ur.), Oživljene kulture, Arheološka odkritja na Gorjancih/Žumberku od prazgodovine do zgodnjega srednjega veka / Revived cultures, Archaeological excavations in the Gorjanci/Žumberak Hills from prehistory to the early Middle Ages, Ljubljana, 74–174. Conspectus [refering to page / kadar je citirana stran], Consp. [refering to form / kadar je citirana oblika]: E. Ettlinger et al., KNEZ, T. 1968, Oblike antičnih grobov na Dolenjskem. – Arheološki vestnik 19, 221–238 [summary in German / povzetek v nemščini]. KNEZ, T. 1992, Novo mesto II. Keltsko-rimsko grobišče / Keltischrömisches Gräberfeld. Beletov vrt. – Carniola Archaeologica 2, Novo mesto. KRIŽ, B., STIPANČIĆ, P., ŠKEDELJ PETRIČ, A. 2009, Arheološka podoba Dolenjske. Katalog stalne arheološke razstave Dolenjskega muzeja Novo mesto / he archaeological image of Dolenjska. Catalogue of the permanent archaeological exhibition at the Dolenjski muzej Novo mesto. – Novo mesto. LOŽAR, R. 1938, Rimska najdba iz Polhovega Gradca. – Glasnik Muzejskega društva za Slovenijo 19, 85–108. MACCHIORO MALNATI, S. 2000, La necropoli romana della Menabrea. Scavi a Gropello Cairoli (Pavia), 1978–1979 e 1981. – Sibrium 23, (1994–1999), 137–237. OCK: A. Oxe, H. Comfort, Ph. Kenrick, Corpus Vasorum Arretinorum. A Catalogue of the Signatures, Shapes, and Chronology of Italian Sigillata. – Antiquitas 3, Abhandlungen zur Vorund Frühgeschichte, zur klassischen und provinzial-römischen Archäologie und zur Geschichte des Altertums 41, Bonn 2000. 93 PETRU, P. 1969, Poskus časovne razporeditve lončenine iz rimskih grobov na Dolenjskem in Posavju. – Razprave 1. razreda SAZU 6, 195–213 [summary in Italian / povzetek v italijanščini]. RADMAN-LIVAJA, I. 2004, Militaria Sisciensia. Nalazi rimske vojne opreme iz Siska u fundusu Arheološkoga muzeja u Zagrebu / Finds of the Roman military equipment in Sisak in the holdings of the Archeological Museum in Zagreb. – Katalozi i monograije Arheološkoga muzeja u Zagrebu 1/1, Zagreb. RADMAN-LIVAJA, I. (ur.) 2010, Nalazi rimske vojne opreme u Hrvatskoj / Finds of the Roman military equipment in Croatia. – Zagreb. RADNÓTI, A. 1938, Die römischen Bronzgefässe von Pannonien. – Dissertationes Pannonicae 2/6, Budapest. RICCI, A. 1985, Ceramica a pareti sottili. – In/V: Enciclopedia del’Arte antica classica e orientale, Atlante delle forme ceramiche II, Roma, 231–356. SCHINDLER-KAUDELKA, E. 1975, Die dünnwandige Gebrauchskeramik vom Magdalensberg. – Kärntner Museumsschriften 58, Archäologische Forschungen zu den Grabungen auf dem Magdalensberg 3, Klagenfurt. 94 SCHINDLER-KAUDELKA, E. 1989, Die gewöhnliche Gebrauchskeramik vom Magdalensberg. – Kärntner Museumsschriften 72, Archäologische Forschungen zu den Grabungen auf dem Magdalensberg 10, Klagenfurt. SLABE, M. 1974, Polhov Gradec. – Varstvo spomenikov 17–19/1, 204. ŠRIBAR, V. 1968–1969, Mihovo. – Varstvo spomenikov 13–14, 196. TASSINARI, G. 1998, Ceramica a pareti sotili. – In/V: G. Olcese (ed./ur.), Ceramiche in Lombardia tra II secolo a.C. e VII secolo d.C., Raccolta dei dati editi, Documenti di Archeologia 16, Mantova. he Celts: S. Moscati et al. (eds./ur.), he Celts. – Exhibition catalogue / Katalog razstave, Milano, 1991. WAURICK, G. 1988, Römische Helme. – In/V: Bottini et al., Antike Helme, Sammlung Lipperheide und andere bestände des Antikenmuseums Berlin, Römisch-Germanisches Zentralmuseum Mainz, Monographien 14, Mainz, 327–364. WINDL, H. 1975, Das La Tène- und kaiserzeitliche Gräberfeld von Mihovo (Unterkrain - Dolenjsko). – Unpublished Ph. D. thesis / Neobjavljena doktorska disertacija, Wien. Plate 1. Verdun, Grave 1. Ceramics. Scale 1–3 = 1 : 4; rest 1 : 2 (drawing A. Fortuna Saje). Tabla 1. Verdun, grob 1. Keramika. M 1–3 = 1 : 4; drugo 1 : 2 (risba A. Fortuna Saje). 1 95 Plate 2. Verdun, Grave 1. 5, 7–9 bronze; 6, 10 iron; 1–4 ceramics. Scale 2–4 = 1 : 4; rest 1 : 2 (drawing A. Fortuna Saje). Tabla 2. Verdun, grob 1. 5, 7–9 bron; 6, 10 železo; 1–4 keramika. M 2–4 = 1 : 4; drugo 1 : 2 (risba A. Fortuna Saje). 1 96 Plate 3. Verdun, Grave 1. 3 bronze; 1–2, 4 iron. Scale = 1 : 2 (drawing A. Fortuna Saje). Tabla 3. Verdun, grob 1. 3 bron; 1–2, 4 železo. M = 1 : 2 (risba A. Fortuna Saje). 1 97 Plate 4. Verdun, Grave 1. Iron and bronze. Scale = 1 : 2 (drawing A. Fortuna Saje). Tabla 4. Verdun, grob 1. Železo in bron. M = 1 : 2 (risba A. Fortuna Saje). 1 98 Plate 5. Verdun, Grave 1. Iron and bronze. Scale = 1 : 2 (drawing A. Fortuna Saje). Tabla 5. Verdun, grob 1. Železo in bron. M = 1 : 2 (risba A. Fortuna Saje). 1 99 Plate 6. Verdun, Grave 1. Iron and bronze. Scale = 1 : 2 (drawing A. Fortuna Saje). Tabla 6. Verdun, grob 1. Železo in bron. M = 1 : 2 (risba A. Fortuna Saje). 1 100 Plate 7. Verdun, Grave 14. 1 iron; rest ceramics. Scale 4–5 = 1 : 4; rest 1 : 2 (drawing A. Fortuna Saje). Tabla 7. Verdun, grob 14. 1 železo; drugo keramika. M 4–5 = 1 : 4; drugo 1 : 2 (risba A. Fortuna Saje). 14 101 Plate 8. Verdun, Grave 24. Ceramics. Scale 3–4, 7 = 1 : 4; rest 1 : 2 (drawing A. Fortuna Saje). Tabla 8. Verdun, grob 24. Keramika. M 3–4, 7 = 1 : 4; drugo 1 : 2 (risba A. Fortuna Saje). 24 102 Plate 9. Verdun, Grave 24. 1–4 ceramics; 5–6 bronze; 8 iron and bronze; 7, 9–10 iron. Scale = 1 : 2 (drawing A. Fortuna Saje). Tabla 9. Verdun, grob 24. 1–4 keramika; 5–6 bron; 8 železo in bron; 7, 9–10 železo. M = 1 : 2 (risba A. Fortuna Saje). 24 103 Plate 10. Verdun, Grave 37. Ceramics. Scale 2–3 = 1 : 4; rest 1 : 2 (drawing A. Fortuna Saje). Tabla 10. Verdun, grob 37. Keramika. M 2–3 = 1 : 4; drugo 1 : 2 (risba A. Fortuna Saje). 37 104 Plate 11. Verdun, Grave 37. 1–2 ceramics; 3–5 bronze; 6 iron and brass. Scale 1–2, 6 = 1 : 4; rest 1 : 2 (drawing A. Fortuna Saje). Tabla 11. Verdun, grob 37. 1–2 keramika; 3–5 bron; 6 železo in medenina. M 1–2, 6 = 1 : 4; drugo 1 : 2 (risba A. Fortuna Saje). 37 105 Plate 12. Verdun, Graves 37 and 41. 1–5 iron; 6–7 bronze. Scale = 1 : 2 (drawing A. Fortuna Saje). Tabla 12. Verdun, grobova 37 in 41. 1–5 železo; 6–7 bron. M = 1 : 2 (risba A. Fortuna Saje). 37 41 106 Plate 13. Verdun, Grave 41. 1, 7 iron; 2–4, 6 bronze; 5, 8 ceramics. Scale 1, 8 = 1 : 4; rest 1: 2 (drawing A. Fortuna Saje) Tabla 13. Verdun, grob 41. 1, 7 železo; 2–4, 6 bron; 5, 8 keramika. M 1, 8 = 1 : 4; drugo 1: 2 (risba A. Fortuna Saje). 41 107 Plate 14. Verdun, Grave 41. Iron and bronze. Scale = 1 : 2 (drawing A. Fortuna Saje). Tabla 14. Verdun, grob 41. Železo in bron. M = 1 : 2 (risba A. Fortuna Saje). 41 108 Plate 15. Verdun, Grave 41. Iron and bronze. Scale = 1 : 2 (drawing A. Fortuna Saje). Tabla 15. Verdun, grob 41. Železo in bron. M = 1 : 2 (risba A. Fortuna Saje). 41 109 Plate 16. Verdun, Grave 41. Iron and bronze. Scale = 1 : 2 (drawing A. Fortuna Saje). Tabla 16. Verdun, grob 41. Železo in bron. M = 1 : 2 (risba A. Fortuna Saje). 41 110 Plate 17. Verdun, Grave 84. 1, 6, 10 iron; 2 iron and bronze; 7–9 bronze; 3–5 ceramics. Scale 3 = 1 : 4; rest 1: 2 (drawing A. Fortuna Saje). Tabla 17. Verdun, grob 84. 1, 6, 10 železo; 2 železo in bron; 7–9 bron; 3–5 keramika. M 3 = 1 : 4; drugo 1: 2 (risba A. Fortuna Saje). 84 111 Plate 18. Verdun, Grave 84. Iron. Scale = 1 : 2 (drawing A. Fortuna Saje). Tabla 18. Verdun, grob 84. Železo. M = 1 : 2 (risba A. Fortuna Saje). 84 112 Plate 19. Verdun, Graves 84 and 98. 1–3, 5, 7–10 ceramics; 4, 6 iron. Scale 2–4, 6, 9 = 1 : 2; rest 1 : 4 (drawing A. Fortuna Saje). Tabla 19. Verdun, grobova 84 in 98. 1–3, 5, 7–10 keramika; 4, 6 železo. M 2–4, 6, 9 = 1 : 2; drugo 1 : 4 (risba A. Fortuna Saje). 84 98 113 Plate 20. Verdun, Grave 112. 1 iron; 2–3 bronze; 4–7 ceramics. Scale 4, 7 = 1 : 4; rest 1 : 2 (drawing A. Fortuna Saje). Tabla 20. Verdun, grob 112. 1 železo; 2–3 bron; 4–7 keramika. M 4, 7 = 1 : 4; drugo 1 : 2 (risba A. Fortuna Saje). 112 114 Plate 21. Verdun, Grave 112. Iron. Scale = 1 : 2 (drawing A. Fortuna Saje). Tabla 21. Verdun, grob 112. Železo. M = 1 : 2 (risba A. Fortuna Saje). 112 115 Plate 22. Verdun, Graves 112 and 131. 1–3 bronze; 4 iron and bronze; 5 iron; 6–7 ceramics. Scale 7 = 1 : 4; rest = 1 : 2 (drawing A. Fortuna Saje). Tabla 22. Verdun, grobova 112 in 131. 1–3 bron; 4 železo in bron; 5 železo; 6–7 keramika. M 7 = 1 : 4; drugo = 1 : 2 (risba A. Fortuna Saje). 112 116 131 Plate 23. Verdun, Grave 131. 1–2 bronze; 3–7 ceramics. Scale 6–7 = 1 : 4; rest 1 : 2 (drawing A. Fortuna Saje). Tabla 23. Verdun, grob 131. 1–2 bron; 3–7 keramika. M 6–7 = 1 : 4; drugo 1 : 2 (risba A. Fortuna Saje). 131 117 Plate 24. Verdun, Grave 131. 1a–b iron and brass; 4 silver- or tinplated bronze; 2–3 iron. Scale 1a–b = 1 : 4; rest 1 : 2 (drawing A. Fortuna Saje). Tabla 24. Verdun, grob 131. 1a–b železo in medenina; 4 posrebren ali pokositren bron; 2–3 železo. M 1a–b = 1 : 4; drugo 1 : 2 (risba A. Fortuna Saje). 131 118 Plate 25. Verdun, Grave 136. 1, 8–9 bronze; 2–3, 7, 10 iron; 4–6 ceramics. Scale 6, 10 = 1 : 4; rest 1 : 2 (drawing A. Fortuna Saje). Tabla 25. Verdun, grob 136. 1, 8–9 bron; 2–3, 7, 10 železo; 4–6 keramika. M 6, 10 = 1 : 4; drugo 1 : 2 (risba A. Fortuna Saje). 136 119 Plate 26. Verdun, Grave 136. 7 glass; 1–6, 8–9 ceramics. Scale 4–6 = 1 : 4; rest 1 : 2 (drawing A. Fortuna Saje). Tabla 26. Verdun, grob 136. 7 steklo; 1–6, 8–9 keramika. M 4–6 = 1 : 4; drugo 1 : 2 (risba A. Fortuna Saje). 136 120 Plate 27. Verdun, Grave 228. 3–5 bronze; 1 iron; 2, 6–8 ceramics. Scale 2 = 1 : 4; rest 1 : 2 (drawing A. Fortuna Saje). Tabla 27. Verdun, grob 228. 3–5 bron; 1 železo; 2, 6–8 keramika. M 2 = 1 : 4; drugo 1 : 2 (risba A. Fortuna Saje). 228 121 Plate 28. Verdun, Grave 228. 5–9 bronze; 1–4 iron; 10–12 ceramics. Scale 10–12 = 1 : 4; rest 1 : 2 (drawing A. Fortuna Saje). Tabla 28. Verdun, grob 228. 5–9 bron; 1–4 železo; 10–12 keramika. M 10–12 = 1 : 4; drugo 1 : 2 (risba A. Fortuna Saje). 228 122 Plate 29. Verdun, Graves 146 and 246. 3 bronze; 1, 4–5 iron; 2 ceramics. Scale 2 = 1 : 4; rest 1 : 2 (drawing A. Fortuna Saje). Tabla 29. Verdun, grobova 146 in 246. 3 bron; 1, 4–5 železo; 2 keramika. M 2 = 1 : 4; drugo 1 : 2 (risba A. Fortuna Saje). 146 246 123 AUGUSTAN MILITARY GRAVES FROM THE AREA OF KONGRESNI TRG IN LJUBLJANA AVGUSTEJSKA VOJAŠKA GROBOVA S KONGRESNEGA TRGA V LJUBLJANI Andrej Gaspari, Iris Bekljanov Zidanšek, Rene Masaryk, Matjaž Novšak Andrej Gaspari, Iris Bekljanov Zidanšek, Rene Masaryk, Matjaž Novšak Abstract Izvleček Between 2009 and 2010, the Ljubljana Museum and Galleries, together with the company Arhej, carried out extensive archaeological excavations on Kongresni trg. Eleven Augustan cremation graves were found in two groups adjacent to the northern wall of Roman Emona. hese are the earliest known Roman graves from the Ljubljana basin. Amongst these, there are two military graves. hese indings raise intriguing questions about the origins of the deceased and the relationship between Early Roman graves and the prehistoric tumulus necropolis, as well as Roman military and civil inds dating to approximately the same period, and from the central Ljubljana area. Med zaščitnimi izkopavanji Kongresnega trga, ki so jih v letih 2009–2010 izvajali Muzej in galerije mesta Ljubljana v sodelovanju s podjetjem Arhej, je bilo pred severnim obzidjem rimske Emone v dveh skupinah odkritih skupno 11 avgustejskih žganih grobov. Ti najzgodnejši znani rimski grobovi iz Ljubljanske kotline vključujejo tudi dva vojaška grobova in odpirajo zanimiva vprašanja v zvezi z izvorom pokojnikov in razmerjem zgodnjerimskih grobov do prazgodovinske gomilne nekropole ter okvirno sočasnih rimskih ostalin vojaške in civilne narave na ožjem ljubljanskem območju. Keywords: Slovenia, Ljubljana, Kongresni trg, Emona, graves, the Roman military, weapons, auxiliary Ključne besede: Slovenija, Ljubljana, Kongresni trg, Emona, grobovi, rimska vojska, orožje, auxilia Figure 1. Emona with Early Roman sites, mentioned in the text. 1 Kongresni trg, cemetery; 2 foot of the Grajski grič (Castle Hill), settlement; 3 Prule, military camp; 4 Gradišče/Emona, town (R. Masaryk). Slika 1. Emona z zgodnjerimskimi najdišči, omenjenimi v besedilu. 1 Kongresni trg, grobišče; 2 vznožje Grajskega griča, naselbina; 3 Prule, vojaški tabor; 4 Gradišče/Emona, mesto (izdelava R. Masaryk). 125 Figure 2. Plan of the early structures and deposits in the researched area of Kongresni trg (R. Masaryk). Slika 2. Načrt zgodnjih struktur in depozitov na raziskanem območju Kongresnega trga (izdelava R. Masaryk). 126 1 Introduction 1 Uvod Extensive archaeological excavations were carried out between 2009 and 2011 before the city’s parking garage was built (ig. 1). he Museum and Galleries of Ljubljana carried out the research in collaboration with the archaeological company Arhej. Martin Horvat and Matjaž Novšak led the team of archaeologists. he excavated area comprises the area of the old parking lot and the newly built underground parking garage and the middle part of Zvezda Park, as well as part of the street by the entrance to the Kazina building, where the ramp is. Other areas also had to be investigated, such as those endangered by the renewal and relocation of communal lines and the new arrangement. Altogether, 12500 m² were gradually excavated in the course of three years (ig. 2). V letih 2009–2011 so bila na območju Kongresnega trga v Ljubljani (sl. 1) pred gradnjo mestne parkirne hiše opravljena obsežna arheološka izkopavanja. Raziskave je izvajal Muzej in galerije mesta Ljubljana v sodelovanju s podjetjem Arhej, arheološko ekipo pa sta vodila Martin Horvat in Matjaž Novšak. Raziskani so bili območje nekdanjega parkirišča, kjer je bila zgrajena podzemna parkirna hiša, ter osrednji del parka Zvezda in del ulice pred vstopom v zgradbo Kazine, kjer je zdaj uvozna klančina. Poleg območij, vezanih na gradnjo parkirne hiše, je bilo treba izkopati tudi predele, ogrožene z obnovo in prestavitvami komunalnih vodov ter novo ureditvijo širše okolice. V treh letih terenskih posegov je bilo postopno raziskanih skupno 12.500 m2 površine (sl. 2). he more prominent results of these excavations include new data on tumulus graves from the Early Hallsatt period, traces of the Roman army’s whereabouts in this area immediately after the transition from BC to AD, new insight into Emona’s northern defence system and a building dating to the Middle Imperial Period found by the main road towards Celeia. Amongst the more notable inds are two groups of Early Roman cremation graves with 11 ex- Odmevnejši rezultati tokratnih izkopavanj Kongresnega trga in parka Zvezda vključujejo nove podatke o planem in gomilnem grobišču iz starejšega dela halštatskega obdobja, odkrite sledove zadrževanja rimske vojske na tem prostoru v času kmalu po prehodu stare v novo ero, ponovni vpogled v severni obrambni sistem Emone in srednjecesarskodobno stavbo ob glavni cesti proti Celeji, posebno mesto pa zavzemata skupini zgodnjerimskih žganih grobov amined burials. he southern group with six graves was discovered in a narrow excavation belt in the middle part of the square. he northern group with ive graves was found in the north-western part of the excavated area, right next to the Kazina building. he following discussion is a contribution to a scientiic meeting he Roman Army in the territory of the nowadays Slovenia. It focuses on two military burials from the northern group, which pose intriguing questions about the origins of the deceased, the dynamics surrounding the burials in the aforementioned area, and the relationship between the Early Roman graves, the prehistoric tumulus necropolis and approximately contemporary Roman inds of military and civilian natures within the central area of today’s Ljubljana. 2 Stratigraphic records in the area of the northern group of Early Roman graves he earliest archaeological traces in the Kongresni trg area date back to the Late Bronze Age. Several small pits containing fragments of pottery are dated to this period. In the north-western part, a group of ive tumuli with rim ditches were formed in the Early Iron Age. In addition to the burials under the tumuli, a few individual, probably lat graves in smaller pits were documented in the immediate vicinity. Diferent indicators lead to the belief that the tumuli were clearly discernible or at least recognizable at the end of the 1st century BC (ig. 3). s skupno 11 raziskanimi pokopi. Južna skupina s šestimi žganimi grobovi je bila odkrita v ozkem izkopnem pasu, ki je prečil osrednji del trga, severna skupina s 5 žganimi grobovi pa na severozahodnem delu raziskovanega območja, tik ob stavbi Kazine. Tokratna obravnava se kot prispevek k temi znanstvenega srečanja Rimska vojska na območju današnje Slovenije osredotoča na dva vojaška žgana pokopa iz severne skupine, ki odpirata zanimiva vprašanja v zvezi z izvorom pokojnikov, dinamiko in vzroki pokopavanja na omejeni površini v kratkih časovnih razmikih ter z razmerjem zgodnjerimskih Figure 3. Hallstatt tumuli at the north-western part of the researched area (photo D. Badovinac). Slika 3. Halštatske gomile na severozahodnem delu raziskanega območja (foto D. Badovinac). Figure 4. Situation plan of the area with discussed grave units (R. Masaryk). Slika 4. Situacijski načrt območja obravnavanih grobnih celot (izdelava R. Masaryk). 127 Table 1. Stratigraphic matrix of the discussed area and descriptions of the stratigraphic units (R. Masaryk). Preglednica 1. Stratigrafska matrika obravnavanega območja in opisi stratigrafskih enot (izdelava R. Masaryk). SU / SE Interpretation / Interpretacija 9000 destruction / recent interventions – uničenje oz. moderni posegi 9319 monastery / vicedominio gardens – samostanski ali vicedomski vrtovi 2661 destruction / recent intervention, terrain levelling for monastery / vicedominio gardens – uničenje oz. novoveški poseg, izravnava terena za samostanske ali vicedomske vrtove very dark greyish brown crumbly silt, containing smaller carbonate pebbles and sandstone rocks from quarries, fragments of ceramic building material, pottery and bones – zelo temnosivkastorjav drobljiv peščeni melj, ki je vseboval manjše apnenčeve prodnike in peščenjakove lomljence, odlomke keramičnega gradbenega materiala, lončenine ter kosti dark soil / paleosol – »temen« sediment oz. paleohumus crumbly, very dark greyish clayey silt, containing carbonate pebbles up to 3 cm in dimension and fragments of the ceramic building material – drobljiv, zelo temnosivkastorjav glinasti melj, ki je vseboval apnenčaste prodnike velikosti do 3 cm in odlomke keramičnega gradbenega materiala 9366 levelling / ill layer – nasutje oz. izravnava very dark greyish sandy clay with carbonate and sandstone pebbles up to 10 cm in dimension and fragments of ceramic building material, pottery and pieces of charcoal – zelo temnosivkastorjava peščena glina z apnenčevimi in peščenjakovimi prodniki velikosti do 10 cm ter odlomki keramičnega gradbenega materiala, lončenine in koščki oglja 9020 levelling layer / loor – nasutje oz. tlak carbonate pebbles up to 10 cm in dimension; spaces in between were illed with crumbly brown sandy silt – apnenčasti prodniki oz. oblice velikosti do 10 cm; vmesni prostori so bili zapolnjeni z drobljivim rjavim peščenim meljem 9322 9381 levelling / ill layer – zasutje oz. izravnava 9401 destruction / Roman Age intervention, terrain levelling in the time of expansion of the northern necropolis of Emona – uničenje oz. rimskodobni poseg, izravnava terena ob širitvi severnega emonskega grobišča 9386=9388 levelling / ill layer – zasutje oz. izravnava 9385 collapse / ground settling above grave 1042 – udor oz. posedanje tal nad grobom 1042 Grave 1038 – Grob 1038 Grave 1039 – Grob 1039 128 Description / Opis crumbly dark greyish brown sandy silt with carbonate and sandstone pebbles up to 10 cm in dimension drobljiv – temnosivkastorjav peščeni melj z apnenčevimi in peščenjakovimi prodniki velikosti do 10 cm crumbly brown sandy silt with carbonate and sandstone pebbles up to 20 cm in dimension and fragments of pottery – drobljiv rjav peščeni melj z apnenčevimi in peščenjakovimi prodniki velikosti do 20 cm ter odlomki lončenine pit and in-ill – jama in zasutje irregular shaped pit with semi-circular cross section (preserved dimensions 1.8 × 0.6 m), steep walls and lat bottom (depth 0.7 m), illed with crumbly brown sandy silt with carbonate pebbles up to 5 cm in dimension and fragments of pottery – v tlorisu nepravilna polkrožna jama (ohr. vel. 1,8 × 0,6 m) s strmimi stenami in ravnim dnom (gl. 0,7 m), zapolnjena z drobljivim rjavim peščenim meljem z apnenčevimi prodniki velikosti do 5 cm in odlomki lončenine levelling / ill layer – nasutje oz. izravnava crumby very dark greyish sandy silt with carbonate and sandstone pebbles up to 15 cm in dimension, sandstone quarries up to 20 cm in dimension and fragments of the ceramic building material up to 5 cm in dimension – drobljiv zelo temnosivkastorjav peščeni melj z apnenčevimi in peščenjakovimi prodniki velikosti do 15 cm, peščenjakovimi lomljenci velikosti do 20 cm ter odlomki keramičnega gradbenega materiala velikosti do 5 cm pit and in-ill – jama in zasutji larger pit, irregular in ground shape (preserved dimensions 4 × 1.6 m) with partially vertical, partially slanted walls and slightly concave bottom (depth 0.8 m), illed with crumbly brown sandy silt with carbonate pebbles up to 10 cm in dimension and fragments of pottery and with dark greyish brown sandy silt with carbonate pebbles up to 10 cm in dimension and fragments of pottery – večja, v tlorisu nepravilna jama (ohr. vel. 4 × 1,6 m) z deloma navpičnimi, deloma poševnimi stenami in rahlo usločenim dnom (gl. 0,8 m), zapolnjena z drobljivim rjavim peščenim meljem z apnenčevimi prodniki velikosti do 10 cm in odlomki lončenine ter drobljivim temnosivkastorjavim peščenim meljem z apnenčevemi prodniki velikosti do 10 cm in odlomki lončenine sediment – sediment crumbly dark brown sandy silt, containing carbonate and sandstone pebbles up to 5 cm in dimension and a few pieces of ceramic building material – drobljiv temno rjav peščeni melj, ki je vseboval apnenčeve in peščenjakove prodnike velikosti do 5 cm ter nekaj drobcev keramičnega gradbenega materiala 9528 coat of the tumulus 1001 – plašč gomile 1001 carbonate and sandstone pebbles up to 15 cm in dimension; spaces in between were illed with crumbly very dark brown sandy silt – apnenčeve in peščenjakove oblice velikosti do 15 cm; vmesni prostori so bili zapolnjeni z drobljivim zelo temnorjavim peščenim meljem 9521 paleosol / A-horizon – naravna tla oz. paleohumus / horizont A crumbly dark brown clayey silt, containing carbonate and sandstone pebbles up to 10 cm in dimension – drobljiv temnorjav glinasti melj, ki je vseboval apnenčeve in peščenjakove prodnike velikosti do 10 cm 9027 upper part of the geological base / B-horizon – zgornji del geološke podlage / horizont B crumbly dark brown sandy silt with carbonate and sandstone pebbles up to 15 cm in dimension – drobljiv temnorjav peščeni melj z apnenčevimi in peščenjakovimi prodniki velikosti do 15 cm 9045 geological base / C-horizon – geološka podlaga / horizont C carbonate and sandstone pebbles up to 7 cm in dimension and dark brown sandy silt – apnenčevi in peščenjakovi prodniki velikosti do 7 cm ter temnorjav peščeni melj 9362/9363 Grave 1042 – Grob 1042 9324 9382 / 9343; 9350 9379=9507 129 he eastern part of tumulus 1001 was covered with sediment SU 9379=9507 (ig. 4; table 1). A pit (SU 9463) of an Early Roman grave (1042) was excavated from the surface of burial SU 9350 above the eastern part of a larger pit SU 9382. Burnt residues (SU 9453) and grave contents (SU 9451) were placed in a wooden case (SU 9460) in the grave pit and afterwards covered with two deposits: an earlier (SU 9433) and a later one (SU 9437). For a while, sediment SU 9450 illed the empty space in the case, covered the grave contents and burnt material, until the north-eastern part of the case (SU 9385) collapsed. he two deposits of the grave pit then subsided, while a thicker layer of sediment on the opposite side of the pit suggests that it remained hollow for quite some time. he southern part of grave pit 1042 and its in-ills (SU 9433 and SU 9437) were removed during the excavation of pit SU 9362. Only the northern part of the pit and its in-ills (SU 9363) remained, whereas the rest was destroyed through recent interventions. Gravel (SU 9349=9405), the tumulus of grave 1039, lay above the northern part of in-ill SU 9350, the western part of the grave pit of grave 1042 (in-ill SU 9437) and above in-ill SU 9350. he gravel covered a wooden case (imprint 9390) that was placed upon a layer of deposit (SU 9350). Sediment (SU 9367) then gradually covered the layer of burnt remains (SU 9404) and grave contents (SU 9389). he sedimentation process progressed simultaneously with the deformation and settling of the grave pit and tumulus deposit, until the hollow space illed up entirely. Figure 5. Grave 1042 with contents in situ (photo D. Badovinac). Slika 5. Grob 1042 s pridatki in situ (foto D. Badovinac). he tumulus cover was partly covered with the same gravel deposit (SU 9325) that spread across deposit SU 9324 and in-ill SU 9363 in the southern part. We presume that later interventions removed the cover of the tumulus 1001 from its primary position to a secondary one. A group of inds (grave 1038) is among the remains found above the preserved segment of the deposit over the tumulus cover above grave 1039. grobov do prazgodovinske gomilne nekropole in okvirno sočasnih rimskih ostalin vojaške in civilne narave na ožjem ljubljanskem območju. 2 Stratigrafski izvid na območju severne skupine zgodnjerimskih grobov Najstarejše arheološke sledi na Kongresnem trgu sodijo v pozno bronasto dobo. Iz tega časa so dokumentirani odlomki lončenine iz posameznih manjših jam. Na severozahodnem delu območja je v starejši železni dobi nastala skupina petih gomil z obodnimi jarki. Poleg pokopov pod gomilami je bilo v neposredni okolici dokumentiranih več posameznih, domnevno planih grobov v manjših jamah. Na podlagi raznovrstnih pokazateljev je mogoče sklepati, da so bile ob koncu 1. stoletja pr. n. št. gomile še jasno vidne oziroma prepoznavne (sl. 3). Nad vzhodnim delom večje jame neznane namembnosti (SE 9382), ki je bila izkopana s površine sedimenta (SE 9379=9507), odloženega na vzhodnem pobočju gomile 1001 po njenem nastanku (sl. 4; preglednica 1), je bila s površine njenega zasutja (SE 9350) izkopana jama (SE 9463) zgodnjerimskega groba 1042. Po odložitvi žganine (SE 9453) in grobnih pridatkov (SE 9451) v leseno skrinjo oziroma zaboj (odtis SE 9460) sta grobno jamo zapolnili starejše in mlajše nasutje (SE 9433, SE 9437). V votlem prostoru grobne skrinje se je nekaj časa nabiral sediment (SE 9450), ki je prekril del grobnih pridatkov in žganine, dokler se severovzhodni del skrinje ni udrl (SE 9385). Ob tem dogodku sta se zasutji grobne jame posedli, v nasprotnem kotu skrinje pa se je verjetno nekaj časa ohranil votel prostor, kar nakazuje debelejša plast tam odloženega sedimenta. Južni del groba 1042 oziroma njegove jame in zasutij (SE 9433, SE 9437) je bil odstranjen z izkopom jame (SE 9362). Od jame in njenega zasutja (SE 9363) se je ohranil le skrajni severni del, ostanek pa je bil uničen z recentnim posegom. Nad severnim delom zasutja (SE 9363), zahodnim delom grobne jame groba 1042 in njenih zasutij je ležalo prodno nasutje (SE 9349=9405), plašč gomile groba 1039. Ta je prekrival leseno skrinjo oziroma zaboj (odtis 9390), postavljen na površino nasutja večje jame (SE 9350). V skrinji se je v času po odložitvi žganine (SE 9404) in grobnih pridatkov (SE 9389) nabiral sediment (SE 9367). Proces sedimentiranja je potekal ob sočasnem deformiranju in posedanju grobne skrinje in gomilnega nasutja do popolne zapolnitve votlega prostora. 130 Površino plašča gomile je deloma prekrivalo enako prodno nasutje (SE 9325), ki se je na zahodu širilo nad nasutji SE 9324 in SE 9363. Za slednje domnevamo, da gre za sekundarno lego dela primarnega plašča gomile 1001, ki so ga poškodovali mlajši posegi. V tem nasutju je ležal skupek najdb, ki smo ga označili za grob 1038. he accumulation of layer SU 9381 can be linked to the arrangement and expansion of the northern Emona necropolis. he upper part of tumulus 1001 and the levee east of graves 1042, 1039 and 1038 were removed during the aforementioned procedure (SU 9401). At the same time, a loor-surface from the time of Early Roman graves (SU 1017 and SU 1033) was also damaged. Dokumentirano je bilo tudi nasipavanje plasti (SE 9381), ki bi jo bilo mogoče povezati tudi z urejanjem okolice ob širitvi območja severnega emonskega grobišča. Med tem posegom (SE 9401) sta bila odstranjeni zgornji del gomile 1001 ter peščena sipina vzhodno od skupine grobov 1042, 1039 in 1038. Takrat je bila uničena tudi hodna površina iz časa nastanka sosednjih zgodnjerimskih grobov 1017 in 1033. 3 Three Early Roman graves of the northern group 3 Trije zgodnjerimski grobovi severne skupine 3.1 Grob 1042 3.1 Grave 1042 3.1.1 Opis (sl. 5–6) 3.1.1 Description (igs. 5–6) he ground plan of burial pit SU 9463 (preserved size 1.6 × 1.4 m, preserved depth 0.54 m) had an irregular shape and was damaged by later interventions on the north and south side. It was excavated from the surface of the deposit SU 9350, and the lower part was dug into the geological base. he deeper section of the pit was surrounded by a shelf, measuring 0.33 to 0.4 m high and up to 0.3 m wide, along the western and southern sides and had merged with the pit walls along the eastern side. he bottom of the deeper part of the pit was lat and slightly inclined towards the west and south. A layer of crumbly, dark yellowish brown clay sand that contained small and large (northeastern part) limestone and sandstone pebbles (sediment SU 9450) covered the pit. he sediment was enclosed and surrounded by a layer of limestone and sandstone pebbles, mixed up with patches of brown sandy silt (SU 9433) from all sides. he same layer also covered the actual sediment. he border between the sediment and gravel layer SU 9433 was quite distinct: it was vertical (the height of the contact surface was up to 0.06 m), and was similar to the shape of the bottom of the pit, so that the ground plan of the sediment’s surface was rectangular, slightly opened towards the north (width 0.7 to 0.8 m, preserved length 0.8 m). Rather than leaning on the walls of the pit, the sediment was separated from them by a 0.03 to 0.15 m wide spacing, which was the widest on the east side. he assumption that the distinct border between sediment and gravel was created by the artiicial division of organic material (probably wooden planks of a chest or case placed into the pit) can be deined as inter-facies or print SU 9460. On the eastern side of the pit, the print appeared as a vertical wall of gravel (SU 9433) with a preserved height of 0.37 m. his case was probably the only larger in-ill of a grave pit that was preserved in its primary position. After the wooden case had collapsed into the pit’s interior, it covered sediment SU 9450. Sediment SU 9450 accumulated within the case partially covered the burnt remains (SU 9453) and grave contents (SU 9451). he burnt remains were lying in the south-eastern part of the area, which was outlined with print SU 9460. In addition to fragments of incinerated bones, the burnt remains also contained bronze and iron Grobna jama (SE 9463; ohr. vel. 1,6 × 1,4 m; ohr. gl. 0,54 m) je imela v tlorisu nepravilno obliko, na severni in južni strani je bila poškodovana z mlajšimi posegi. Izkopana je bila iz površine zasutja SE 9350, njen spodnji del je bil vkopan v geološko osnovo. Globlji del jame je bil na zahodu in jugu obdan z 0,33–0,4 m visoko in do 0,3 m široko polico, ki se je na vzhodni strani združila s steno jame. Ravno dno globljega dela jame je prekrivala plast drobljivega, temnorumenkastorjavega glinenega peska, ki je vseboval manjše in večje prodnike iz apnenca in peščenjaka (sediment SE 9450). Sediment je bil z vseh strani ostro zamejen in obdan s plastjo apnenčevih in peščenjakovih prodnikov, premešanih z mazavim rjavim peščenim meljem (SE 9433); ista plast je sediment tudi prekrivala. Meja med sedimentom in plastjo proda SE 9433 je bila izrazita, navpična (višina stične površine do 0,06 m) in je posnemala obliko dna jame, tako da je imela tudi površina sedimenta v tlorisu obliko pravokotnika, rahlo razprtega proti severu (š. 0,7–0,8 m; ohr. d. 0,8 m). Sediment se ni naslanjal na stene jame, temveč je bil od njih ločen z 0,03–0,15 m širokim razmikom, ki je bil največji na vzhodni strani. Zaradi domneve, da je izrazito mejo med sedimentom in prodom ustvarila umetna ločnica iz organskega materiala, verjetno lesene deske v jamo postavljenega zabojnika oziroma skrinje, je bila ta opredeljena Figure 6. Ground plan of the grave 1042 with contents (R. Masaryk). Slika 6. Tlorisna situacija groba 1042 s pridatki (izdelava R. Masaryk). 131 ittings (pl. 1: 8–10) and a fragment of bronze wire (pl. 2: 13). A bronze ibula (pl. 2: 12) and a bronze ring (pl. 2: 11) were lying on its surface. A group of four ceramic vessels was set west of the burnt remains. he remains partly surrounded a beaker (pl. 2: 14) and covered an edge of a plate (pl. 2: 15). A single-handled jug (pl. 2: 17) and a twohandled pot (pl. 2: 16) stood behind the beaker and plate. West and north of the vessels lay a group of iron objects. West of the single-handled jug lay a knife with its tip facing south (pl. 1: 7). North of the knife and the two-handled pot were two spearheads, lying one on top of the other, with their tips pointing toward the southwest (the lower one – pl. 1: 4; the upper one – pl. 1: 5). he side-ittings of the scabbard were broken into pieces and oriented in the north-south direction. hey were placed above the knife and spearheads. he two converged in a button-shaped end on the south side and lay slightly open towards the north, so that they were lying 0.1 m apart at the mouth. A sword was lying above the ittings in the north-south direction. Its tip was turned towards the north, i.e. in the opposite direction than the scabbard. he sword was placed oblique so that it was lifted 0.1 m above the scabbard ittings on the northern side. A shield boss (pl. 1: 6) with its dome facing the northeast was placed north of the spearheads and east of the scabbard and the sword. he top parts of the grave items extended above sediment SU 9450 and were mostly covered with deposit SU 9433. 3.1.2 Catalogue of grave contents1 Plate 1. 1. Sword; iron. L 71.2 cm; W of blade 5.2 cm; W of waisted part 4.5 cm; L of tang 15 cm; W of tang 1.9 cm; wgt. 720 g. SU 9451. PN 6644. 2. Part of the side itting of a scabbard; iron. Pr. L 39.0 cm; W 1.0 cm, wgt. 88 g. SU 945. PN 6655. 3. Part of the side itting of a scabbard with a buttonshaped end; iron, bronze. Pr. L 54.8 cm; W 1.0 cm; H of button 1.5 cm; wgt. 115 g. SU 9451. PN 6668. 4. Spearhead; iron. Pr. L 28.3 cm; W of the blade 2.7 cm; dm. of the socket 2.2 cm; wgt. 120 g. SU 9451. PN 6667. 5. Spearhead; iron. Pr. L 24.1 cm; W of the blade 4.0 cm; th. of the blade 0.3 cm; dm. of the socket 2.1 cm; wgt. 158.8 g. SU 9451. PN 6669. 6. Shield boss; iron. Dm. 15.6 cm; dm. of the dome 10.2 cm; H 11.5 cm; th. 0.18 cm; wgt. 163 g. SU 9451. PN 6645. 7. Knife; iron. L 28.3 cm; L of the tang 11.3 cm; W of the blade 2.7 cm; wgt. 105 g. SU 9451. PN 6666. 1 132 List and explanation of abbreviations: L – length; Pr. L – preserved length; W – width; Dm./dm. – diameter; H – height; wgt. – weight; th. – thickness. kot mejna površina oziroma odtis SE 9460. Ob vzhodni strani jame se je odtis kazal kot navpična stena prodnate plasti SE 9433 z ohranjeno višino 0,37 m. V tem primeru je najverjetneje šlo za edini večji, v primarni legi ohranjeni del zasipa grobne jame, ki se je v drugih delih jame po propadu lesene skrinje posedel v njeno notranjost in prekril sediment SE 9450. Sediment SE 9450, ki se je odložil znotraj skrinje, je deloma prekril žganino (SE 9453) in grobne pridatke (SE 9451). Žganina je ležala v jugovzhodnem delu prostora, zamejenega z odtisom SE 9460. Poleg prebranih odlomkov sežganih kosti je vsebovala tudi bronaste in železne okove (t. 1: 8–10) ter odlomek bronaste žice (t. 2: 13). Na njeni površini sta ležala bronasta ibula (t. 2: 12) in bronasti obroček (t. 2: 11). Zahodno od žganine je bila postavljena skupina štirih keramičnih posod. Žganina je deloma obdajala kozarec (t. 2: 14) in prekrila rob krožnika (t. 2: 15). Za kozarcem in krožnikom sta stala enoročajni vrč (t. 2: 17) in dvoročajni lonec (t. 2: 16). Zahodno in severno od posod je ležala skupina železnih predmetov. Zahodno od enoročajnega vrča je ležal nož, s konico obrnjen proti jugu (t. 1: 7), severno od njega in dvoročajnega lonca pa sulični osti, ležeči ena na drugi, s konicami obrnjenimi proti jugozahodu (spodnja t. 1: 4; zgornja t. 1: 5). Nad nožem in suličnimi ostmi sta v smeri sever – jug ležala robna okova nožnice, razlomljena na več delov. Na jugu sta se stikala v gumbastem zaključku, proti severu pa se rahlo razpirala, tako da sta pri ustju ležala 0,1 m narazen. Nad okovoma je v smeri sever – jug ležal meč, s konico obrnjen proti severu, torej obratno kot nožnica. Meč je ležal poševno, tako da je bil na severni strani dvignjen nad okova za 0,1 m. Severno od suličnih osti ter vzhodno od okovov in meča je ležala ščitna grba (t. 1: 6) z vrhom kalote, obrnjenim proti severovzhodu. Zgornji deli pridatkov so segali nad sediment SE 9450, zato jih je v večjem delu prekrilo zasutje SE 9433. 3.1.2 Katalog pridatkov1 Tabla 1. 1. Meč; železo. D. 71,2 cm; š. rezila 5,2 cm; š. zožitve 4,6 cm; d. ročaja 15 cm; š. ročaja 1,9 cm; t. 720 g. SE 9451. PN 6644. 2. Del robnega okova nožnice; železo. Ohr. d. 39,0 cm; š. 1,0 cm; t. 88 g. SE 9451. PN 6655. 3. Del robnega okova nožnice z gumbastim zaključkom; železo, bron. Ohr. d. 54,8 cm; š. 1,0 cm; v. gumba 1,5 cm; t. 115 g. SE 9451. PN 6668. 4. Sulična ost; železo. Ohr. d. 28,3 cm; š. lista 2,7 cm; pr. tula 2,2 cm; t. 120 g. SE 9451. PN 6667. 1 Seznam in razlaga okrajšav: D./d. – dolžina; Ohr. d. – ohranjena dolžina; Š./š. – širina; Pr./pr. – premer; V./v. – višina; t. – teža; deb. – debelina. Plate 1. Kongresni trg, grave 1042. 1 iron, bronze; 10 bronze; rest iron. Scale 10 = 1 : 2; rest 1 : 3 (drawing D. Kniic Lunder, L. Skalerič). Tabla 1. Kongresni trg, grob 1042. 1 železo, bron; 10 bron; drugo železo. M 10 = 1 : 2; drugo 1 : 3 (risba D. Kniic Lunder, L. Skalerič). Grob 1042 133 8. Fitting; bronze. W 1.3 cm; th. 0.2 cm. SU 9453. PN 6651b. 9. Fitting; iron, wood. W 1 cm; th. 0.6 cm. SU 9453. PN 6654. 10. Fittings (13 fragments); bronze. wgt. 12.2 g. SU 9453. PN 6651a. Plate 2. 11. Ring; bronze. Dm 2.4 cm; W 0.4 cm; wgt. 2 g. SU 9453. PN 6650. 12. Fibula; bronze. L 8.0 cm; H 2.5 cm; wgt. 26 g. SU 9453. PN 6648. 13. Wire; bronze. Pr. L 3.6 cm; dm. 2.1 cm; wgt. 1 g. SU 9453. PN 6652. 14. ACO beaker; ceramics. H 8.6 cm; dm. of the rim 9.2 cm; wgt. 73.8 g. SU 9451. PN 6641. 15. Plate Consp. Dm. 18.2 cm; ceramics. H 3 cm; dm. of the rim 16.4 cm; wgt. 218 g. SU 9451. PN 6647. 16. Two-handled pot; ceramics. H 20.3 cm; dm. of the rim 10.9 cm; wgt. 900.6 g. SU 9451. PN 6643. 17. One-handled jug; ceramics. H 21.3 cm; dm. of the rim 5.4 cm; wgt. 670.8 g. SU 9451. PN 6642. 3.1.3 Commentary on the grave contents he sword with a scabbard (pl. 1: 1–3) he sword is 71.2 cm long and is marked by an elongated hilt tang with a triangular contour (15.5 cm) and a wide blade (up to 5.2 cm) with a lenticular cross-section, which narrows slightly just before the transition to a long tip. his characterizes the sword into the group of relatively long and narrow gladii of the Mainz-type Sisak version.2 he high frequency and homogeneity of the type suggest a canonized shape of swords within the abovementioned category, which is probably connected with the Augustan military reform. he long hilt and straight transition to the blade of lenticular cross-section characterizes the swords of the Sisak version as similar to the group of approximately 75 cm long and somewhat narrower gladii from Augustan graves (gr. 58, 68, 70 and 105) at the Lepontian necropolis at Gravellona Toce in Piemonte.3 hese are comparable to the Late Republican and Early Augustan swords4 because the blades are distinctly narrowed. he early emergence of the Sisak version allegedly dates to around 20/15 BC and is evident in the fact that the middle of the blade typically displays a narrow groove5 or a pair of wider parallel grooves.6 Some earlier versions of gladii have a pair of somewhat separated 2 3 4 5 134 6 Miks 2007, pls. 8: A662, 9, 10: A 501. Pernet 2010, 225, pls. 105, 106, 108. Miks 2007, pl. 6; Poux 2008, 316–322; e.g. Istenič 2009a, ig. 85; Istenič 2009b, cat. no. 67. Verdun, gr. 84 and 112 (Breščak 1989), Kolpa in Sisak (Radman-Livaja 2004, pl. 10: 36). E.g. Salzburg-Liefering (Hell 1956, ig. 1: 1). 5. Sulična ost; železo. Ohr. d. 24,1 cm; š. lista 4,0 cm; deb. lista 0,3 cm; pr. tula 2,1 cm; t. 158,8 g. SE 9451. PN 6669. 6. Ščitna grba, železo. Pr. 15,6 cm; pr. kalote 10,2 cm; v. 11,5 cm; deb. 0,18 cm; t. 163 g. SE 9451. PN 6645. 7. Nož; železo. D. 28,3 cm; d. ročajnega trna 11,3 cm; š. rezila 2,7 cm; t. 105 g. SE 9451. PN 6666. 8. Okov; bron. Š. 1,3 cm; deb. 0,2 cm. SE 9453. PN 6651b. 9. Okov; železo, les. Š. 1 cm; deb. 0,25 cm. SE 9453. PN 6654. 10. Okovi (13 odlomkov); bron. T. 12,2 g. SE 9453. PN 6651a. Tabla 2. 11. Obroček; bron. Pr. 2,4 cm; š. 0,4 cm; t. 2 g. SE 9453. PN 6650. 12. Fibula; bron. D. 8,0 cm; v. 2,5 cm; t. 26 g. SE 9453. PN 6648. 13. Žica; bron. Ohr. d. 3,6 cm; pr. 0,15 cm; t. 1 g. SE 9453. PN 6652. 14. Kozarec tipa Aco; keramika. V. 8,6 cm; pr. ustja 9,2 cm; t. 73,8 g. SE 9451. PN 6641. 15. Krožnik oblike Consp. 18.2; keramika. V. 3 cm; pr. ustja 16,4 cm; t. 218 g. SE 9451. PN 6647. 16. Dvoročajni lonec; keramika. V. 20,3 cm; pr. ustja 10,9 cm; t. 900,6 g. SE 9451. PN 6643. 17. Enoročajni vrč; keramika. V. 21,3 cm; pr. ustja 5,4 cm; t. 670,8 g. SE 9451. PN 6642. 3.1.3 Komentar k pridatkom Meč z nožnico (t. 1: 1–3) Meč z dolžino 71,2 cm označujeta podolgovat nastavek za ročaj trikotnega obrisa (15,5 cm) in do 5,2 cm široko rezilo lečastega preseka, ki se rahlo zoži tik pred prehodom v dolgo konico. Našteto ga uvršča v skupino razmeroma dolgih in ozkih gladijev različice Sisak tipa Mainz,2 ki je na podlagi oblikovne homogenosti in številčnosti verjetno že kanonizirana oblika mečev omenjenega tipa, najverjetneje povezana z Avgustovo reformo vojske. Dolg nastavek za ročaj in raven prehod v rezilo lečastega preseka približuje meče različice Sisak skupini okoli 75 cm dolgih in nekoliko ožjih gladijev iz avgustejskih grobov 58, 68, 70 in 105 na lepontski nekropoli Gravellona Toce v Piemontu,3 ki po izrazitem zoženju rezila spominjajo na poznorepublikanske in zgodnjeavgustejske izvedbe.4 Zgodnji nastanek različice Sisak, domnevno okrog 20/15 pr. n. št., se kaže tudi v nažlebljenosti sredine rezila, ki pri značilnih predstavnikih nastopa v obliki ozkega žleba5 oziroma 2 3 4 5 Miks 2007, t. 8: A662, 9, 10: A501. Pernet 2010, 225, t. 105, 106, 108. Miks 2007, t. 6; Poux 2008, 316–322; npr. Istenič 2009a, sl. 85; Istenič 2009b, kat. št. 67. Verdun, gr. 84 in 112 (Breščak 1989), Kolpa v Sisku (RadmanLivaja 2004, t. 10: 36) Plate 2. Kongresni trg, grave 1042. 11–13 bronze; rest ceramics. Scale 16–17 = 1 : 3; rest 1 : 2 (drawing D. Kniic Lunder). Tabla 2. Kongresni trg, grob 1042. 11–13 bron; drugo keramika. M 16–17 = 1 : 3; drugo 1 : 2 (risba D. Kniic Lunder). Grob 1042 135 Figure 7. Items from the grave 1042 (photo D. Badovinac). Slika 7. Pridatki iz groba 1042 (foto D. Badovinac). narrow grooves.7 Some swords with a distinctly sharp point and a relatively long hilt tang from central and northern European areas of the Barbaricum8 and similar examples from the south-eastern Alpine region also have9 only one groove. Istenič presumes that the latter are a product of northern Italic workshops for the elite warriors of Celtic and Germanic tribes. She dates these swords to approximately between 40/30 and 15 BC.10 Rare stamps indicate the Roman origins of the Mainz type gladii from Early Imperial graves in the Empire and the territory of Barbaricum.11 One of these, for example, is the rectangular stamp with SEX.VOLUS.F inscription at the top of the blade of a 71.6 cm long sword of a Sisak version from a destroyed incineration cemetery at Bell near Koblenz.12 he Roman origin of the Mainz type can also be supposed from equally rare grave inds of swords with metal hilt guards or complicated handcrafted versions of scabbards.13 Gladii of the legionaries had quality scabbards with openwork or relief ornamented mouth itting and/or the chape, as well as decorated hilts. hese were documented mainly amongst river inds, whereas swords from graves are usually accompanied with poorer remains of scabbards. his however does not necessarily mean that this fact relates (solely) to diferent conditions for the preservation of brass or bronze. Most of the graves therefore contain side ittings or button ends, clamps and rings for attaching scabbards, whereas hilt guards and other sword elements are usually missing. A 72.3 cm long sword from the Ljubljanica River in Kamin, probably similar in shape to the example from the Kongresni trg, was found in a scabbard with transverse clamps, a mouth and a chape with openwork ornament of brass and tinned plates.14 Scabbards of a 70 cm long sword of the Sisak variant from grave 112 in Verdun15 and a 72.5 cm long sample from the Kolpa riverbed in Sisak16 ofer a more suitable comparisons for the discussed grave ind. he scabbard from grave 1042 at Kongresni trg ends in a massive rounded button of bronze alloy, which is riveted to a thorn-shaped extension of iron side itting. Based on known comparisons and their scarcity in Vindonissa, this shape of the button is typical for scabbards of pre-Tiberian para tesno skupaj potekajočih širokih žlebov.6 Nekatere starejše izvedbe gladijev imajo par nekoliko razmaknjenih ozkih žlebov,7 en sam žleb pa se pojavlja tudi na nekaterih mečih z izrazito ostro konico in razmeroma dolgim ročajnim trnom iz srednje- in severnoevropskih območij Barbarika8 in njim sorodnih primerkih z jugovzhodnoalpskega območja,9 za katere J. Istenič domneva, da so izdelki severnoitalskih delavnic, namenjeni bojevniškim elitam keltskih in germanskih plemen, in jih datira v čas med okrog 40/30 in 15 pr. n. št.10 Rimski izvor gladijev tipa Mainz iz zgodnjecesarskih grobišč v imperiju in Barbariku11 nakazujejo sicer redki žigi, npr. pravokotni žig z napisom SEX.VOLUS.F na zgornjem delu rezila 71,6 cm dolgega primerka različice Sisak iz uničenega žganega grobišča Bell pri Koblenzu,12 ter enako redke grobne najdbe mečev s kovinskimi braniki ali rokodelsko zahtevnejšimi izvedbami nožnic.13 V primerjavi z (legionarskimi?) gladiji s kvalitetnimi nožnicami s predrtim ali reliefnim okrasom okova ustja in/ali koničnika ter okrašenimi ročaji, ki so zastopani pretežno med rečnimi najdbami, meče iz grobov spremljajo navadno skromnejši ostanki nožnic, pri čemer ni nujno, da je ta okoliščina povezana (le) z različnimi pogoji za ohranitev medenine oziroma brona. V grobovih so tako najpogosteje ohranjeni le robni okovi in posamični gumbasti zaključki, spojke in obročki za obešanje nožnic, največkrat pa manjkajo tudi braniki in drugi kovinski deli mečev. Meč iz Ljubljanice v Kaminu z dolžino 72,3 cm, ki je tudi po obliki verjetno zelo podoben primerku s Kongresnega trga, je bil najden v nožnici s prečnimi okovi, ustjem in koničnikom s predrtim okrasom iz medenine ter pokositrenima platicama.14 Ustreznejši primerjavi za to grobno najdbo s Kongresnega trga ponujajte nožnici okoli 70 cm dolgega meča variante Sisak iz groba 112 iz Verduna15 in 72,5 cm dolgega primerka iz struge Kolpe v Sisku.16 Nožnica iz groba 1042 na Kongresnem trgu se na spodnjem koncu zaključuje z masivnim zaobljenim gumbom iz bronaste zlitine, zakovičenim na trnast podaljšek železnih robnih okovov. Glede na nam znane primerjave, pa tudi njihovo redkost v Vindonissi, je ta oblika gumbov 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 136 16 Pernet et al. 2006, 46; Pernet 2010, pls. 97: 1, 132: 1. Biborski 1999, 88–90, ig. 8; Łuczkiewicz 2000, 366, 379, ig. 7 (with further references). Istenič 2010, 140, ig. 3. Istenič 2010. Biborski 1999, 93–95, ig. 12. Schumacher 1999, 34, 138, pl. 63: a. E.g. Třebusice, gr. 420 (Droberjar 2009, ig. 10: 16, 22), Zemplín, gr. 163 (Budinský-Krička, Lamiová-Schmiedlová 1990, pl. 21: 4), Ilok, gr. 5 (Dizdar 2010); refer to: Künzl 1996, 388–389. Istenič 2009b, cat. no. 62. Breščak 1989; Križ et al. 2009, cat. no. 9.3.25; Breščak, in this book. Baćani 2010. 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Npr. Salzburg-Liefering (Hell 1956, sl. 1: 1). Pernet et al. 2006, 46; Pernet 2010, t. 97: 1, 132: 1. Biborski 1999, 88–90, sl. 8; Łuczkiewicz 2000, 366, 379, sl. 7 (z nadaljnjimi referencami). Istenič 2010, 140, sl. 3. Istenič 2010. Biborski 1999, 93–95, sl. 12. Schumacher 1999, 34, 138, t. 63: a. Npr. Třebusice, gr. 420 (Droberjar 2009, sl. 10: 16, 22), Zemplín, gr. 163 (Budinský-Krička, Lamiová-Schmiedlová 1990, t. 21: 4), Ilok, gr. 5 (Dizdar 2010); glej Künzl 1996, 388–389. Istenič 2009b, kat. št. 62. Breščak 1989; Križ et al. 2009, kat. št. 9.3.25; Breščak, v tem zborniku. Baćani 2010. 137 origin.17 he proiled segment of the square section at the juncture between side ittings indicates a similarity with Late Republican and Early Augustan versions of scabbard ends with smaller rounded or globular buttons, which pass into the ittings without particular narrowing or neck; usually, they have a square or rectangle section in this spot.18 Amongst dated comparisons for the described transition between ittings and the button are the samples such as bronze endings cast in one piece from camp Dangstetten (around 20/15–9/7 BC),19 from a Mid-Augustan context at Magdalensberg,20 related ending from Augustan grave 97 from the necropolis of Ornavasso-In Persona21 and a silver chape from Kalkriese.22 However, the closest analogy is an iron chape from a group of military inds from Augsburg-Oberhausen, which can be approximately dated to the Late Augustan-Early Tiberian period.23 Spearheads (pl. 1: 4–5) A lat spearhead, lenticular in cross-section has been documented in earlier periods; however, it was not prominent in the earlier part of the Late La Tène period that was characterized by longer samples with a distinct middle rib or blades with an accentuated rhombic cross-section.24 Flat spearheads with a lenticular cross-section and with relatively short points appeared again in larger numbers in the later part of the LT D2 and in the Early Imperial period.25 Comparisons for the longer spearhead with a narrow blade,26 which is rounded at one side and has a lat triangular cross-section on the opposite, and a shorter sample with a wider blade27 originate from Early Imperial camps and military graves. he analysis of inds from central and northern Gallia and the Augustan Limes in the Rhine and upper Danube River 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 138 E.g. Müller 2002, 180, pl. 38: 419–420; Dular 1991, pl. 75: 21. Poux 2008, 322–323, ig. 15; e.g. Giubiasco, gr. 471, Gravellona Toce, gr. 105, Mihovo, gr. 1846/3 (Pernet 2010, pls. 103: 2, 108: 2, 119: 1); refer to: Istenič 2003, ig. 7. Fingerlin 1986, 211/5; Miks 2007, cat. no. B 154, 31. Deimel 1987, 246, pl. 69: 11. Pernet 2010, pl. 132: 1. Franzius 1999, 579, ig. 11. Refer to: Deschler-Erb 2007, ig. 4 (pls. 12, 16b). Božič 1981, 319, pls. 3: 32, 8: 1, 7, 9: 2, 3. Schumacher 1999, ig. 12: 5, 6; Riquier 2008, igs. 9: 1, 14: 2, 15: 1. Camps: Dangstetten (Fingerlin 1998, 766/4), Windisch (Unz, Deschler-Erb 1997, pl. 16: 247, 255), Augst (Deschler-Erb 1999, pls. 4: 55, 5: 56–61), Gardun (Ivčević 2010a), Kolpa in Sisak (Radman-Livaja 2004, pl. 4: 13); cemeteries (Waurick 1994, igs. 6: 12, 11a: 8; Nicolay 2007, pl. 29: 243.7, 82.49; Pernet et al. 2006, ig. 2.20: 1l; Guštin 1991, pls. 16: 6, 30: 2, 3). Camps: Dangstetten (Fingerlin 1998, 1291/3), Haltern (Harnecker 1997, pls. 75: 800, 76: 803), Kalkriese (Harnecker, Franzius 2008, pl. 1: 7), Hedemünden (Grote 2005, ig. 49), Windisch (Hagendorn et al. 2003, pl. 59: ME386), Sredno polje near Čatež (Guštin 2002, ig. 3: 3); Gardun (Ivčević 2010b); cemeteries (Waurick 1994, igs. 6: 13, 7: 2, 11, 12, 14: 3; Pernet et al. 2006, ig. 2.20: 1t; Riquier 2008, ig. 9: 1; Nicolay 2007, pl. 33: 291.27). značilna za nožnice iz predtiberijskih celot.17 Proilirani segment kvadratnega preseka na stiku robnih okovov nakazuje sorodnost s poznorepublikansko-zgodnjeavgustejskimi različicami zaključkov nožnic z manjšimi okroglimi ali gobastimi gumbi, ki navadno prehajajo v robne okove brez izrazitega zoženja oziroma vratu in imajo na tem mestu navadno kvadraten ali pravokoten presek.18 Med kronološko oprijemljive primerjave za tako oblikovan prehod med robnima okovoma in gumbom sodijo npr. v enem kosu ulita bronasta zaključka iz tabora Dangstetten (ok. 20/15– 9/7 pr. n. št.)19 in srednjeavgustejske celote s Štalenske gore (Magdalensberg),20 sorodni zaključek iz avgustejskega groba 97 z nekropole Ornavasso-In Persona21 ter srebrni koničnik nožnice iz Kalkrieseja,22 najbližja znana analogija pa je železni koničnik z bronastim gumbom iz konvoluta vojaških najdb iz Augsburg-Oberhausna, okvirno datiranega v poznoavgustejsko-zgodnjetiberijski čas.23 Sulični osti (t. 1: 4–5) Sploščen, lečast presek manjše od obeh osti je sicer znan že iz starejših obdobij, vendar se je po odsotnosti v starejšem delu poznega latena, ko so prevladovali dolgi primerki z izrazitim sredinskim rebrom ali listi poudarjenega rombičnega preseka,24 v večjem številu ponovno pojavil pri pretežno krajših osteh mlajšega dela stopnje LT D2 in zgodnjecesarskega časa.25 Primerjave za daljšo sulično ost z ozkim listom,26 pri katerem je ena stran zaobljena, druga pa ima sploščen trikotni presek, in za krajši primerek s širšim listom27 tako izvirajo predvsem iz zgodnjecesarskih taborov ter vojaških grobov. Analiza najdb iz osrednje in severne Galije ter z območja avgustejskega limesa v Porenju in zgornjem Podonavju je opozorila na tendenco krajšanja suličnih osti v 1. stoletju 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 Npr. Müller 2002, 180, t. 38: 419–420; Dular 1991, t. 75: 21. Poux 2008, 322–323, sl. 15; npr. Giubiasco, gr. 471, Gravellona Toce, gr. 105, Mihovo, gr. 1846/3 (Pernet 2010, t. 103: 2, 108: 2, 119: 1); glej Istenič 2003, sl. 7. Fingerlin 1986, 211/5; Miks 2007, kat. št. B154, 31. Deimel 1987, 246, t. 69: 11. Pernet 2010, t. 132: 1. Franzius 1999, 579, sl. 11. Glej Deschler-Erb 2007, sl. 4 (t. 12, 16b). Božič 1981, 319, t. 3: 32, 8: 1, 7, 9: 2, 3. Schumacher 1999, sl. 12: 5, 6; Riquier 2008, sl. 9: 1, 14: 2, 15: 1. Tabori: Dangstetten (Fingerlin 1998, 766/4), Windisch (Unz, Deschler-Erb 1997, t. 16: 247, 255), Augst (Deschler-Erb 1999, t. 4: 55, 5: 56–61), Gardun (Ivčević 2010a), Kolpa v Sisku (Radman-Livaja 2004, t. 4: 13); grobišča (Waurick 1994, sl. 6: 12, 11a: 8; Nicolay 2007, t. 29: 243.7, 82.49; Pernet et al. 2006, sl. 2.20: 1l; Guštin 1991, t. 16: 6, 30: 2, 3). Tabori: Dangstetten (Fingerlin 1998, 1291/3), Haltern (Harnecker 1997, t. 75: 800, 76: 803), Kalkriese (Harnecker, Franzius 2008, t. 1: 7), Hedemünden (Grote 2005, sl. 49), Windisch (Hagendorn et al. 2003, t. 59: ME386), Sredno polje pri Čatežu (Guštin 2002, sl. 3: 3), Gardun (Ivčević 2010b); grobišča (Waurick 1994, sl. 6: 13, 7: 2, 11, 12, 14: 3; Pernet et al. 2006, sl. 2.20: 1t; Riquier 2008, sl. 9: 1; Nicolay 2007, t. 33: 291.27). area revealed to the tendency of shortening spearheads in the 1st century BC. he analysis also demonstrated that the samples produced according to Roman standards, are usually much shorter than La Tène spearheads from the period prior to the Gallic wars. Spearhead lengths from the time before LT D2 phase, samples with etched ornamentation and inds from the sites associated with the Gallic Wars are between 25 and 50 cm, whereas the length of spears between the Caesarian and Augustan period stabilized mostly between 15 and 25 cm.28 Shorter spearheads with a straight-cut blade base and willow leaf shaped blade (both have a lenticular or lat rhombic cross-section) from the period after the irst half of the 1st century BC were found in the south-eastern pre-Alpine area. Spearheads with an octagonally facetted socket and a classically shaped blade with a rib or a narrow blade and a lattened rhombic cross-section are particular numerous in central and southeastern Slovenia. As direct versions of LT D1 forms, these, to 40 cm long spearheads are typical for the later part of the LT D2 / phase Mokronog IIIb,29 and are preserved all through the Early Imperial period.30 According to literary and iconographic sources, spears (hastae) were a typical weapon of auxiliary infantry and cavalry.31 According to depictions on tombstones from the Early Imperial period in the Rhine River area, pairs of spearheads were often part of a permanent set of auxiliary infantry armament, which would mean that at least one of them was intended for throwing.32 Two can be seen on the tombstone of Firmus, a member of the Rhaetian cohort who was found in Andernach and on the stela of Annaius Daversus, a member of the cohors III Delmatarum from Bingen-Bingenbrück.33 he shield boss (pl. 1: 6) he shield boss with the largest diameter (15.6 cm) and height (11.5 cm) is characterized by a narrow horizontal lange with 12/13 fastening holes, a vertical edge and a relatively high, rounded conical dome. he fastening nails, the ittings and the handgrip were not found. Based on the shape and dimensions, the shield boss was probably a part of a smaller round shield with lat plate. he boss is similar to the Bohnsack type 8, according to its cross-section and number of attachments. his type is typical for the armament of Germanic warriors in the area of Przeworsk and Oksywie cultures and southwest Slovakia in the A3 stage of the pre-Roman Iron Age (LT D2). It also pr. n. št. in pokazala, da so primerki, izdelani po rimskih standardih, v splošnem bistveno krajši od latenskih osti iz časa pred galskimi vojnami. Težišče dolžin osti iz časa pred stopnjo LT D2, primerkov z jedkanim okrasom in najdb s prizorišč spopadov iz obdobja galskih vojn je med 25 in 50 cm, dolžina osti iz rimskih celot med Cezarjem in Avgustom pa se je ustalila pretežno med 15 in 25 cm.28 Tudi na jugovzhodno(pred)alpskem območju so se začele po sredini 1. stoletja pr. n. št. pojavljati krajše sulične osti z ravno spodrezano bazo lista ter vrbovolistni primerki (oboji imajo lečast ali sploščen rombični presek), posebej v osrednji in jugovzhodni Sloveniji pa so pogoste osti z osemkotno fasetiranim tulom in klasičnim listom z rebrom ali ožjim listom sploščenega rombičnega preseka. Kot neposredne izvedenke oblik stopnje LT D1 so te, do 40 cm dolge osti, značilne za mlajši del stopnje LT D229 obdržale pa so se še v zgodnjecesarski čas.30 Sulice (hastae) veljajo, sodeč po literarnih in ikonografskih virih, v okviru rimske vojske za značilno orožje pomožne pehote in konjenice.31 Glede na upodobitve na zgodnjecesarskih nagrobnikih iz Porenja so bili pari suličnih osti neredko sestavni deli stalnega kompleta oborožitve pomožnih vojakov, kar bi pomenilo, da je bila vsaj ena od njiju namenjena metanju.32 Po dve, druga drugi podobni osti z razmeroma dolgima tuloma, nasajeni na okoli 1,8–2,0 m dolgih drogovih, sta prikazani npr. na nagrobniku Firmusa, pripadnika kohorte Retijcev, ki je bil najden v Andernachu, in na steli Annaiusa Daversusa, pripadnika enote cohors III Delmatarum iz Bingen-Bingenbrücka.33 Ščitna grba (t. 1: 6) Ščitno grbo z največjim premerom 15,6 cm in višino 11,5 cm označujejo ozek vodoravni okrajek z 12 oziroma 13 predrtinami za pritrjevanaje navpični rob in razmeroma visoka, konično zaobljena kalota. Žeblji za pritrjevanje, robni okovi ščita in prečka niso bili najdeni. Glede na dimenzije in obliko je bila grba najverjetneje del manjšega okroglega ščita z ravno ploščo. Grba je po proilaciji in številu pritrditev zelo blizu tipu Bohnsack 8, ki je v stopnji A3 predrimske železne dobe (LT D2) značilen za oborožitev germanskih bojevnikov na območju kultur Przeworsk- in Oksywie ter jugozahodne Slovaške, sočasno pa se pojavljal tudi na območju med vzhodnimi Alpami in srednjim Porenjem, kjer je bil posamično najden še v zgodnjerimskih grobovih.34 Bockius in Łucki28 29 28 29 30 31 32 33 Riquier 2008, ig. 19; Poux 2008, 337–340. Breščak 1989; Križ et al. 2009, cat. no. 9.2.5; Breščak, in this book. E.g. Breščak 1989; Križ et al. 2009, cat. no. 9.3.18; Dular 1991, pls. 57: 8, 18, 58: 20, 78: 3, 79: 3. Junkelmann 1992, 135–146; Breščak, in this book. Bishop, Coulston 1993, 69. Bishop, Coulston 1993, ig. 143: 3, 4. 30 31 32 33 34 Riquier 2008, sl. 19; Poux 2008, 337–340. Breščak 1989; Križ et al. 2009, kat. št. 9.2.5; Breščak, v tem zborniku. Npr. Breščak 1989; Križ et al. 2009, kat. št. 9.3.18; Dular 1991, t. 57: 8, 18, 58: 20, 78: 3, 79: 3. Junkelmann 1992, 135–146; Breščak, v tem zborniku. Bishop, Coulston 1993, 69. Bishop, Coulston 1993, sl. 143: 3, 4. Bockius, Łuckiewicz 2004, 90, sl. 16: 3–4, seznam 13/B, karta 31; Pieta 2005, 53, t. 12: 2, 13: 1. 139 occurs in the area between the eastern Alps and the central Rhine River area, where it is individually still attested to in Early Roman graves.34 Amongst the later samples of the examined type, Bockius and Łuckiewicz list shield bosses from grave A in Goeblingen-Nospelt (Luxemburg), which dates to 30–15 BC, as well as later grave inventories from Andernach (gr. 9; Tiberian period),35 Lautenbach (gr. 5),36 Wederath (gr. 2095) and Antran (Late Augustan period).37 Geographically speaking, the closest example to the examined type originate from Mihovo.38 he shield boss from the reconstructed grave group in Salzburg-Liefering, occurring with a gladius of the Sisak variant and a spearhead with the middle rib,39 is remarkably similar to the one from Ljubljana; however, it has a slightly slanted lange. A lower shield boss (dm. 14.5 cm, H 9.2 cm) from the cremation grave of an auxiliary soldier of Celtic origin from Sv. Trojica near Starigrad, roughly dated between last decades of the 1st century BC and the irst two decades of the 1st century AD, has highly similar typological characteristics as well.40 Middle Augustan and later military graves from central and south-eastern Slovenia contain shield bosses with a somewhat lower conical dome, a vertical or slightly slanted edge and a narrow lat lange with a smaller number of fastening points (5–7), as well as a total diameter of 16.5–18.5 cm. hese are probably already a fully standardized pieces of auxiliary units’ equipment (like the Weisenau type helmets).41 Geographically, the closest shield boss of this type (dm. 18 cm, H 7.5 cm) along with its iron handgrip with a characteristic D cross-section was found in the Tiberian-Early Claudian assemblage in Polhov gradec,42 most probably belonging to the grave inventory of a prominent member of indigenous elite.43 Very similar shield bosses known from approximately contemporary graves in Zemplín (grave 128; phase Eggers B1a),44 Katzelsdorf (tumulus 2, Tiberian-Claudian period) in Lower Austria45 and from battleield site at Oberesch fallow near Kalkriese.46 Knife (pl. 1: 7) he massive iron knife is 28.3 cm long and has a hilt tang with a rectangular cross-section and a long blade with a curved S-shaped tip. his is probably a derivative of Late 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 140 46 Bockius, Łuckiewicz 2004, 90, ig. 16: 3–4, list 13/B, map 31; Pieta 2005, 53, pls. 12: 2, 13: 1). Pernet 2010, pl. 193: 9. Schumacher 1999, 119, pl. 13: a. Pernet 2010, pl. 132: 1. Windl 1975, 179, pl. 80: 5. Hell 1956, ig. 1: 3. Radman-Livaja 2010a; Tonc, Radman-Livaja, Dizdar 2013, ig. 6: 2. For reference to the situation in the area of Treveri refer to: Pernet 2010, 163, 167. Ložar 1938, ig. 22d. Mráv 2005. Budinský-Krička, Lamiová-Schmiedlová 1990, pl. 18: 8. Urban 1984, 85, ig. 14: 28. Harnecker, Franzius 2008, pl. 4. ewicz med mlajšimi primerki obravanega tipa navajata grbe iz groba A v Goeblingen-Nospeltu (Luksemburg), datiranega v 30–15 pr. n. št., ter poznejših celot iz Andernacha (gr. 9; tiberijsko obd.),35 Lautenbacha (gr. 5),36 Wederatha (gr. 2095) in Antrana (poznoavgustejsko obdobje).37 Geografsko najbližji primerek tega tipa izvira iz Mihovega,38 ljubljanski zelo podobna grba z rahlo nagnjenim okrajkom pa sestavlja del rekonstruirane grobne celote z dvojno zvitim gladijem tipa Sisak in sulično ostjo s sredinskim rebrom iz Salzburg-Lieferinga.39 Zelo podobne tipološke značilnosti ima tudi nekoliko nižja grba s poševnim okrajkom (pr. 14,5 cm, v. 9,2 cm) iz žganega groba avksiliarnega vojaka keltskega porekla iz Sv. Trojice pri Starigradu, ki je okvirno datiran med zadnja desetletja 1. stoletja pr. n. št. in prvi dve desetletji 1. stoletja n. št.40 V srednjeavgustejskih in mlajših vojaških grobovih iz osrednje in jugovzhodne Slovenije so običajnejše ščitne grbe z nekoliko nižjo kopasto kaloto, navpičnim ali rahlo usločenim oziroma poševnim prehodom med kaloto in okrajkom ter ozkim ravnim okrajkom z manjšim številom predrtin (5–7) in skupnim premerom 16,5–18,5 cm, ki so verjetno (podobno kot čelade tipa Weisenau) že popolnoma standardiziran kos opreme pomožnih enot.41 Geografsko najbližja grba tega tipa (pr. 18 cm, v. 7,5 cm) je bila skupaj s pripadajočo železno prečko D-preseka odkrita v sklopu bogatih tiberijsko-zgodnjeklavdijskih najdb iz Polhovega Gradca,42 pri katerih gre najverjetneje za inventar žganega groba izpostavljenega predstavnika staroselske elite.43 Sorodne grbe podobnih dimenzij so znane npr. iz okvirno sočasnih grobnih celot iz Zemplína (grob 128; stopnja Eggers B1a) v zgornjem Potisju,44 iz Katzelsdorfa (gomila 2; tiberijsko-klavdijsko obdobje) v Spodnji Avstriji45 ter s prizorišča bitke na ledini Oberesch pri Kalkrieseju.46 Nož (t. 1: 7) Masiven, 28,3 cm dolg železni nož ima trnast ročajni nastavek pravokotnega preseka, ki z zgornjim robom prehaja v dolgo rezilo z esasto ukrivljeno konico. Verjetno gre za izpeljanko poznolatenskih ukrivljenih nožev z nesklenjenim obročkom,47 znanih tudi iz zgodnjerimskih celot.48 Več nožev s trnastim nastavkom, podobnih primerku iz groba 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 Pernet 2010, t. 193: 9. Schumacher 1999, 119, t. 13: a. Pernet 2010, t. 132: 1. Windl 1975, 179, t. 80: 5. Hell 1956, sl. 1: 3. Radman-Livaja 2010a; Tonc, Radman-Livaja, Dizdar 2013, sl. 6: 2. Za situacijo na območju Treverov glej Pernet 2010, 163, 167. Ložar 1938, sl. 22d. Mráv 2005. Budinský-Krička, Lamiová-Schmiedlová 1990, t. 18: 8. Urban 1984, 85, sl. 14: 28. Harnecker, Franzius 2008, t. 4. Stare 1973, t. 8: 8; Dular 1991, t. 52: 2, 67: 9. Npr. Dangstetten (Fingerlin 1986, 465/6; Fingerlin 1998, 1037/11). La Tène curved knives with open rings,47 which are also known from Early Roman contexts.48 A few knives with a hilt tang, similar to the sample from grave 1042, are found amongst the material from destroyed cremation graves in Pockhorn, Mölltal. hese are dated between approximately the end of the La Tène period and the 1st century AD.49 Further analogies originate from Ljubljana50 and the Ljubljanica riverbed near Vrhnika;51 however, these are not chronologically determinable. Fittings (pl. 1: 8–10) Fifteen fragments of 0.3 to 0.5 cm wide metal strips were found in the grave: 14 bronze and one iron fragment belong to similar rectangular clamps of approximately 2 × 1 cm. Bronze clamps of a similar size have also been found in graves at Beletov vrt. hey appear in the grave 15152 together with a ibula (type Idrija Ia) which Božič links to women’s attire of the Mokronog IIIb phase,53 as well as in gr. 162 with the tip of a long narrow spearhead and a Late La Tène bronze ibula of the Beletov vrt type54 and in gr. 188 with the pin and spring of a bronze ibula, as well as in gr. 204 with a pair of Pannonian brooches (“kraftig proilierte Fibel”) with a high bow.55 he purpose of such clamps is not known; however, based on its position within the burnt remains next to the ring and ibula, it might have been a belt ornament. Ring (pl. 2: 11) he bronze ring has a cross-section in the shape of the lattened letter D (dm. 2.3 cm). What distinguishes it from the other rings with similar cross-section (which have been interpreted as inger rings) is the unusually large inside diameter (20 mm),56 whereas the diameter in most rings with a D cross-section reaches only up to about 14.3–19.1 mm.57 he average of 89 measured rings from Augst and Kaiseraugst lies in the group up to 15.9 mm.58 he example from Kongresni trg has a slightly thinned edge in one place, which is undoubtedly a trace of wear, similar to those on the rings (dm 1.8 cm) of the lower clamp of the gladius scabbard from the gr. 11/12 in Idrija pri Bači.59 he suspension rings of more luxurious scabbards of the Mainz type gladii have a more massive cross-section. he inner 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 Stare 1973, pl. 8: 8; Dular 1991, pls. 52: 2, 67: 9. E.g. Dangstetten (Fingerlin 1986, 465/6; Fingerlin 1998, 1037/11). Gugl 2001, 320, ig. 8: 6–8, 11. Petru 1972, pl. 89: 3, 8. Unpublished. Collection Potočnik. Museum and Galleries of Ljubljana. Knez 1992, pl. 53: 6. Božič 2008, 103. Knez 1992, pl. 57: 4; refer to Božič 2008, 114. Knez 1992, pl. 72: 8. E.g. Deimel 1987, pl. 45: 7. Deimel 1987, 63, pl. 45: 17–19; Müller 2002, 61, pl. 72: 791–793. Riha 1990, 51, igs. 17: type 2.34, 18. Guštin 1991, pl. 12: 3. 1042, se pojavlja med gradivom iz uničenih žganih grobov v kraju Pockhorn v Mölltalu, okvirno datiranih v čas med koncem latenskega obdobja in 1. stoletjem n. št.49 Nadaljnje, vendar kronološko neoprijemljive analogije izvirajo iz Ljubljane50 in struge Ljubljanice pri Vrhniki.51 Objemke (t. 1: 8–10) V grobu je bilo najdenih 15 odlomkov trakaste pločevine s širino 0,3–0,5 cm. Štirinajst bronastih in en železen odlomek pripadajo podobnim pravokotnim objemkam z velikostjo približno 2 × 1 cm. Bronaste objemke podobnih dimenzij so znane iz grobov na Beletovem vrtu, kjer se v primeru gr. 15152 pojavijo skupaj s ibulo tipa Idrija Ia, ki jo Božič na Dolenjskem povezuje z žensko nošo stopnje Mokronog IIIb,53 v gr. 162 s konico dolge ozke sulične osti in poznolatensko bronasto ibulo tipa Beletov vrt,54 v gr. 188 z iglo in peresovino bronaste ibule, v gr. 204 pa s parom močno proiliranih ibul z visokim lokom.55 Njihova namembnost ni znana, glede na lego v žganini skupaj z obročkom in ibulo pa bi lahko šlo za jermenski okras. Obroček (t. 2: 11) Bronasti obroček s presekom v obliki sploščene črke D (pr. 2,3 cm) se od obročkov s podobnim presekom, ki se interpretirajo kot prstani, loči po neobičajno velikem notranjem premeru, ki znaša 20 mm,56 medtem ko pri večini prstanov z D-presekom sega od 14,3 do 19,1 mm.57 Povprečje 89 izmerjenih prstanov iz Augsta in Kaiseragusta leži v skupini do 15,9 mm.58 Primerek iz groba na Kongresnem trgu kaže na enem mestu neznatno stanjšan obod, ki je nedvomno sled obrabe, podobno kot na obročkih (pr. ok. 1,8 cm) spodnje spojke nožnice gladija iz gr. 11/12 v Idriji pri Bači.59 Obročki za pripenjanje razkošnejših nožnic tipa Mainz imajo zato masivnejši presek, ki je na notranji strani praviloma izbočen v obliki črke D, na zunanji pa vzdolžno proiliran s poudarjenim sredinskim rebrom. Štirje obročki iz gr. 3 v Reki pri Cerknem, ki so se uporabljali najverjetneje za pripenjanje rimske nožnice za skrajšan meč latenske sheme, imajo premer 2,3 cm, vendar opazno masivnejši D-presek z grebenom;60 slednji označuje tudi dva obročka nožnice gladija iz Gravellona Toce, gr. 70, s premerom 2,3 cm,61 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 Gugl 2001, 320, sl. 8: 6–8, 11. Petru 1972, t. 89: 3, 8. Neobjavljeno. Zbirka Potočnik. Muzej in galerije mesta Ljubljane. Knez 1992, t. 53: 6. Božič 2008, 103. Knez 1992, t. 57: 4; glej Božič 2008, 114. Knez 1992, t. 72: 8. Npr. Deimel 1987, t. 45: 7. Deimel 1987, 63, t. 45: 17–19; Müller 2002, 61, t. 72: 791–793. Riha 1990, 51, sl. 17: tip 2.34, 18. Guštin 1991, t. 12: 3. Guštin 1991, 26, t. 29: 18. Pernet 2010, t. 106: 1. 141 arch is generally in the shape of a D and the outside is proiled with a reinforced midrib. he diameters of four rings from gr. 3 in Reka near Cerkno are 2.3 cm, whereas the D cross-section is noticeably more massive and has distinct rib.60 hese four rings probably served for suspension of the Roman scabbard of a shortened sword in the La Tène scheme. he D cross section with the rib also characterizes two rings of gladius scabbard from Gravellona Toce gr. 70 with a 2.3 cm diameter. 61 he diameters of the set of similar rings from gr. 112 in Verdun are between 2 and 2.2 cm.62 Similarly to Kongresni trg, gr. 1 in Verdun contained one single bronze ring with a 2.2 cm diameter.63 he ittings of the scabbard were not found. his could imply a symbolic enclosement of the smaller part of the whole – pars pro toto. However, the position of the ring within the burnt remains probably suggests that it was actually a inger ring. Double-knobbed ibula (pl. 2: 12) he ibula with double knobs has a sieve-like punctured pin holder and is exceptionally well preserved. It belongs to the Almgren 237b variant, which appeared soon after the transition from BC to AD according to Demetz. It was still used in the Tiberian period.64 Two similar ibulae were found in the area of insula XXXIX in Emona and both have a bow with a rounded cross-section, unlike the sample being examined. he larger of the two is 10.8 cm long and was found in the pit illing, which was probably dug just prior to the town being built in the last decade of the Augustan period.65 he smaller ibula (7.2 cm) was found in one of the sediments on decumanus J and dates approximately to the Tiberian period.66 More individual or paired ibulae of the classical 237b variant were found in Early Roman graves with weaponry from Mihovo. In grave 1655/39,67 for example, one was found together with a ibula with a biting animal head of the Ia1 type,68 which was documented in grave inventories from Magdalensberg from as early as 20–10 BC.69 One of the early inventories with ibulae of the 237b type, military grave 41 from Verdun70 contained weapons, a premeri kompleta podobnih obročkov nožnice iz gr. 112 iz Verduna pa znašajo 2–2,2 cm.62 V gr. 1 iz Verduna, v katerem okovi nožnice niso bili odkriti, je bil enako kot na Kongresnem trgu najden en sam bronasti obroček s premerom 2,2 cm.63 To bi morda kazalo na simbolno prilaganje manjšega dela celote – pars pro toto, čeprav pri obravnavanem grobu lega obročka v žganini najverjetneje pomeni, da gre za prstan. Fibula z dvema gumboma (t. 2: 12) Dobro ohranjena ibula z dvema gumboma in sitasto preluknjanim nosilcem igle pripada različici Almgren 237b, ki se je po Demetzu pojavila kmalu po prehodu iz starega štetja v novo in se je uporabljala še v tiberijskem obdobju.64 Večja (10,8 cm) od dveh podobnih ibul z območja insule XXXIX v Emoni, ki imata drugače od obravnavanega primerka lok okroglega preseka, je bila najdena v polnilu jame, vkopane najverjetneje v času pripravljalnih del za gradnjo mesta v zadnjem desetletju Avgustove vladavine,65 manjša (7,2 cm) pa v enem prvih sedimentov na dekumanu J, okvirno datiranem v čas Tiberijeve vladavine.66 Več posamičnih ali parnih najdb ibul klasične različice 237b izvira iz zgodnjerimskih grobov z orožjem iz Mihovega, kjer se je v grobu 1655/3967 nahajala skupaj s ibulo z grizočo živalsko glavo različice Ia1,68 ki je na Štalenski gori dokumentirana že v celotah iz obdobja 20–10 pr. n. št.69 Med zgodnejše celote s ibulami različice 237b sodi tudi vojaški grob 41 iz Verduna,70 ki je poleg orožja in dvoročajnega vrča vseboval čašo z lijakastim ustjem (oblika Ricci 1/186)71 in bronasto zajemalko vrste Radnóti 40. Pokazatelj možnega nastanka te različice že v zadnjem desetletju pr. n. št. ali celo prej bi lahko bila ibula z iztegnjenim lokom iz polnila vodne kotanje na jugozahodnem vogalu konglomeratnega pomola v Kranju nad Jelenovim klancem,72 ki jo spremljajoče najdbe (dno večjega italskega vrča, čaša tankih sten s paličastim okrasom, dve zgodnji varianti ibul tipa Aucissa z lokom trikotnega preseka in bronasta pletena ovratnica) postavljajo v srednjeavgustejsko obdobje.73 62 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 142 70 Guštin 1991, 26, pl. 29: 18. Pernet 2010, pl. 106: 1. Breščak 1989; Križ et al. 2009, cat. no. 9.3.22; Breščak, in this book. Breščak 1989; Križ et al. 2009, cat. no. 9.3.5; Breščak, in this book. Demetz 1999, 52–53, 56, list 6, pl. 12: 4, 5. Gaspari 2010, pl. 29: Š 1308. Gaspari 2010, pl. 29: Š 5110. Windl 1975, pl. 5: 16. Garbsch 1965, 44–46, pl. 44: 6–8. Sedlmayer 2009, 25. Breščak, in this book. 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 Breščak 1989; Križ et al. 2009, kat. št. 9.3.22; Breščak, v tem zborniku. Breščak 1989; Križ et al. 2009, kat. št. 9.3.5; Breščak, v tem zborniku. Demetz 1999, 52–53, 56, seznam 6, t. 12: 4, 5. Gaspari 2010, t. 29: Š 1308. Gaspari 2010, t. 29: Š 5110. Windl 1975, t. 5: 16. Garbsch 1965, 44–46, t. 44: 6–8. Sedlmayer 2009, 25. Breščak, v tem zborniku. Pernet et al. 2006, 197 (z nadaljnjimi referencami). Podatek R. Urankar; Guštin 2011a, sl. 2. Glej npr. Vičič 1994, 33, t. 5: 11. two-handled jug, a beaker with a funnel rim (Ricci 1/186 shape)71 and a bronze ladle of the Radnóti 40 type. An indicator that shows the examined version could have been made in the last decade BC or even earlier is a ibula with an elongated bow from the illing of a water basin on the south-western corner of a conglomerate clif in Kranj above Jelenov klanec.72 he accompanying inds (the bottom of a large Italic jug, a thin-walled beaker with a sticklike ornament, two early variants of the Aucissa type ibula with a triangular cross-sectioned bow and a fragmented bronze knitted torques) date this context to the Mid-Augustan period.73 According to Demetz,74 the same kind of sieve-like punctuated foot as with the ibulas of type 237b can also be found with the Idrija Ib type, known from Emona in three examples.75 Aco beaker (pl. 2: 14) he Aco beaker with a stamp of a northern Italian manufacturer C. ACO C. L. EROS belongs to the uncoated conical beakers of the 4D form, according to Mazzeo Saracino,76 the 3b form according to Lavizzari Pedrazzini77 and type 4c according to Schindler Kaudelka.78 his form was documented in the south-eastern Alpine area in the (Mid) Augustan settlement layers in Kranj79 and at Magdalensberg. Later site yielded larger numbers of Aco beakers from around year 10 BC onwards, whereas the number of uncoated samples noticeably drops towards the end of the Augustan period.80 A stamp equal to the one examined can also be found at Magdalensberg.81 Kenrick dates it to the period between 20 BC and AD 10.82 Plate (pl. 2: 15) he Consp. 18.2 type plate appears during the time of the Dangstetten and Haltern military camps and is prominent until the Tiberian period. It was made in northern Italic workshops. In Ljubljana, this form appears at Gornji trg 30 from the Mid-Augustan settlement phase (IIIa). Most sigillata plates from the Middle (after 10 BC) and Late Augustan phase of the earlier camp at Prule (Tribuna) belong to the Consp. 18 shape. he same form was found at the NUK II site in Ljubljana, where generally occurred in the contexts from the time before the irst insulae walls were Podobno sitasto predrto nogo, kot jo imajo ibule različice 237b, pa srečamo tudi pri različici Idrija Ib po Demetzu,74 ki je v Emoni znana s tremi primerki.75 Aco kozarec (t. 2: 14) Kozarec tipa Aco z žigom severnoitalskega izdelovalca C. ACO C. L. EROS spada med stožčaste kozarce brez premaza oblike 4D po Mazzeo Saracino,76 3b po Lavizzari Pedrazzini77 oziroma tipa 4c po Schindler Kaudelka.78 Ta oblika je bila na jugovzhodnoalpskem območju dokumentirana že v (srednje)avgustejskih naselbinskih plasteh v Kranju,79 in na Štalenski gori. Tam so se kozarci tipa Aco v večjem številu pojavljali od okoli leta 10 pr. n. št., število primerkov brez premaza pa se je izrazito zmanjšalo ob koncu Avgustove dobe.80 Na Štalenski gori je bil najden tudi žig, enak obravnavanemu,81 ki ga Kenrick datira v čas med 20 pr. n. št. in 10 n. št.82 Krožnik (t. 2: 15) Krožnike oblike Consp. 18.2, ki so se pojavili v času vojaških taborov Dangstetten in Haltern ter so ostali v uporabi do Tiberijevega obdobja, so izdelovali v severnoitalskih lončarskih delavnicah. V Ljubljani na Gornjem trgu 30 krožniki te oblike izvirajo iz srednjeavgustejske naselbinske faze IIIa. Obliki Consp. 18 pripada večina sigilatnih krožnikov iz srednje- (po 10 pr. n. št.) in poznoavgustejske faze starejšega tabora na Prulah (Tribuna), na najdišču NUK II pa je bila najdena v celotah iz časa pred gradnjo prvih zidov insul.83 V tiberijskih grobovih severne emonske nekropole je obliko Consp. 18 nadomestila oblika Consp. 20/21.84 Obravnavani krožnik ima na dnu odtisnjen dvovrstični žig PARA/BOLI pravokotne oblike z zaobljenimi robovi. Kenrick navaja enak žig s Štalenske gore, datiran v obdobje po letu 15 pr. n. št.85 Lastnosti keramične mase krožnika ustrezajo masi, ki je bila na Štalenski gori prepoznana kot fabrikat C padanske sigilatne proizvodnje (zelo mehka keramika, slabo ohranjen tenek premaz, voskast na otip), značilen za avgustejsko obdobje.86 Dvoročajni lonec (t. 2: 16) Gre za poznorepublikanski tip italskega dvoročajnega lonca za shranjevanje živil, kakršni so v Lombardiji značilni 74 75 76 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 Pernet et al. 2006, 197 (with further references). Information by R. Urankar; Guštin 2011a, ig. 2. See for example: Vičič 1994, 33, pl. 5: 11. Demetz 1999, 126. Božič 2008, 101, n. 58. Mazzeo Saracino 1985, 188–189, 216, pl. 69: 11–13. Lavizzari Pedrazzini 1987, 31, 68, pl. 13: 5–10. Schindler Kaudelka 1980. Sagadin 2003, 73, pl. 3: 7, 8. Schindler Kaudelka 2000, 62. Schindler Kaudelka 2000, 55. OCK 32.1. 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 Demetz 1999, 126. Božič 2008, 101, op. 58. Mazzeo Saracino 1985, 188–189, 216, t. 69: 11–13. Lavizzari Pedrazzini 1987, 31, 68, t. 13: 5–10. Schindler Kaudelka 1980. Sagadin 2003, 73, t. 3: 7, 8. Schindler Kaudelka 2000, 62. Schindler Kaudelka 2000, 55. OCK 32.1. Vičič 1994, 34, t. 4: 5; Vojaković et al. 2011, 133, sl. 52; Gaspari 2010, t. 2: 8195, 9536, 4: 8103, 5: 8106. Plesničar-Gec 1972, t. 21: gr. 86, 40: gr. 146, 91: gr. 342, 101: 377, 155: 676; Mikl-Curk 1979, 339–371. OCK 1379. Zabehlicky Schefenegger, Sauer 2000, 69. 143 built.83 In Tiberian graves of the northern Emona necropolis, the Consp. 18 form was replaced by Consp. 20/21.84 he examined plate has a two-lined stamp at the base: PARA/BOLI – in a rectangular shape with rounded edges. Kenrick cites the same stamp from Magdalensberg, which dates to the period after 15 BC.85 he characteristics of the fabric are the same as the fabric from Magdalensberg. hese were classiied as a fabricate C of the sigillata of Po area production, which is typical for the Augustan period.86 Two-handled pot (pl. 2: 16) his Late Republican type of an Italic pot served for foodstorage. A similar form of pot was typical for the later part of the Late La Tène period in Lombardy.87 Pot types like this have not yet been found in Emona graves.88 he closest comparison is one from the earlier illing of a waste pit next to road A near the Forum platform,89 which was dug out from the loor surface of the irst building phase. At Magdalensberg, pots of this type are dated from around 20 BC to the Claudian period.90 A pot with its maximum diameter placed slightly higher than the examined pot was found at the Bratislava-Devín site and originates from the Mid- to Late Augustan layers.91 One-handled jug (pl. 2: 17) he rim of this jug is similar to most jugs found in deposits of the house at Gornji trg 15 in Ljubljana, which was built in the last decade BC or in the Late Augustan period and was presumably destroyed by ire during the Late Augustan or Early Tiberian age.92 A similar jug comes from the aforementioned waste pit in the Forum (Ferant’s garden). he rims of the pots from the well at NUK II site in Ljubljana are also similarly shaped. he well itself was in use before the irst walls were constructed in insula XIII.93 Grave 7 from cemetery VI C at Strmec above Bela Cerkev contained a similar jug. According to ibulae and sigillata pottery (Consp. R 2, 18, 22), the grave is dated to the Middle Augustan or Early Tiberian period.94 Two pear-shaped jugs from the Socerb cemetery95 and an exam83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 144 95 Vičič 1994, 34, pl. 4: 5; Vojaković et al. 2011, 133, ig. 52; Gaspari 2010, pls. 2: 8195, 9536, 4: 8103, 5: 8106. Plesničar-Gec 1972, pls. 21: gr. 86, 40: gr. 146, 91: gr. 342, 101: 377, 155: 676; Mikl-Curk 1979, 339–371. OCK 1379. Zabehlicky Schefenegger, Sauer 2000, 69. See Pernet et al. 2006, 220 (Giubiasco, gr. 320) with further references. Petru 1972; Plesničar-Gec 1972; Plesničar-Gec 1977, 33, pl. 3: 31–33. Plesničar Gec 2006, 27, proile 8, pl. 9: 10; Mikl Curk 2006, 94. Schindler Kaudelka 1989, 35, pl. 6. Pieta, Plachá 1999, ig. 10: 13. Vičič 1993, 164, pl. 6: 11–16. Plesničar Gec 2006, pl. 9: 3; Gaspari 2010, 41, pl. 11: 8278, 8281. Dular 1991, pl. 60: 13. Casari 2002, 96, nos. 41, 42. za mlajši del poznega latena.87 V do zdaj znanih emonskih grobovih posode tega tipa niso bile odkrite.88 Najbližja primerjava izvira iz starejšega polnila odpadne jame na cesti A ob forumski ploščadi,89 ki je bila izkopana iz hodne površine prve gradbene faze. Na Štalenski gori so posode takšne oblike datirane v čas od okoli l. 20 pr. n. št. do klavdijskega obdobja,90 lonec iz najdišča BratislavaDevín, ki ima največji obod pomaknjen nekoliko višje od obravnavane posode, pa izvira iz srednje- do poznoavgustejskih plasti.91 Enoročajni vrč (t. 2: 17) Enako oblikovana ustja ima večina vrčev, odkritih v depozitih hiše na Gornjem trgu 15 v Ljubljani, ki je bila postavljena v zadnjem desetletju pr. n. št. ali v poznoavgustejskem obdobju, uničil pa naj bi jo požar v poznoavgustejskem ali zgodnjetiberijskem obdobju.92 Podoben vrč izvira iz omenjene odpadne jame na forumu (Ferantov vrt), sorodno oblikovana pa so tudi ustja loncev iz zasutja vodnjaka na lokaciji NUK II, ki je deloval pred gradnjo prvih zidov v insuli XIII.93 Grob 7 iz grobišča VI C na Strmcu nad Belo Cerkvijo, v katerega je bil pridan soroden vrč, sodi glede na pridane ibule in sigilatno posodje (Consp. R 2, 18, 22) med srednjeavgustejsko in zgodnjetiberijsko obdobje.94 V približno enak časovni okvir najverjetneje sodita tudi dva vrča s hruškasto oblikovanim trupom iz grobišča na Socerbu95 in primerek iz gr. 1661/26 v Mihovem.96 Vrči s tako oblikovanim trupom in ustjem so na Štalenski gori datirani v čas od okoli l. 20 pr. n. št. do klavdijskega obdobja.97 3.2 Grob 1039 3.2.1 Opis (sl. 8–9) Plašč gomile nad grobom 1039 (sl. 4; preglednica 1) je prekrivala plast prodnikov iz apnenca in peščenjaka velikosti 5–20 cm, med katerimi se je nabral temnosiv glinen melj z odlomki lončenine (SE 9325). Gomilni plašč je iz vseh strani obdajal manjšo kopo ine zemljine, ki je bila zgoščena v njegovem severovzhodnem delu, ter jo tudi deloma prekrival. Kopa, v tlorisu nepravilne večkotne oblike, je bila z daljšo osjo orientirana v smeri zahod/severozahod–vzhod/ jugovzhod (vel. 0,45 × 0,35 m). Sestavljala jo je mazava, temnorjava meljasta glina, v kateri so se posamično pojavljali 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 Glej Pernet et al. 2006, 220 (Giubiasco, grob 320) z nadaljnjimi referencami. Petru 1972; Plesničar-Gec 1972; Plesničar-Gec 1977, 33, t. 3: 31–33. Plesničar Gec 2006, 27, proil 8, t. 9: 10; Mikl Curk 2006, 94. Schindler Kaudelka 1989, 35, t. 6. Pieta, Plachá 1999, sl. 10: 13. Vičič 1993, 164, t. 6: 11–16. Plesničar Gec 2006, t. 9: 3; Gaspari 2010, 41, t. 11: 8278, 8281. Dular 1991, t. 60: 13. Casari 2002, 96, št. 41, 42. Windl 1975. Schindler Kaudelka 1989, 43–44, t. 23. ple from gr. 1661/26 in Mihovo96 probably also belong to the same time frame. he jugs with similar rim and body shape from Magdalensberg are dated to the time between around 20 BC and Claudian period.97 3.2 Grave 1039 3.2.1 Description (igs. 8–9) A layer of limestone and sandstone pebbles ranging in size from 5 to 20 cm and very dark grey clay silt from fragments of pottery (SU 9325) covered the outer coat of the tumulus above grave 1039 (ig. 4; table 1). A small pile of ine soil was situated in its north-eastern part and surrounded by the covering of the tumulus. It was composed of dark brown silt clay, which contained smaller individual limestone and sandstone pebbles and fragments of charcoal (SU 9367). It also contained a fragment of an iron nail (pl. 3: 4). he clay covered the burnt remains (SU 9404) and grave contents (SU 9389) that were placed on the relatively lat surface of layer SU 9350 (the tumulus coating covered this layer as well). Layer SU 9367 probably formed with gradual sedimentation within the hollow grave pit, which was probably delimited by a wooden case. Accordingly, the border between the soil sediment and stone coating was deined as print SU 9390, despite the fact that the border surface does not represent the original location of the wooden case walls. Speciically, these were dislocated or blurred a while ago by the pressure of the coating. he southern part of the grave pit area contained two groupings of cremated bone fragments and a ceramic pot (pl. 3: 9) between the two. Immediately next to the pot and to the east, there was an iron spearhead with its tip turned towards the southwest (pl. 3: 2). A balsamarium (pl. 3: 8) was leaning against the spearhead from the southeast. A bone spoon (pl. 3: 7) was lying north of the pot and right next to it, as well as a bronze ibula (pl. 3: 5) that was leaning on the spoon. An almost entirely decomposed single-handled jug (pl. 3: 10) was lying in the northern part of the grave area, between its northern border and a larger (eastern) set of bones. A knife and an iron spearhead (pl. 3: 1) that was placed upright were both leaning onto the jug from the northwest and were pressed between the jug and the wall of the grave pit. he spearhead and the knife were leaning against each other. he spear point tip was turned towards the ground and the knife was turned in the opposite direction. he arc of the bronze ibula (pl. 3: 6) embraced the narrowest part of the spearhead’s haft. Presumably, the ibula attached the knife and the spearhead before they were placed into the grave (ig. 10). 96 97 Windl 1975. Schindler Kaudelka 1989, 43–44, pl. 23. Figure 8. Grave 1039 with contents in situ (photo D. Badovinac). Slika 8. Grob 1039 s pridatki in situ (foto D. Badovinac). Figure 9. Ground plan of the grave 1039 with contents (R. Masaryk). Slika 9. Tlorisna situacija groba 1039 s pridatki (izdelava R. Masaryk). manjši prodniki iz apnenca in peščenjaka ter drobci oglja (SE 9367); vsebovala je tudi odlomek železnega žeblja (t. 3: 4). Glina je prekrivala žganino (SE 9404) in grobne pridatke (SE 9389), položene na dokaj ravni površini plasti SE 9350 (na površini te plasti je ležal tudi gomilni plašč). Plast SE 9367 je nastala najverjetneje s postopno sedimentacijo v votlem prostoru groba, domnevno zamejenega z lesenim zabojem oziroma skrinjo. V skladu s to domnevo je bila mejna površina med zemljenim sedimentom in kamnitim plaščem opredeljena kot odtis SE 9390, čeprav mejna površina ne pomeni originalne lege lesenih sten skrinje, saj so bile te zaradi pritiska plašča premaknjene oziroma zabrisane. V južnem delu prostora groba sta ležala dva skupka odlomkov žganih kosti, med njima pa keramični lonec (t. 3: 9). Tik ob loncu je ležala železna sulična ost s konico, obrnjeno proti jugozahodu (t. 3: 2). Nanjo se je naslanjal balzamarij (t. 3: 8). Severno od lonca je ležala koščena žlica (t. 3: 7), nanjo se je naslanjala bronasta ibula (t. 3: 5). V severnem delu prostora groba oziroma med njegovo severno mejo in večjim (vzhodnim) skupkom kosti je stal skoraj popolnoma preperel enoročajni vrč (t. 3: 10). Na vrč sta se naslanjala pokončno postavljena železna sulična ost (t. 3: 1) in nož (t. 3: 3), ki sta bila stisnjena med vrč in steno grob- 145 nega prostora. Sulična ost in nož sta slonela tesno drug ob drugem; ost je bila s konico obrnjena proti tlom, nož pa obratno. Najožji del nasadišča sulice je objemal lok bronaste ibule t. 3: 6; ni izključeno, da so pred položitvijo v grob z njo speli nož in sulično ost (sl. 10). 3.2.2 Katalog pridatkov Figure 10. Radiograph of the spearhead and ibula whole from the grave 1039 before conservation (MGML). Slika 10. Rentgenski posnetek skupka sulične osti in ibule iz groba 1039 pred konservacijo (MGML). 3.2.2 Catalogue of grave contents Plate 3. 1. Spearhead; iron. Pr. L 22.9 cm; W of the blade 3.8 cm; th. 0.9 cm; dm. of the socket 2.8 cm; wgt. 131.4 g. SU 9389. PN 6505. 2. Spearhead; iron. Pr. L 13.1 cm; W of the blade 2.7 cm; th. 0.8 cm; dm. of the socket 2.2 cm; wgt. 58 g. SU 9389. PN 6580. 3. Knife; iron. L 14.7 cm; W of the blade 1.8 cm; wgt. 80 g. SU 9389. PN 6877. 4. Spine of a nail; iron. Pr. L 2.9 cm; wgt. 3 g. SU 9367. PN 6504. 5. Fibula; bronze. L 4.7 cm; H 1.7 cm; wgt. 5 g. SU 9389. PN 6540. 6. Fibula; bronze. L 5.6 cm; W 2.4 cm; H 2.6 cm; wgt. 10 g. SU 9389. PN 6520. 7. Spoon; bone. L 7.8 cm; W 3.4 cm; wgt. 5.1 g. SU 9389. PN 6539. 8. Balsamarium with a poorly preserved slip; ceramics; colour of ceramics: 5 YR 7/6 reddish yellow; colour of slip: 2.5 YR 4/6 red; ceramic mass: inely cleansed; surface: smooth; hardness: soft; iring: oxidized. H 6.1 cm; dm. of lip 2.2 cm; wgt. 22.4 g. SU 9389. PN 6507. 9. Pot; coarse ware; production: freehand; colour of ceramics: patchy, light reddish brown almost beige; ceramic mass: not reined, extremely dense small inclusions of quartz; surface: coarse; hardness: hard; iring: oxidized. H 12.7 cm; dm. of the lip 9 cm; wgt. 435.3 g. SU 9389. PN 6506. 10. One-handled jug; tableware; production: pottery wheel; colour of ceramics: 5 YR 6/6 reddish yellow; ceramic mass: inely cleansed, medium dense inclusions of broken ceramics and extremely small white particles; surface: dusty; hardness: soft; iring: oxidized. H 3.2 cm; dm. of the bottom 6.8 cm; wgt. 30 g. SU 9389. PN 6508. 3.2.3 Commentary on the grave contents 146 he ibula of the Mid-La Tène scheme (pl. 3: 5) he small ibula made from a bronze wire is characterized by a trapeze-shaped bow, a backwards-bent foot that is attached to the highest part of the bow with a simple Tabla 3. 1. Sulična ost; železo. Ohr. d. 22,9 cm; š. lista 3,8 cm; deb. 0,9 cm; pr. tula 2,8 cm; t. 131,4 g. SE 9389. PN 6505. 2. Sulična ost; železo. Ohr. d. 13,1 cm; š. lista 2,7 cm; deb. 0,8 cm; pr. tula 2,2 cm; t. 58 g. SE 9389. PN 6580. 3. Nož; železo. D. 14,7 cm; š. rezila 1,8 cm; t. 80 g. SE 9389. PN 6877. 4. Trn žeblja; železo. Ohr. d. 2,9 cm; t. 3 g. SE 9367. PN 6504. 5. Fibula; bron. D. 4,7 cm; v. 1,7 cm; t. 5 g. SE 9389. PN 6540. 6. Fibula; bron. D. 5,6 cm; š. 2,4 cm; v. 2,6 cm; t. 10 g. SE 9389. PN 6520. 7. Žlica; kost. D. 7,8 cm; š. 3,4 cm; t. 5,1 g. SE 9389. PN 6539. 8. Balzamarij z zelo slabo ohranjenim premazom; keramika; barva keramike: 5 YR 7/6 rdečkastorumena; barva premaza: 2.5 YR 4/6 rdeča; keramična masa: zelo ino prečiščena; površina: gladka; trdota: mehka; žganje: oksidacijsko. V. 6,1 cm; pr. ustja 2,2 cm; t. 22,4 g. SE 9389. PN 6507. 9. Lonec; kuhinjska keramika; izdelava: prostoročna; barva keramike: lisasta, svetlo rdečkastorjava do sivorjava; keramična masa: neprečiščena, zelo goste drobne primesi kremena; površina: groba; trdota: trda; žganje: stihijsko. V. 12,7 cm; pr. ustja 9 cm; t. 435,3 g. SE 9389. PN 6506. 10. Enoročajni vrč; namizna keramika; izdelava: na lončarskem vretenu; barva keramike: 5 YR 6/6 rdečkastorumena; keramična masa: ino prečiščena, srednje gosti vključki zdrobljene keramike in zelo drobni beli delci; površina: prašnata; trdota: mehka; žganje: oksidacijsko. V. 3,2 cm; pr. dna 6,8 cm; t. 30 g. SE 9389. PN 6508. 3.2.3 Komentar k pridatkom Fibula srednjelatenske sheme (t. 3: 5) Majhno ibulo iz bronaste žice označuje trapezasto oblikovan lok, nazaj zavita noga, ki se s preprosto objemko pripenja na lok na njegovem najvišjem delu, ter samostrelna peresovina s štirimi navoji in spodvito tetivo. Oblika je značilna za starejši del poznolatenskega obdobja (LT D1), kamor sodijo npr. najdbe iz polnila obodnega jarka svetišča na Frauenbergu pri Lipnici ter naselbinskih plasti v Stični, na Libni in Kučarju.98 98 Božič 1999, 201; za podatke o najdiščih se zahvaljujemo Draganu Božiču. Plate 3. Kongresni trg, grave 1039. 1–4 iron; 5–6 bronze; 7 bone; 8–10 ceramics. Scale 1–4 = 1 : 3; rest 1 : 2 (drawing D. Kniic Lunder). Tabla 3. Kongresni trg, grob 1039. 1–4 železo; 5–6 bron; 7 kost; 8–10 keramika. M 1–4 = 1 : 3; drugo 1 : 2 (risba D. Kniic Lunder). Grob 1039 147 clamp and a crossbow spring with four coils and an internal chord. his form is typical for the earlier part of the Late La Tène period (LT D1). Finds such as those from the illing of a rim ditch of the sanctuary at Frauenberg near Leibnitz and settlement layers at Stična, Libna and Kučar are from the same period.98 Zelo podobne, vendar večje žičnate ibule tipa Riha 1.4 (d. 4,6–8 cm) so bile med avgustejskim in klavdijskim obdobjem ena vodilnih oblik vojaške in civilne noše na najdiščih severno od Alp in v Galiji.99 Temu tipu je pripisana tudi 3,2 cm dolga ibula z območja rimske opekarne Ilovica pri Vranskem.100 One of the leading forms of military and civilian attire included similar, yet larger wired ibulas of the Riha 1.4 type (L 4.6–8 cm), from sites north of the Alps and Gallia in the time span from Augustan to Claudian periods.99 A 3.2 cm long ibula presumably of this type is known from the area of the Roman brickyard Ilovica near Vransko.100 Italska ibula na šarnir tipa Aucissa (t. 3: 6) Fibula na šarnir s polkrožnim lokom, trapezasto glavo z dvema okroglima predrtinama ter gobastim vodoravnim gumbom na zaključku nosilca za iglo, izdelana iz bronaste zlitine, pripada vrsti Feugère 22b(2)101 oziroma njeni različici z zaprtim tulom. Italic ibula of Aucissa type (pl. 3: 6) he ibula with a hinge has a semi-circular bow, a trapezeshaped head with two round openings and a horizontal globular knob at the end of the pin holder. It is made of bronze alloy and belongs to the Feugère 22b(2)101 variant or its version with a closed quiver. Podobne ibule s trapezasto ploščo s predrtinama, kakršne so v opaznem številu zastopane v taboru Haltern,102 z dvema najdbama pa so zastopane tudi na prizorišču bitke pri Kalkrieseju,103 so precej redkejše od podobnih primerkov s prečno proilirano ploščo nižjega in širšega obrisa. Slednji so znani že iz srednjeavgustejskih taborov Dangstetten in Oberaden,104 na Štalenski gori pa se taki sponki pojavljata v poznoavgustejski in tiberijski celoti.105 Similar brooches with a trapeze head with openings are found in large numbers at Haltern camp102 and two are known from the Kalkriese battle site. 103 hese ibulae are much less common than the similar examples with a transverse-proiled plate with a lower and wider outline. hese are known from Mid-Augustan camps Dangstetten and Oberaden;104 however, at Magdalensberg this form of brooches shows up in Late Augustan and Tiberian contexts.105 A wavy ornament at the arched middle rib of the bow (form 5d, according to Müller) can be seen on the more common version with cut-out eyes. It is a leading form of attire from Dangstetten106 and of later military sites, e.g. at Devín near Bratislava, where it probably dates to the Late Augustan phase.107 Knife (pl. 3: 3) he knife’s original length is approximately 15 cm and has a hilt tang with a triangular outline. he stepped transition passes into a narrow bent blade. he edges of the tang are somewhat convex because of the making of the 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 148 107 Božič 1999, 201; many thanks to Dragan Božič for the information on sites. Riha 1994, 20, 53–56, nos. 1841–1887. Lazar et al. 2006, 39, ig. M1. Feugère 1985, 312–324. Müller 2002, 20, n. 105, pl. 13. Harnecker, Franzius 2008, pl. 15: 221–222. Fingerlin 1986, 85/1; Fingerlin 1998, 1234/1, 1246/2; Kühlborn 1992, pl. 33: 45; see also Haltern (Müller 2002, pl. 16: 160, 162, 163), Zurzach (Hänggi, Doswald, Roth-Rubi 1994, pl. 2: 45.16) Sedlmayer 2009, 39–40, 142–149, ig. 93, pl. 25: 535, 542, 543, 545. Fingerlin 1986, 10/1, 115/1, 268/3, 455–457/1, 463/2, 484/3; Fingerlin 1998, 685/2, 793/1, 841/2, 844/1, 1013/1. Pieta, Plachá 1999, 197, ig. 13: 7. Valovit okras na zvišanem sredinskem rebru loka (oblika 5d po Müllerju) spremlja tudi pogosteje izpričano različico z izrezanimi očesci, ki sodi med vodilne oblike noše iz Dangstettna,106 med poznejšimi najdišči vojaške narave pa je znana npr. tudi z Devína pri Bratislavi; ta najverjetneje sodi v poznoavgustejsko fazo najdišča.107 Nož (t. 3: 3) Nož s prvotno dolžino okoli 15 cm ima ročajni trn trikotnega obrisa, ki z nizkima stopnicama prehaja v ozko ukrivljeno rezilo. Stranice trna so zaradi izdelave predrtine za zakovico nekoliko napete. Skromna dolžina trna nakazuje možnost, da gre za nož na preklop, čeprav je bil verjetneje opremljen s togim držajem. Glede na oblikovanost rezila in trna je nož izvedenka ene od različic bojnih nožev (sica) skupine Padea-Panagjurski Kolonii iz obdobja po sredini 2. stoletja pr. n. št.,108 ki jo označujeta kratek trn trikotnega obrisa in razmeroma ozko ukrivljeno rezilo s punciranim oziroma vtolčenim okrasom in/ali enim ali dvema žlebovoma pod hrbtom rezila s klekom ali brez njega. Skupini do 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 Riha 1994, 20, 53–56, št. 1841–1887. Lazar et al. 2006, 39, sl. M1. Feugère 1985, 312–324. Müller 2002, 20, op. 105, t. 13. Harnecker, Franzius 2008, t. 15: 221–222. Fingerlin 1986, 85/1; Fingerlin 1998, 1234/1, 1246/2; Kühlborn 1992, t. 33: 45; glej še Haltern (Müller 2002, t. 16: 160, 162, 163), Zurzach (Hänggi, Doswald, Roth-Rubi 1994, t. 2: 45.16). Sedlmayer 2009, 39–40, 142–149, sl. 93, t. 25: 535, 542, 543, 545. Fingerlin 1986, 10/1, 115/1, 268/3, 455–457/1, 463/2, 484/3; Fingerlin 1998, 685/2, 793/1, 841/2, 844/1, 1013/1. Pieta, Plachá 1999, 197, sl. 13: 7. Rustoiu 2007. rivet hole. he small length of the tang indicates that it might have been a pocketknife; however, it probably had a rigid helve. Judging by the shape of the blade and tang, this knife is a derivative of one of the versions of combat knives (sica) of the Padea-Panagjurski Kolonii group from the period after the mid-2nd century BC.108 his type of up to 30 cm long knives is characterized by a short tang of a triangular outline and a somewhat narrow, bent blade with a hammered ornament and one or two grooves under the back of the blade with or without a crock. (group 1 according to Borangic.)109 he form of these is similar to the examined example from grave 1039. he group includes knives from three Late La Tène and one Early Roman warrior grave at Karaburma in Belgrade,110 where they are accompanied by one to three spearheads. One of the best analogies is a 13.4 cm long knife from the cremation grave of a 21–22-year-old man that dates to LT D1 phase from the Hunedoara-Grădina Castelului necropolis.111 Similar knives were documented at the tumulus necropolis in Zemplín, where the bent knives (18.3 cm and 15.8 cm in length) were found in two warrior graves from the beginning of the Eggers B1a phase (10/5 BC–AD 20/30).112 Within the south-eastern Alpine region, two similar examples were found amongst numerous knives with tongueshaped tangs with a rivet from the Magdalensberg, which originate primarily from contexts between Late Augustan and Claudian periods.113 he following similar inds from the region are notable: example from the Late Augustan/Tiberian grave, along with a pair of brooches of the Almgren 67b1 variant from Peratschitzen,114 examples from Tiberian military grave 84 from Verdun and grave 228 (with a Neron coin) from the same necropolis,115 as well as examples amongst inds with unknown grave inventories from Strmec above Bela Cerkev,116 an example from the Tiberian-Claudian grave 234 of the northern Emona necropolis117 and from the illing of the pit, dug into the irst decumanus J street level in Emona after the construction of the cloaca at the Šumi site and that dates back to the mid-1st century AD.118 Spearheads (pl. 3: 1–2) he spearhead with a lattened rhombic cross-section of the blade and a relatively long socket is similar to pieces 30 cm dolgih nožev omenjene različice, ki jih je Borangic združil v tipu 1109 in so po obliki dokaj blizu primerku iz obravnavanega groba 1039, pripadajo tudi noži iz treh poznolatenskih in enega zgodnjerimskega bojevniškega groba na Karaburmi v Beogradu,110 kjer nastopajo v kombinaciji z eno do tremi suličnimi ostmi. Ena najboljših primerjav je 13,4 cm dolg nož iz žganega groba 21–22 let starega moškega na nekropoli Hunedoara-Grădina Castelului, datiranega v stopnjo LT D1.111 Podobni noži so dokumentirani tudi na gomilni nekropoli v Zemplínu, kjer sta bila ukrivljena noža z dolžinama 18,3 in 15,8 cm najdena v dveh bojevniških grobovih z začetka stopnje Eggers B1a (10/5 pr. n. št.–20/30 n. št.).112 Na jugovzhodnoalpskem območju sta sorodna primerka izpričana med razmeroma številnimi noži z jezičastim trnom z zakovico z naselbine na Štalenski gori, ki izvirajo predvsem iz celot iz časa med poznoavgustejskim in klavdijskim obdobjem.113 Med najdbami iz regije po podobnosti izstopajo primerki iz poznoavgustejsko-tiberijskega groba s parom ibul vrste Almgren 67b1 iz Peračije pri Škocjanu v Podjuni (Peratschitzen),114 tiberijskega vojaškega groba 84 iz Verduna in groba 228 (z Neronovim novcem) iz iste nekropole,115 med najdbami brez znanih celot s Strmca nad Belo Cerkvijo,116 iz tiberijsko-klavdijskega groba 234 s severnega emonskega grobišča 117 in iz polnila vkopa v prvo cestišče emonskega dekumana J po dograditvi kloake na lokaciji Šumi, ki je okvirno datirano v sredino 1. stoletja n. št.118 Sulični osti (t. 3: 1–2) Sulična ost s sploščenim rombičnim presekom lista in razmeroma dolgim tulom (t. 3: 1) ima primerjave v grobnih celotah stopnje LT D2 in zgodnjecesarskega časa iz južnoalpskih dolin119 in severne Galije,120 znane so npr. tudi iz tabora Dangstetten, z območja bojišča pri Kalkrieseju121 in s Štalenske gore.122 Podobne velikosti in razmerja med tulom in listom nastopajo tudi pri osteh s poševno spodrezano bazo lista.123 109 110 111 112 113 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 Rustoiu 2007. Rustoiu 2007, igs. 2: 5–6, 3: 3; Borangic 2009, pls. 5: 1, 6: 6–7, 8: 5, 9: 1–4. E.g. Karaburma, gr. 25, 28, 32, 145 (Todorović 1972, pls. 9: 25/1, 11: 28/1, 13: 32/1, 36: 145/1). Sîrbu, Luca, Roman 2007, 156, ig. 3: 6. Budinský-Krička, Lamiová-Schmiedlová 1990, pls. 15: 38, 18: 6. Dolenz 1998, 257–259, pls. 101: ME 43, 102: ME47. Sedlmayer 2009, 175, ig. 115. Breščak 1989; Breščak, in this book. Stare 1973, pl. 49: 6. Petru 1972, pl. 23: 24. PN 1282; SU 1377 (unpublished). 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 Rustoiu 2007, sl. 2: 5–6, 3: 3; Borangic 2009, t. 5: 1, 6: 6–7, 8: 5, 9: 1–4. Npr. Karaburma, gr. 25, 28, 32, 145 (Todorović 1972, t. 9: 25/1, 11: 28/1, 13: 32/1, 36: 145/1). Sîrbu, Luca, Roman 2007, 156, sl. 3: 6. Budinský-Krička, Lamiová-Schmiedlová 1990, t. 15: 38, 18: 6. Dolenz 1998, 257–259, t. 101: ME 43, 102: ME47. Sedlmayer 2009, 175, sl. 115. Breščak 1989; Breščak, v tem zborniku. Stare 1973, t. 49: 6. Petru 1972, t. 23: 24. PN 1282; SE 1377 (neobjavljeno). Pernet et al. 2006, sl. 2.20: 2Al. Schumacher 1999, sl. 12: 2. Dangstetten (Fingerlin 1986, 309/4), Kalkriese (Harnecker, Franzius 2008, t. 2: 13). Štalenska gora (Dolenz 1998, t. 7: M52). Npr. Polhov Gradec (Ložar 1938, sl. 22b) in Štalenska gora (Dolenz 1998, t. 6: M41, M42); glej še npr. Schumacher 1999, sl. 12: 6; Harnecker 1997, t. 77: 813; Deschler-Erb 1999, t. 6: 69. 149 from LT D2 and Early Imperial grave inventories from south Alpine valleys 119 and northern Gaul.120 Similar ones were also found at Dangstetten camp, at the battleield in Kalkriese121 and Magdalensberg.122 It is noticeable that the spearheads with obliquely blade bases have a similar sizes and ratios between the socket and the blade.123 Comparisons with short-pointed lances (pl. 3: 2) are also known from the Early Imperial contexts.124 hese lances (iacula, lancea) had a 1 to 1.5 m long shaft and were mostly used by the light infantry and cavalry. he representations on tombstones show that an individual soldier had two to ive lances125 that could be thrown up to 70 m with a rope loop. his is two-and-a-half times farther than the range of a classic pilum.126 Bone spoon (pl. 3: 7) A shallow ladle with a tongued (pointed oval) shape with a levelled crossing to a horizontal helve is preserved from a carefully designed polished spoon (ligula). he helve has a transverse indentation of a V cross-section in the front. On the bottom side of the ladle, there are two shallow decorative channels on both sides of the helve extension. Finds of similarly shaped bone spoons are rare. A similar example with a somewhat smaller ladle was found at camp Dangstetten,127 and one of two remarkably similar inds from Magdalensberg originates from the Claudian context.128 Balsamarium (pl. 3: 8) Ceramic balsamaria in this shape appear across the entire Empire from the Early Augustan period onwards.129 Pot (pl. 3: 9) he pot with a saddle-shaped transition between the base and the rounded body, as well as an inward bent rim, is 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 150 129 Pernet et al. 2006, ig. 2.20: 2Al. Schumacher 1999, ig. 12: 2. Dangstetten (Fingerlin 1986, 309/4), Kalkriese (Harnecker, Franzius 2008, pl. 2: 13). Magdalensberg (Dolenz 1998, pl. 7: M52). E.g. Polhov Gradec (Ložar 1938, ig. 22b) and Magdalensberg (Dolenz 1998, pl. 6: M41, M42); also e.g. Schumacher 1999, ig. 12: 6; Harnecker 1997, pl. 77: 813; Deschler-Erb 1999, pl. 6: 69. Kalkriese (Harnecker, Franzius 2008, pl. 2: 8), Haltern (Harnecker 1997, pl. 74: 807, 808), Windisch (Unz, Deschler-Erb 1997, pl. 19: 305–314), Magdalensberg (Dolenz 1998, pl. 7: M52); Hoppstätten-Weiersbach, gr. 7 (Schumacher 1999, pl. 46: a). E.g. the relief on the base of the pillar from Mainz with a representation of an auxiliary soldier with an oval shield with a round shield boss and a helmet (Weisenau type?); in one hand the soldier is holding the shield and two lances and in the other a third lance (Bishop, Coulston 1993, ig. 5a); the tombstone of Belaterus from Cherchel in Algeria (Cesarea/ Mauretania Cesarensis), a member of the cohors VI Delmatarum on which a soldier is portrayed with two lances with a short point (AE 1921, 31; AE 1952, 214). Junkelmann 1997, 193. Fingerlin 1986, 363/30. Gostenčnik 2005, 88–89, pl. 20: 3, 4. Roth-Rubi 2006, 93. Iz zgodnjecesarskih kontekstov so znane tudi primerjave za ost kopja s kratko konico t. 3: 2.124 Takšna kopja (iacula, lancea) so bila opremljena z 1–1,5 m dolgim kopjiščem, uporabljali pa sta jih lahka pehota in konjenica. Upodobitve na nagrobnikih kažejo, da je imel vojak v kompletu od dve do pet kopij,125 ki jih je bilo mogoče s pomočjo vrvne zanke metati tudi do 70 m daleč, torej dvainpolkrat več, kot je znašal učinkovit domet klasičnega piluma.126 Koščena žlica (t. 3: 7) Od natančno izdelane polirane žlice (ligula) je ohranjena plitva zajemalka jezičaste (koničasto ovalne) oblike s stopničasto izdelanim prehodom v vodoravni držaj, ki ima na začetku prečno zajedo V-preseka. Na spodnji strani zajemalke spremljata podaljšek držaja na obeh straneh plitvi okrasni kaneluri. Najdbe podobno oblikovanih žlic iz kosti so redke. Sorodni primerek z nekoliko manjšo zajemalko je znan iz tabora Dangstetten,127 ena od dveh zelo podobnih najdb s Štalenske gore pa izvira klavdijevskega konteksta.128 Balzamarij (t. 3: 8) Keramični balzamariji te oblike se pojavljajo po celotnem imperiju od zgodnjeavgustejskega obdobja naprej.129 Lonec (t. 3: 9) Velikost in oblika lonca s sedlastim prehodom dna v zaobljeno ostenje in uvihanim ustjem, izdelanega prostoročno iz neprečiščene, rdečkasto do sivorjave žgane keramične mase s porozno površino, nakazujeta, da gre za čašo oziroma pivsko posodo. Preprosta groba lonca primerljive velikosti, vendar z manj poudarjeno uvihanim ustjem in z okrasom plastičnih aplik oziroma vtisov, sta bila pridana v srednjelatenska moška grobova 109 in 173 na Kapiteljski njivi v Novem mestu,130 z iste nekropole pa izvira tudi več manjših čaš z zaobljenim trupom in stanjšanim ustjem, ki v grobovih praviloma nastopajo v paru z večjo posodo.131 Njim sorodna, grobo izdelana čaša s sedlastim prehodom dna v ostenje in trebušastim trupom je znana tudi iz zgodnjerimskega groba 47 na bližnjem Beletovem 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 Kalkriese (Harnecker, Franzius 2008, t. 2: 8), Haltern (Harnecker 1997, t. 74: 807, 808), Windisch (Unz, Deschler-Erb 1997, t. 19: 305–314), Štalenska gora (Dolenz 1998, t. 7: M52), Hoppstätten-Weiersbach, gr. 7 (Schumacher 1999, t. 46: a). Npr. relief na bazi stebra iz Mainza s prikazom avksiliarnega vojaka z ovalnim ščitom z okroglo grbo in čelado (tipa Weisenau?), ki v eni roki drži ščit in dve kopji, z drugo pa vihti tretje (Bishop, Coulston 1993, sl. 5a); nagrobnik Belaterusa iz Cherchela v Alžiriji (Cesarea/Mauretania Cesarensis), pripadnika cohors VI Delmatarum, na katerem je vojak upodobljen z dvema kopjema s kratkima konicama (AE 1921, 31; AE 1952, 214). Junkelmann 1997, 193. Fingerlin 1986, 363/30. Gostenčnik 2005, 88–89, t. 20: 3, 4. Roth-Rubi 2006, 93. Križ 2005, t. 5: 109/1, 46: 173/1. Npr. Križ 2005, t. 9: 114/3, 37: 158/2, 49: 181/1. made of an unreined, reddish and sepia-coloured fabric with a porous surface. he size and shape of the pot indicate that it was a beaker or drinking pot. Two simple coarse pots of a similar size, yet a less accentuated bent rim and with a decoration of plastic applique or imprints were added to two Middle La Tène male graves (109 and 173) at Kapiteljska njiva in Novo mesto.130 Several smaller beakers with a rounded body and a thinned rim that appear in graves alongside a larger pot were found at the same necropolis.131 A similar, roughly made cup with a saddleshaped transition between the base and rounded body appears in an Early Roman grave (no. 47) at Beletov vrt.132 According to the decoration and cross-section, the mentioned forms are linked to the Hallstatt tradition.133 Researchers interpret the occurrence of handmade pottery in graves and at settlements of the Mokronog group as a result of the preCeltic population merging with newcomers.134 It is intriguing that approximately contemporary pots similar to piece from grave 1039 at Kongresni trg concentrate in the northern part of the middle Danubian area. he two beakers from the workshop at Devín near Bratislava are remarkably similar and date back to the latest phase of Late La Tène settlement.135 he emergence of handmade ceramics that had replaced some forms designed on a wheel was documented at other sites of the LT D2 and Eggers B1a phase in Slovakia,136 where it is allegedly connected to older traditions. Pots from Zemplín in northern Tisza area have the same proile.137 Similar to analogies from individual Late La Tène sites of the Scordisci (e.g. Gomolava in Slavonija and Kale-Krševica in the upper valley of the Morava River),138 these portray inluences of rough Dacian ceramics. Two typical small bowls with handles139 and similar bowls with a straight bottom and widely outward bent rim from graves at Beletov vrt are particularly noteworthy here.140 hese must be examined in the context of events after the defeat of the Boii and Taurisci against the Dacians in the time just prior to Burebista’s death in the fourth decade of the 1st century BC. Despite the fact that the examined pot was not part of the local pottery tradition, it was a simple, purposeful vessel that shows up in diferent regions during the Late La Tène period. Coarse beakers of similar forms and dimensions 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 Križ 2005, pls. 5: 109/1, 46: 173/1. E.g. Križ 2005, pls. 9: 114/3, 37: 158/2, 49: 181/1. Knez 1992, pl. 15: 5. Dular 1982, 31, pl. 7: 56–57. Božič 1999, 208; Šinkovec 2011, 16–17. Pieta 2010, 185, ig. 81: 8–9. Pieta 2010, igs. 89: 17, 90: 7, 13. Pieta 2010, ig. 82: 14. Jovanović, Jovanović 1988; Popović 2011, igs. 4 and 5, upper right. Knez 1992, pls. 27: 1, 51: 6; Guštin 2011b, 240–241. Knez 1992, pls. 14: 11, 41: 6, 42: 10, 46: 2, 48: 9, 63: 4–6, 64: 11, 72: 9. Figure 11. Items from the grave 1039 (photo D. Badovinac). Slika 11. Pridatki iz groba 1039 (foto D. Badovinac). vrtu.132 Omenjene oblike se po oblikah in okrasu, pa tudi po prelomu navezujejo na lokalno halštatsko tradicijo,133 pri čemer pojav prostoročno izdelanega posodja v grobovih in naselbinah mokronoške skupine raziskovalci interpretirajo kot rezultat stapljanja predkeltskega prebivalstva s prišleki.134 Zanimivo je, da se okvirno sočasne primerjave za lonec iz gr. 1039 na Kongresnem trgu zgoščajo v severnem delu srednjega Podonavja. Zelo podobna sta pokala iz delavnice na Devínu pri Bratislavi, datirane v najmlajšo fazo poznolatenske poselitve,135 pojav prostoročno izdelane keramike, ki je nadomestila nekatere oblike posod, oblikovanih na vretenu, pa je v tem času dokumentiran tudi na drugih najdiščih stopenj LT D2 in Eggers B1a na Slovaškem,136 kjer se povezuje s starejšimi tradicijami. Enak proil imajo tudi lonci iz Zemplína v severnem Potisju,137 v katerih naj bi se tako kot pri primerjavah iz posameznih poznolatenskih najdišč, pripisanih Skordiskom (npr. Gomolava v Slavoniji in Kale-Krševica v zgornjem toku Morave),138 kazali vplivi grobe dačanske keramike. S tem v zvezi velja spomniti na značilni skledici z ročajem139 in njima sorodne sklede oziroma skledice z ravnim dnom in široko izviha132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 Knez 1992, t. 15: 5. Dular 1982, 31, t. 7: 56–57. Božič 1999, 208; Šinkovec 2011, 16–17. Pieta 2010, 185, sl. 81: 8–9. Pieta 2010, sl. 89: 17, 90: 7, 13. Pieta 2010, sl. 82: 14. Jovanović, Jovanović 1988; Popović 2011, sl. 4 in 5, desno zgoraj. Knez 1992, t. 27: 1, 51: 6; Guštin 2011b, 240–241. 151 Figure 12. Items from the grave 1038 in situ (photo D. Badovinac). Slika 12. Pridatki iz groba 1038 in situ (foto D. Badovinac). Figure 13. Items from the grave 1038 (photo D. Badovinac). Slika 13. Pridatki iz groba 1038 (foto D. Badovinac). Figure 14. Ground plan of the grave 1038 (R. Masaryk). Slika 14. Tlorisna situacija pridatkov iz groba 1038 (izdelava R. Masaryk). were being added to warriors’ graves during this time in the areas between the Moselle and Rhine Rivers.141 hese graves also always contained ceramics crafted on the wheel. 3.3 Grave 1038 3.3.1 Description (igs. 12, 14) he set of objects (SU 9344) in layer SU 9325 (i.e. presumably in the moved part of the tumulus covering of grave 1039 (ig. 4; table 1) was interpreted as grave 1038. he set was situated amongst pebbles above the area where layer SU 9325 was covering the edge of the tumulus coating (SU 9349). he set of objects includes two horizontally lying ceramic balsamaria (south – pl. 4: 2; north – pl. 4: 3), a miniature ceramic pot (pl. 4: 4) and a broken bronze ibula (pl. 4: 1), placed between the two pieces of balsamaria (ig. 13). A few fragments of cremated bones (SU 9345), a pottery fragment (?) and pieces of undeined materials (resin?) were lying in proximity to the aforementioned objects. he same unknown material was melted onto one of the limestone pebbles. No traces of the grave pit were discernible. he ine soil that appeared amongst the pebbles in proximity to the inds was the same as the soil in the wider surroundings (components of layer SU 9325). 3.3.2 Catalogue of grave contents Plate 4. 1. Fibula; bronze L 5.7 cm; H 2.3 cm; wgt. 7.4 g. SU 9344. PN 6443. 2. Balsamarium; ceramics. H 10 cm; dm. of the rim 2.5 cm; wgt. 30.3 g. SU 9344. PN 6440. 3. Balsamarium; ceramics. H 9.1 cm; dm. of the rim: 2.4 cm; wgt. 27.8 g. SU 9344. PN 6441. 4. Miniature pot; ceramics. H 4.5 cm; dm. of the rim 3.7 cm; wgt. 42 g. SU 9344. PN 6442. 152 141 Schumacher 1999, pls. 41: g, 42: k, 48: b, 83: l. nim ustjem iz grobov z Beletovega vrta,140 ki jih moramo obravnavati v kontekstu dogajanj po porazu Bojev in Tavriskov proti Dačanom v času tik pred Burebistovo smrtjo v 40-ih letih 1. stoletja pr. n. št. Čeprav oblika obravnavanega lonca v lokalni lončarski tradiciji ni znana, pa gre vendarle za preprosto, namenu prilagojeno posodo, ki se je v poznem latenu pojavljala tudi v drugih regijah. Grobe pokale podobnih oblik in dimenzij so v tem času npr. prilagali v bojevniške grobove na ozemlju med Mozelo in Renom,141 v katerih vedno nastopajo skupaj keramiko, izdelano na vretenu. 3.3 Grob 1038 3.3.1 Opis (sl. 12, 14) Kot grob 1038 je bil opredeljen skupek predmetov (SE 9344), ki so ležali v plasti SE 9325, t. j. v domnevno pre140 141 Knez 1992, t. 14: 11, 41: 6, 42: 10, 46: 2, 48: 9, 63: 4–6, 64: 11, 72: 9. Schumacher 1999, t. 41: g, 42: k, 48: b, 83: l. Plate 4. Kongresni trg, grave 1038. 1 bronze; rest ceramics. Scale = 1 : 2 (drawing D. Kniic Lunder). Tabla 4. Kongresni trg, grob 1038. 1 bron; drugo keramika. M = 1 : 2 (risba D. Kniic Lunder). Grob 1038 3.3.3 Commentary on the grave contents Winged ibula (pl. 4: 1) he bronze winged brooch belongs to the Almgren 238a type, which is typical for the eastern Alpine region between the Salzburg area and the lower Krka valley. According to Demetz, this type appears around the year 30 BC at the latest.142 Božič attributes graves with this type of ibula from Beletov vrt (gr. 134, 136)143 to the latest part of the Mokronog IIIb phase.144 However, at Magdalensberg they appear mostly in Late Augustan ill layers, which contain materials from older deposits.145 Based on the stratigraphic position of grave 1038, we can presume that wearing brooches of the examined type continued at least through to the Late Augustan period. Demetz believes that this was the case for the Almgren 238b variant of the type as well.146 Balsamaria (pl. 4: 2–3) he shape of the ceramic balsamaria is similar to the balsamaria of the D 7.2 form in Dangstetten. It appears throughout Empire from the Early Augustan period onwards.147 hey are a common element of grave contents in Augustan graves in Lombardy.148 A similarly shaped balsamarium was found in pit 1 at Gornji trg 15 in Ljubljana. According to Vičič, the pit was illed in the Late Augustan period. At Gornji trg 30 occurs in phase IIIb,149 whereas the one from the Emona forum was found in the abovementioned waste pit on road A.150 his form of balsamar142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 Demetz 1999, 42–46, list 4, pl. 4: 2, 3. Knez 1992, pls. 48: 7, 8, 49: 5. Božič 2008, 123. Sedlmayer 2009, 28, 122–128, pl. 13: 292–302. Demetz 1999, 46. Roth-Rubi 2006, 93. Frontini 1985, 147, pl. 47; Božič 2008, 138–140. Vičič 1993, 157–158, pl. 1: 10; Vičič 1994, 34, pl. 11: 6. Plesničar Gec 2006, pl. 20: 9, 10; Mikl Curk 2006, 90, 94. maknjenem delu gomilnega plašča groba 1039 (sl. 4; preglednica 1). Skupek je ležal med prodniki nad mestom, kjer je plast SE 9325 prekrivala rob gomilnega plašča (SE 9349). Sestavljali so ga vodoravno ležeča keramična balzamarija (južni t. 4: 2; severni t. 4: 3), miniaturna keramična posodica (t. 4: 4) in zlomljena bronasta ibula (t. 4: 1), položena med balzamarija (sl. 13). V neposredni bližini teh predmetov je ležalo nekaj odlomkov sežganih kosti (SE 9345), odlomek lončenine (?) ter koščki neznanega materiala (rastlinska smola?). Enak material je bil pritaljen na eno od apnenčevih oblic. Sledovi vkopa (grobne jame) niso bili opaženi, niti ni bila ina zemljina, ki se je pojavljala med prodniki v neposredni bližini najdb, drugačna od zemljine v širši okolici (sestavine plasti SE 9325). 3.3.2 Katalog pridatkov Tabla 4. 1. Fibula; bron. D. 5,7 cm; v. 2,3 cm; t. 7,4 g. SE 9344. PN 6443. 2. Balzamarij; keramika. V. 10 cm; pr. ustja 2,5 cm; t. 30,3 g. SE 9344. PN 6440. 3. Balzamarij; keramika. V. 9,1 cm; pr. ustja: 2,4 cm; t. 27,8 g. SE 9344. PN 6441. 4. Miniaturna posodica; keramika. V. 4,5 cm; pr. ustja 3,7 cm; t. 42 g. SE 9344. PN 6442. 3.3.3 Komentar k pridatkom Fibula s krilci (t. 4: 1) Bronasta sponka s krilci pripada vrsti Almgren 238a, ki je značilna za vzhodnoalpsko območje med okolico Salzburga in dolino spodnjega toka Krke. Po Demetzu moramo z njihovim pojavom računati že vsaj okoli l. 30 pr. n. št.142 142 Demetz 1999, 42–46, seznam 4, t. 4: 2, 3. 153 ium is also known from the settlement below Miklavški hrib in Celje.151 Miniature pot (pl. 4: 4) he miniature pot was probably used for preparing medicinal substances. However, we did not ind an accurate comparison for this particular example. 4 Commentary Early Roman graves at Kongresni trg in Ljubljana, including the two presented burials, are currently the earliest known graves with Italic contents from the Emona region. he analysis of grave inventories indicates the start of burials in the Middle to Late Augustan period. he weapons from grave 1042 display the characteristics of the period between 20/15 BC and AD 5/15. he sword and shield boss were most probably made in the last decade BC or perhaps even slightly before that. he plate of the Consp. 18 type and the uncoated Aco beaker are probably from the same time frame. However, the double-knobbed ibula with a sieve-like punctured pin-holder, which probably came into fashion during the irst years of the 1st century AD, and both jug and two-handled pot with analogies in the Late Augustan and Tiberian contexts presumably belong amongst later grave contents. Narrowing the time frame to the irst years of AD, it can be assumed that the weapons were not older than 20–25 years when added to the grave. his corresponds with the estimated amount of time that Roman swords were used. Within this context, the beaker is the most surprising; presumably, it was added to the grave a few years after the main period of popularity of the type. Grave 1007 from the southern group152 and unpublished grave 1017 from the northern group, which contained an oil lamp with an angular nozzle (so called Tiegellampe) and a one-handled jug (lagynos), too belong to the earliest group of Roman burials from Kongresni trg (20/15 BC– AD 5/15). he other two excavated graves from the northern group, which are following grave 1042 in the stratigraphic sequence, belong (according to the grave contents) to the Late Augustan period. A common type of cremation burial typical for this particular period and region characterizes the oldest group of graves from Kongresni trg. he burial was placed in a shallow grave pit of an oval or round shape, which was popular at the northern Emona necropolis, at Late La Tène and Early Roman cemeteries in Novo mesto,153 as well as at other Early Roman necropolises of native populations in the south-eastern Alpine area. Grobove s takšnimi ibulami z Beletovega vrta (gr. 134, 136)143 je Božič pripisal fazi Mokronog IIIb oziroma njenemu najmlajšemu delu,144 na Štalenski gori pa se pojavljajo predvsem v poznoavgustejskih nasutjih, ki vsebujejo gradivo iz starejših depozitov.145 Na podlagi stratigrafskega položaja groba 1038 lahko sklepamo, da se je nošnja ibul obravnavane vrste nadaljevala še vsaj v poznoavgustejsko obdobje, podobno kot to domneva Demetz za njihovo izvedenko vrste Almgren 238b.146 Balzamarija (t. 4: 2–3) Oblika keramičnih balzamarijev je podobna balzamarijem oblike D 7.2 v Dangstettnu, pojavlja pa se po celotnem imperiju od zgodnjeavgustejskega obdobja naprej.147 V avgustejskih grobovih v Lombardiji so pogost pridatek.148 V Ljubljani na Gornjem trgu 15 je bil balzamarij podobne oblike najden v jami 1, katere zasutje Vičič datira v poznoavgustejsko obdobje. Na Gornjem trgu 30 se pojavlja v fazi IIIb,149 na emonskem forumu pa v omenjeni odpadni jami na cesti A.150 Balzamarije te oblike so našli tudi med gradivom izpod Miklavškega hriba v Celju.151 Miniaturna posodica (t. 4: 4) Miniaturni posodici, ki so jo uporabljali najverjetneje za pripravo zdravilnih učinkovin, nismo našli ustrezne primerjave. 4 Komentar Zgodnjerimski grobovi na Kongresnem trgu v Ljubljani, ki vključujejo tudi predstavljena pokopa z orožjem, so doslej najstarejši znani grobovi z italskimi pridatki iz okolice Emone. Analiza grobnih inventarjev nakazuje začetek pokopavanja v srednje- ali najpozneje v poznoavgustejskem obdobju. Orožje iz groba 1042 kaže značilnosti obdobja med 20/15 pr. n. št. in 5/15 n. št., pri čemer se zdi za meč in ščitno grbo še najverjetnejši nastanek v zadnjem desetletju pr. n. št. ali celo nekoliko pred tem. V približno enak časovni okvir sodi tudi težišče pojavljanja sigilatnih krožnikov tipa Consp. 18 in kozarcev tipa Aco brez premaza, med mlajše grobne pridatke pa sodijo ibula z dvema gumboma in sitasto predrto nogo, kakršne so se začele nositi domnevno v prvih letih 1. stoletja n. št., in oba vrča, ki imata primerjave iz poznoavgustejsko-tiberijskih celot. Če datacijo zožimo na prva leta n. št., starost orožja v času priložitve ni presegala 20–25 let, kar ni neobičajno oziroma se sklada 143 144 145 146 147 148 151 152 154 153 Vičič 1997, pl. 1: 8. Bekljanov Zidanšek 2012. Knez 1992, 85; Božič 2008, 111–112. 149 150 151 Knez 1992, t. 48: 7, 8, 49: 5. Božič 2008, 123. Sedlmayer 2009, 28, 122–128, t. 13: 292–302. Demetz 1999, 46. Roth-Rubi 2006, 93. Frontini 1985, 147, t. 47; Božič 2008, 138–140. Vičič 1993, 157–158, t. 1: 10; Vičič 1994, 34, t. 11: 6. Plesničar Gec 2006, t. 20: 9, 10; Mikl Curk 2006, 90, 94. Vičič 1997, t. 1: 8. Covering the grave pit with a lid or marking it in another way was not documented in any of the newly discovered graves. However, grave 1039 is an exception: here, the collected remains of the cremated bones of the deceased and the other grave contents were placed into a wooden chest that was then set down directly onto the loor surface and covered with pebble tumulus.154 At the northern Emona cemetery, grave pits with wooden cases are more common. According to Nowotny, this custom appears in deeper grave pits with objects that have been better preserved and are usually more valuable.155 Nowotny examined the area east of the Dunajska Street roadway between Trdinova and Pražakova Streets, from which 664 graves were excavated between 1904 and 1907. Amongst Roman incineration cemeteries from the area, Bobovek near Kranj ofers more information regarding the examined types of burials. he remains of the wooden cases and carbonated timber panelling at this cemetery are exceptionally well preserved. he panelling is attested only in grave pits of a rectangular or square shape.156 he tumulus at the same cemetery is marked with an additional layer of pebbles, which is typical for Early Roman cemeteries in the Dolenjska region,157 and vertical stakes placed right next to the grave pit.158 Graves from the southern group and grave 1017 from the northern group at Kongresni trg contained fragments of burnt ceramic and glass vessels that were placed into the grave pit together with the burnt remains of the deceased.159 Remains of funerary accoutrements (swine, poultry and ish bones) were lying on top of the vessels placed in grave 1017.160 he swine bones might have something to do with the funerary validation of the burial, as described by Cicero.161 He states that a grave becomes legal only after a pig has been sacriiced.162 he fact that relatives of the deceased strictly abided by the general rules of the Roman funerary ritual is relected by graves of the southern group.163 However, the rituals that accompanied burials in graves with weapons only involved cremation of the deceased, whereas the adding grave contents, such as the burnt vessels from the cremation place and funerary accoutrements, was absent. he weapons found at Kongresni trg do not show signs of being bent or otherwise damaged, unlike most of the 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 Plesničar-Gec 1972, 10. Petru 1972, 11–12. Petru, Valič 1958–1959, pls. 1, 7, 9, 10, 11, 13, 15, 21. Breščak 1985. Breščak 1985, pls. 10, 13; stakes next to the graves have been reported by the head of the excavations of the Late La Tène graveyard in Zagorica near Bič (Šinkovec 2011). Toynbee 1971, 50. Bekljanov 2012. De legibus II, 22, 57. Casari 2002, 96, with further references. Toynbee 1971, 40. z domnevami o trajanju uporabe rimskih mečev. V tem kontekstu bolj preseneča kozarec, ki je bil v grob verjetno pridan z nekajletnim zamikom od glavnega obdobja njihove priljubljenosti. Najzgodnejšemu horizontu rimskih pokopov (20/15 pr. n. št.–5/15 n. št.) s Kongresnega trga pripadata tudi grob 1007 iz južne skupine152 in neobjavljeni grob 1017 iz severne skupine, ki je vseboval oljenko z oglatim noskom (t. i. Tiegellampe) ter enoročajni vrč (lagynos). Druga dva obravnavana grobova iz severne skupine, ki v stratigrafskem nizu sledita grobu 1042, sta glede na pridatke poznoavgustejska. Najstarejšo skupino grobov s Kongresnega trga označuje za ta čas in prostor običajen tip žganega pokopa v plitvo grobno jamo ovalne ali okrogle oblike, kakršen prevladuje tudi na severni emonski nekropoli, na poznolatenskih in zgodnjerimskih grobiščih v Novem mestu153 ter na drugih zgodnjerimskih nekropolah staroselskega prebivalstva na jugovzhodnoalpskem območju. Prekrivanje grobne jame s pokrovom ali drugačen način označevanja pri večini novoodkritih grobov nista bila ugotovljena. Izjema je grob 1039, pri katerem so bili izbrani ostanki sežganih kosti pokojnika in pridatki očitno položeni v lesen zaboj, ki so ga postavili neposredno na tedanjo hodno površino, čezenj pa nasuli gomilo prodnikov.154 Na severnem emonskem grobišču je pogostejši tip vkopane grobne jame z leseno skrinjo. Po Nowotnyju, ki je raziskoval območje vzhodno od cestišča med Trdinovo in Pražakovo, na katerem je bilo v letih 1904–1907 skupno odkritih 664 grobov, je tak običaj opaziti pri globlje vkopanih grobovih, v katerih so predmeti bolje ohranjeni in navadno večje vrednosti.155 Med rimskimi žganimi grobišči iz okolice, ki odkrivajo v zvezi z obravnavanimi oblikami grobov več podatkov, izstopa Bobovek pri Kranju s posebej dobro ohranjenimi ostanki lesenih skrinj in zoglenelih opažev iz brun, ki so izpričani samo pri pravokotnih oziroma kvadratnih grobnih jamah.156 Na istem grobišču je izpričano tudi dodatno označevanje gomile z oblogo iz prodnikov, ki je običajna tudi na zgodnjerimskih grobiščih na Dolenjskem,157 in s tik ob jami zabitimi navpičnimi koli.158 Grobovi iz južne skupine in grob 1017 iz severne skupine na Kongresnem trgu so poleg pridatkov vsebovali še odlomke prežganih keramičnih in steklenih posod, ki so jih 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 Bekljanov Zidanšek 2012. Knez 1992, 85; Božič 2008, 111–112. Plesničar-Gec 1972, 10. Petru 1972, 11–12. Petru, Valič 1958–1959, t. 1, 7, 9, 10, 11, 13, 15, 21. Breščak 1985. Breščak 1985, t. 10, 13; stojke ob grobovih omenja tudi vodja izkopavanj poznolatenskega grobišča v Zagorici pri Biču (Šinkovec 2011). 155 swords and spearheads from cremation graves in the south-eastern pre-Alpine area of approximately the same period. Generally, only the irst ofensive weapon of the warrior, i.e. the sword or the spear, was deformed in the cremation graves from the beginning of the Late La Tène period in the area. In rare examples, the shield boss or helmet are also intentionally damaged. his is the case with weapons from Early Roman graves in Verdun,164 Strmec above Bela Cerkev,165 Reka near Cerkno,166 Rassach in the Austrian Styria region,167 Salzburg-Liefering168 as well as Sv. Trojica near Starigrad.169 Graves with undamaged weapons also appear in cemeteries in Verdun (gr. 37, 41, 131, 136),170 and Idrija pri Bači (gr. 11/12, 17),171 while this practice is characteristic for skeletal graves in the Dolenjska region (Mihovo, Strmec above Bela Cerkev).172 he weapons from both military graves indicate that two members of the auxiliary units of the Roman army were buried here. heir origin was presumably Celtic or celticized natives of the wider region. Based solely on the profered presumed dates, place of burial and uniformity of armaments, it cannot be determined whether the two soldiers were members of the regular professional auxiliary that was introduced with the Augustan military reform or whether they were members of one of the local tactical units of tribal organization derived from the obligations of the subdued peoples of the south-eastern Alpine area.173 he individual integration of volunteers from tribes of the south-eastern Alpine area into the Roman army could have already begun during the time of Caesar’s Proconsulate in both Gallias and Illyricum (59–49 BC). Suetonius reports that Caesar overlooked legal provisions and accepted people without citizenship into his legions in Gallia Transalpina.174 his might have also occurred in the far eastern parts of Gallia Cisalpina or Italy, which most probably occupied a large portion of today’s western Slovenia after 42/41 BC. he area of the Ljubljana gate with the beginning of the waterway towards Danubian area, was also under Roman supervision. Controlling the strategically crucial passage to Italy from the northeast became particularly salient when Caesar made plans to march towards the Dacians. his was after Burebista won the battle against the Boii and Taurisci.175 his posed a serious threat to Noricum and the Roman state.176 In 49 BC, the Norican king sent approximately 300 cavalry to 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 156 176 Breščak 1989. Dular 1991, pls. 54: 1, 4, 57: 8, 75: 18–23, 77: 3, 59: 10. Guštin 1991, pl. 30: 1. Fuchs, Hinker 2004. Hell 1956. Radman-Livaja 2010a; Tonc, Radman-Livaja, Dizdar 2013. Breščak 1989; Križ et al. 2009. Guštin 1991, pl. 12: 3, 17. Božič 1999, 194–195. See: Waurick 1994, 23–25; Keppie 1998, 130–131; Nicolay 2007, 200. Keppie 2000, 50–51; Pernet 2010, 176. Strabo, Geogr. VII 3.11. Šašel Kos 1998, 111. v grobno jamo posuli skupaj s sežganimi ostanki pokojnika.159 Na posodah, pridanih v grob 1007, so ležali ostanki pogrebne popotnice: kosti svinje, perutnine in rib.160 Kosti svinje so morda povezane z obredno potrditvijo pokopa, o kateri govori Cicero161 in navaja, da postane grob legalen šele po žrtvovanju prašiča.162 Pri grobovih južne skupine in grobu 1017 so svojci dosledno upoštevali v tistem času splošno sprejet rimski pogrebni ritual,163 obredje v primeru grobov z orožjem (1039 in 1042) pa je, kot kaže, predvidevalo le sežig pokojnikov brez pridajanja ostankov sežganih posod z ustrine in pogrebne popotnice. Orožje iz grobov na Kongresnem trgu ne kaže zvijanja ali drugačnega uničevanja, značilnega za velik del mečev in sulic iz okvirno sočasnih žganih grobov jugovzhodno(pred) alpskega območja z okolico. Od začetka poznega latena naprej je v žganih grobovih tega prostora praviloma deformirano samo glavno oziroma prvo napadalno orožje bojevnika, torej meč ali sulica; redkeje kažejo namerne poškodbe tudi ščitne grbe in čelade. Zelo podobno velja tudi za orožje iz zgodnjerimskih grobov iz Verduna,164 Strmca nad Belo Cerkvijo,165 Reke pri Cerknem,166 Rassacha na avstrijskem Štajerskem,167 Salzburg-Lieferinga168 in Sv. Trojice pri Starigradu.169 Na grobiščih v Verdunu (gr. 37, 41, 131, 136),170 in na Idriji pri Bači (gr. 11/12, 17)171 se pojavljajo tudi grobovi z izključno nepoškodovanim orožjem, ki je sicer značilnost skeletnih grobov na Dolenjskem (Mihovo in Strmec nad Belo Cerkvijo).172 Orožje iz obeh vojaških grobov nakazuje, da sta v njih pokopana pripadnika pomožnih enot rimske vojske, po izvoru najverjetneje Kelta oziroma keltizirana staroselca s širšega območja. Predlagana datacija, mesto pokopa in uniformnost oborožitve ne dopuščajo dokončnih sklepov, ali gre ali za vojaka regularne poklicne auxilie, ki je bila vpeljana z Avgustovo vojaško reformo, ali pa za pripadnika ene od lokalnih taktičnih enot plemenske ureditve, izhajajočih iz obveznosti podvrženih ljudstev jugovzhodnoalpskega območja.173 Ni izključeno, da je do posamičnega vključevanja prostovoljcev iz plemen jugovzhodnoalpskega območja v rimsko vojsko prišlo že v času Cezarjevega prokonzulata v obeh Galijah in Iliriku (59–49 pr. n. št.). Suetonij 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 Toynbee 1971, 50. Bekljanov 2012. De legibus II, 22, 57. Casari 2002, 96, z nadaljnjimi referencami. Toynbee 1971, 40. Breščak 1989. Dular 1991, t. 54: 1, 4, 57: 8, 75: 18–23, 77: 3, 59: 10. Guštin 1991, t. 30: 1. Fuchs, Hinker 2004. Hell 1956. Radman-Livaja 2010a; Tonc, Radman-Livaja, Dizdar 2013. Breščak 1989; Križ et al. 2009. Guštin 1991, t. 12: 3, 17. Božič 1999, 194–195. Glej Waurick 1994, 23–25; Keppie 1998, 130–131; Nicolay 2007, 200. Caesar to help him in the civil war against the Pompeiians. hey reached the Caesar during the siege of Corinium.177 his gesture, amongst others, relects the traditional alliance between the two political units and the personal relationship between the Caesar and the Norican king during the time of the Proconsulate in the region.178 Prior to annexation, the inluence of Noricum perhaps spread across a considerable part of the territory south of the Karavanke and to the area of Celeia and Poetovio that was before under the hostile tribal alliance of the Taurisci. his can be additionally supported with statements of Pliny the Elder (quondam Taurisci appellati, nunc Norici),179 indings of numismatic analysis,180 select epigraphic monuments (Caius Iulius Vepo donatus civitate romana viritim et inmunitate ab divo Augusto; CIL III 5232)181 and the near complete absence of clear traces of Roman military interventions in the Gorenjska region, Slovenian Carinthia and Styria. he situation in the Idrija-Cerkno area and Notranjska region demonstrates the complete opposite. Numerous siege sites and other locations with Roman military equipment are known from archaeological sites in the area from Šentviška planota to the Notranjska region. hese demonstrate the intensity of military action in the direct north-eastern hinterland of Aquileia in the Octavianic or Early Augustan period.182 he corridor leading from the Ljubljana basin towards Segesta was probably conquered either during the period of Octavian wars in Illyricum, or, at the latest, during the wars of Tiberius and Agrippa against the Pannonians in the years 14–9 BC.183 It has been assumed that the Taurisci did not attack the northern wing of Octavian’s army during the march against the Iapodes, despite the fact that the Taurisci are listed amongst the defeated peoples, along with the Carni.184 his assumption is supported by the probability that the Celts from the Ljubljana basin or from the Krka valley185 were also among the allies that provided the vessels to help the Roman army during the siege of Segesta.186 he changes in the tactics and armament of local tribes began during the period between the mid-1st century BC and the Octavianic/Early Augustan era. hese changes include the reduction of shield boss sizes,187 the use of swords with narrow blades and distinctly long points of type IV (according to Łuczkiewicz) or the I/1 type (according to Biborski) or Bell-Zemplín (according to Kaczanowski).188 hese 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 Caesar, Bell. civ. I 18.5. Dobesch 1993, 347–351, 401–402. N. h. III 133. Kos 1984, 190–191. Šašel Kos 2005, 486. Istenič 2005; Istenič, in this book; Laharnar, in this book. Horvat 1999, 219. Šašel Kos 1998, 111; Šašel Kos 2005, 412–416. See: Šašel Kos 2005, 441; Dzino 2010, 110. Dio XIL 35–38. See: Bochnak 2006, 180–186; Božič 2008, 122. Biborski 1999, 88–90, ig. 8. namreč poroča, da je Cezar presegel zakonska določila in v Galiji Transalpini v legije sprejemal tudi osebe brez državljanstva.174 Morda se je to dogajalo tudi na skrajnem vzhodnem območju Galije Cisalpine oziroma Italije, ki je po 42/41 pr. n. št. zelo verjetno obsegala velik del sedanje zahodne Slovenije, pod rimskim nadzorom pa je bilo tudi območje Ljubljanskih vrat z začetkom plovne poti proti Podonavju. Obvladovanje strateško ključnega prehoda v Italijo s severovzhoda je postalo posebej pomembno v luči Cezarjevnih načrtov za pohod proti Dačanom po zmagi Burebiste nad Boji in Tavriski,175 ki je resno ogrozila Noriško kraljestvo in rimsko državo.176 Okoli 300 konjenikov, ki jih je leta 49 pr. n. št. Cezarju poslal tedanji noriški kralj kot pomoč v državljanski vojni proti pompejancem in so Cezarja dosegli med obleganjem Korinija,177 je le eden od izrazov tradicionalnega zavezništva med omenjenima političnima enotama, pa tudi osebnih zvez Cezarja z noriškim kraljem v času prokonzulata v regiji.178 Vpliv noriškega kraljestva se je v desetletjih pred aneksijo morda razširil tudi na znatni del ozemlja južno od Karavank in na območje Celeje in poznejše Petovijone, ki ga je pred tem obladovala Rimu sovražna plemenska zveza Tavriskov. O tem bi lahko poleg navedb Plinija Starejšega (quondam Taurisci appellati, nunc Norici),179 spoznanj na podlagi numizmatične analize180 in nekaterih epigrafskih spomenikov (Caius Iulius Vepo donatus civitate romana viritim et inmunitate ab divo Augusto; CIL III 5232)181 pričala tudi skoraj popolna odsotnost nedvoumnih sledov rimskih vojaških posegov na Gorenjskem ter slovenskem Koroškem in Štajerskem, ki je v izrazitem nasprotju z razmerami na Idrijsko-Cerkljanskem in Notranjskem. Z najdišč med Šentviško planoto, notranjskimi podolji in dolino Pivke je znana vrsta prizorišč obleganj in drugih najdišč z rimsko vojaško opremo, ki dokazujejo intenzivnost vojaškega dogajanja v neposrednem severovzhodnem zaledju Akvileje še v oktavijanskozgodnjeavgustejskem obdobju.182 Koridor od Ljubljanske kotline proti Segesti je bil vojaško osvojen verjetno že v času Oktavijanovih ilirskih vojn, najpozneje pa med vojnami Tiberija in Agripe proti Panoncem v letih 14–9 pr. n. št.183 Domnevo, da med pohodom proti Japodom severni bok Oktavijanove vojske ni bil izpostavljen obsežnejšim napadom Tavriskov, ki so vendarle omenjeni med pokorjenimi ljudstvi skupaj s Karni,184 podpira tudi verjetnost, da se za omembo zave174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 Keppie 2000, 50–51; Pernet 2010, 176. Strabo, Geogr. VII 3.11. Šašel Kos 1998, 111. Caesar, Bell. civ. I 18.5. Dobesch 1993, 347–351, 401–402. N. h. III 133. Kos 1984, 190–191. Šašel Kos 2005, 486. Istenič 2005; Istenič, v tem zborniku; Laharnar, v tem zborniku. Horvat 1999, 219. Šašel Kos 1998, 111; Šašel Kos 2005, 412–416. 157 swords generally had scabbards with high-quality openwork ornamentation in brass. Based on individual stamped examples, these swords were the product of northern Italic armourers.189 Presumably, the Romans kept the distribution of these swords under strict surveillance. his also supports the assumption that allies of the Roman army (probably members of early auxiliary units or their heirs) were buried in the graves containing such weaponry in the area south of the Karavanke (e.g. gr. 37 and 131 from Verdun, gr. 1 at the Košak B grave plot at Strmec above Bela Cerkev and gr. 1657/8 from Mihovo).190 his is even more probable for one of few military graves (that of a 31–40-year-old man) from the central Norican area, excavated in 2003 in Rassach near Deutschlandsberg (western Styria). It contained ceramic pottery, a sword of the Late La Tène scheme, which had been bent once and that had a long point, a lenticular cross-section of the blade with three shallow ribs (L 89 cm; W of the blade 4.5 cm),191 a scabbard with rounded end and two pointed protuberances192 and an extended attachment plate of the hanging loop. he grave also contained a 49.5 cm long spearhead with a narrow blade and a low centre rib, the remains of a round shield boss with a 20 cm diameter and a double-knobbed ibula of the Almgren 236c type. he latter indicates the burial under the tumulus is from the Middle or Late Augustan period. he combination of a single bent sword of Late La Tène scheme with the remains of the bronze scabbard (pr. L 75.5 cm; W 4.5 cm) and smaller shieldboss with conical dome, vertical rim and narrow lange with four rivets (Dm. 15 cm; H 8.2 cm) is also documented in the case of double cremation burial of a man and a woman from the tumulus 2 at Katzelsdorf,193 which is dated to the Tiberian-Claudian period according to accompanying terra sigillata. Referring to the sword and the shieldboss as well to the drinking horn ittings, Urban ascribed the graveyard to the Germanic people and connected it with the settling in the period of the Vannius, king of the Quadi (regnum Vannianum).194 Newer interpretations explain the barrows as graves of the elite of the Celtic Boii, while the buried warrior may have been serving in auxiliary units of the Roman army.195 Available sources of information suggest the measures of the Augustan military reforms were presumably intro- znikov, ki so s plovili priskočili na pomoč rimski vojski pri obleganju Segeste,185 skrivajo Kelti iz Ljubljanske kotline ali doline Krke.186 Z obdobjem med sredino 1. stoletja pr. n. št. in oktavijansko/zgodnjeavgustejskim obdobjem sovpadajo spremembe v taktiki oziroma oborožitvi lokalnih plemen, ki se poleg zmanjšanih dimenzij okroglih ščitnih grb187 kažejo v uporabi mečev z ozkimi rezili z izrazito dolgimi konicami tipa IV po P. Łuczkiewiczu, I/1 po M. Biborskem oziroma Bell-Zemplín po P. Kaczanowskem,188 ki jih praviloma spremljajo nožnice s kvalitetnim predrtim okrasom v medenini in so sodeč po posameznih žigosanih primerkih izdelek severnoitalskih orožarjev.189 Verjetnost, da so Rimljani distribucijo teh mečev skrbno nadzorovali, govori v prid domnevi, da so v grobovih s tem orožjem na območju južno od Karavank (npr. gr. 37 in 131 iz Verduna, gr. 1 na parceli Košak B na Strmcu nad Belo Cerkvijo, gr. 1657/8 iz Mihovega) pokopani Rimu zavezniški vojaki, zelo verjetno pripadniki zgodnjih oblik pomožnih enot oziroma njihovi dediči.190 Tak status je toliko verjetnejši za enega redkih vojaških grobov z osrednjenoriškega območja, odkritega leta 2003 v Rassachu pri Deutschlandsbergu (zahodna Štajerska), ki pripada 31–40 let staremu moškemu in je poleg keramičnih posod vseboval enkrat prepognjen meč poznolatenske sheme z dolgo konico in lečastim presekom rezila s tremi plitvimi rebri (d. 89 cm; š. rezila 4,5 cm)191 v nožnici z zaobljenim zaključkom s koničastima izrastkoma 192 in podaljšano ploščico zanke za obešanje, 49,5 cm dolgo sulično ost z ozkim listom in nizkim sredinskim rebrom, ostanke okrogle ščitne grbe premera okoli 20 cm in ibulo z dvema gumboma tipa Almgren 236c. Slednja postavlja pokop pod gomilo najzgodneje v srednje- do poznoavgustejsko obdobje. Kombinacija enkrat prepognjenega meča poznolatenske sheme z ostanki bronaste nožnice (ohr. d. 75,5 cm; š. 4,5 cm) in manjše okrogle ščitne grbe s konično kaloto, navpičnim robom in ozkim okrajkom s štirimi zakovicami (pr. 15 cm; v. 8,2 cm) je dokumentirana tudi v primeru dvojnega žganega pokopa moškega in ženske iz gomile 2 v Katzelsdorfu,193 ki ga pridano sigilatno posodje datira v tiberijsko-klavdijski čas. O. H. Urban je na podlagi meča in ščitne grbe ter okovov pivskih rogov grobišče pripi185 189 190 191 192 193 194 158 195 Istenič 2010; see: Budinský-Krička, Lamiová-Schmiedlová 1990, 280 with further references for the stamps with italic names. Istenič 2010, 145. See also: sword with a 4 cm wide blade with a similar crosssection from Salzburg-Liefering (Hell 1958, ig. 1). See similar chapes of the scabbards from gr. 1 from the Košak B lot at Strmec (Istenič 2010, ig. 7: b) and grave 108 from Zemplín (Budinský-Krička, Lamiová-Schmiedlová 1990, pl. 15: 30; Pieta 2010, ig. 126: 4c–4d). Urban 1984, 85, igs. 13, 14: 28. Urban 1984, 95–98. Egri 2012, 510–511. 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 Dio XIL 35–38. Glej Šašel Kos 2005, 441; Dzino 2010, 110. Glej Bochnak 2006, 180–186; Božič 2008, 122. Biborski 1999, 88–90, sl. 8. Istenič 2010; glej Budinský-Krička, Lamiová-Schmiedlová 1990, 280 z nadaljnjimi referencami za žige z italskimi imeni. Istenič 2010, 145. Glej še meč s 4 cm širokim rezilom podobnega preseka iz Salzburg-Lieferinga (Hell 1958, sl. 1). Glej podobna koničnika nožnice iz gr. 1 na parceli Košak B na Strmcu (Istenič 2010, sl. 7: b) in gr. 108 iz Zemplína (Budinský-Krička, Lamiová-Schmiedlová 1990, t. 15: 30; Pieta 2010, sl. 126: 4c–4d). Urban 1984, 85, sl. 13, 14: 28. duced soon after the battle near Actium in 31 BC. hese measures included the reduction of the number and reorganization of legions and the establishment of auxiliary units. he regular auxiliary units (alae and cohortes) that were made up of soldiers with the legal status of the peregrini were recruited, trained and managed by the Roman army.196 he duration of military service and payment under Augustus are not well documented. he period service for auxiliary soldiers may have been the same as for the legionaries (16 years with an extra four years in the reserve, based on the decree from the year 13 BC, or 20 years with an extra ive years after year AD 5). However, this was not necessarily standardized. In the early stage, until the end of Augustus’s reign, the units were still ethnically homogenous and active primarily in the wider area of the recruitment zone (e.g. Norican cohors I Montanorum). During the Julio-Claudian dynasty, the draft of peregrini was carried out randomly from a ixed portion of able-bodied men from each tribe. According to Holder, most of the recruits (tirones) were between 18 and 23 years old.197 Being permanently included in the Roman army was only possible after the armament of individual units was uniied, which enabled their efective and tactical use.198 Including local auxiliary units also meant that the Roman army would partly equip newly recruited soldiers with gladii of the Mainz type, helmets of the Weisenau type, shields with round bosses and metal grip and perhaps spearheads and lances with blades of a lenticular cross-section. here is a limited number of Late Republican and Early Augustan gladius shapes from graves of the discussed area (e.g. Mihovo, gr. 1657/16). Most graves with standardized Roman weapons from the area between Posočje and Gorjanci contain Mid-/ Late Augustan or early elements (brooches, bronze ladles, ine table-ware). he Roman equipment in these graves is often accompanied by weaponry of the La Tène scheme of Celtic (non-Italic) origin, especially helmets of the Novo mesto and Port type, round shield bosses of the Novo mesto 169 group and smaller versions of these from the Mokronog IIIb phase,199 slashing knives, long spearheads with a middle rib and samples of a lenticular cross-section with a faceted socket and individual swords (e.g. gr. 1846/5 from Mihovo200 and gr. 3 from Reka near Cerkno201). he status of soldiers or warriors from cemeteries of the Julio-Claudian period is not entirely clear. heoretically, the recruitment of regular auxiliary units in this area could have begun shortly after the Illyrian wars of Octavian202 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 Keppie 1996, 379–384; Keppie 1998, 154–156; Speidel 2000, 66–67; Gilliver 2011, 186. Holder 1980, 123–138. Waurick 1994; Schumacher 1999, 93; Nicolay 2007, 200. Gaspari et al. 2014. Windl 1975. Guštin 1991, pl. 30: 1. Istenič 2005, 84. sal Germanom in jih povezal z naseljevanjem v obdobju kvadskega kralja Vanija (regnum Vannianum).194 V skladu z novejšimi interpretacijami naj bi gomile pripadale eliti keltskih Bojev (Boii), pokopani bojevnik pa naj bi služil v pomožnih enotah rimske vojske.195 V skladu z interpretacijo razpoložljivih virov naj bi bile od Avgustove vojaške reforme, katere prvi ukrepi (zmanjšanje števila in reorganizacija legij ter vzpostavitev pomožnih enot) naj bi bili sprejeti že kmalu po bitki pri Akciju 31 pr. n. št., regularne pomožne enote (alae in cohortes), ki so jih sestavljali vojaki s pravnim statusom peregrinov, rekrutirane, urjene in vodene v okviru rimske vojske.196 Trajanje obveznosti in plačilo pod Avgustom nista dobro dokumentirana; njihovo obdobje služenja je morda ustrezalo legijskemu (16 let z dodatnimi 4 leti v rezervi od odloka iz leta 13 pr. n. št. oziroma 20 let z dodatnimi 5 leti po letu 5 n. št.), ni pa bilo nujno standardizirano. V zgodnji fazi, do konca Avgustove vladavine, je šlo še vedno za pretežno etnično homogene enote, katerih območje delovanja je pogosto obsegalo predvsem širšo okolico rekrutacijskega območja (npr. noriška cohors I Montanorum). Poleg prostovoljcev naj bi v času julijsko-klavdijske dinastije nabor peregrinov potekal v obliki žreba iksnega deleža telesno zmožnih moških iz vsakega plemena. Po Holderju je večina rekrutov (tirones) izvirala iz starostne skupine 18–23 let.197 Trdna vključitev v rimsko vojsko je bila mogoča le ob poenotenju oborožitve posamičnih enot, ki je omogočalo njihovo učinkovito taktično uporabo.198 Vključevanje lokalnih avksiliarnih enot je rimska država zagotavljala tudi z delnim opremljanjem rekrutiranih vojakov, ki je obsegalo predvsem izdajo gladijev tipa Mainz, čelad tipa Weisenau, okroglih ščitnih grb s kovinsko prečko, morda pa tudi suličnih osti in kopij z listi lečastega preseka. Poznorepublikanske in zgodnjeavgustejske oblike gladijev iz grobov obravnavanega območja so omejene na maloštevilne primerke (Mihovo, gr. 1657/16), večina grobov s standardiziranim rimskim orožjem z ozemlja med Posočjem in Gorjanci pa vsebuje srednje-/poznoavgustejske ali mlajše elemente (ibule, bronaste zajemalke, ino namizno posodje). V teh grobovih se rimska oprema pogosto pojavlja še v kombinaciji z orožjem latenske sheme keltskega (neitalskega) izvora, zlasti čeladami tipov Novo mesto in Port, okroglimi ščitnimi grbami skupine Novo mesto 169 in njenimi manjšimi izvedenkami iz stopnje Mokronog IIIb,199 udarnimi noži, dolgimi suličnimi ostmi s sredinskim rebrom in primerki lečastega preseka s fasetiranim tu194 195 196 197 198 199 Urban 1984, 95–98. Egri 2012, 510–511. Keppie 1996, 379–384; Keppie 1998, 154–156; Speidel 2000, 66–67; Gilliver 2011, 186. Holder 1980, 123–138. Waurick 1994; Schumacher 1999, 93; Nicolay 2007, 200. Gaspari et al. 2014. 159 during the manning of legions after the demobilization of veterans from the battle at Actium between 27 and 20 BC203 and deinitely before the Pannonian wars (14–9 BC). Similar to the more eastern areas of Illyricum, this was one of the measures taken to stabilize the region.204 It was carried out through ensuring that a certain number of men were part of an individual military campaign. he Romans required that the Desidiates assured contingents for the march against Maroboduus, king of Marcomanni. his demand, along with the oicers’ behaviour and the method of recovering their tribute, was the main cause of the Bellum Batonianum. Men who used to serve the Roman army as oicers, such as Marboduus and Arminius,205 led the rebellion. his means that recruitment into auxiliary units began soon after the Pannonian wars at the latest. Most burials of auxiliary unit soldiers in the south-eastern (pre)-Alpine area originate from native necropolises located in rural environments (Mihovo, Verdun, Strmec above Bela Cerkev, Bobovek, Reka near Cerkno, Idrija pri Bači). hey either belong to the deceased veterans206 or soldiers who died during active service and were carried back to their homes.207 he fact that the suggested dating of the military graves from Kongresni trg date to the same time frame as the camp at Prule-Tribuna / Ljubljana may lead to the assumption that the graves with weaponry belong to the members of the regular auxiliary unit, stationed close by, who may have died during the construction of the city; or even early settlers who were either soldiers with completed service or veterans from the region. Based on graves containing weaponry from the proximity of Urmitz and Mainz-Weisenau forts, as well as some other military graves from the border area in the central Rhine area (where camps from the same time have yet to be proven – Andernach, Koblenz-Neuendorf, Bongen, Speyer, Straßburg),208 Waurick forms his thesis that deceased active soldiers were either buried near the area where they served the army or near the camp of the unit to which they had belonged. However, due to the unstandardized grave contents and non-Roman weaponry in Early Roman military graves from Wederath (which Hafner and Schumacher recognized as graves of regular auxiliary unit members) 209 Waurick interpreted these as burials of soldiers of the local militia who had returned home after fulilling their duties. Waurick supports his assumption with an example of a warrior with Roman weapons from grave 2215, lom ter posameznimi meči (npr. gr. 1846/5 iz Mihovega200 in gr. 3 iz Reke pri Cerknem201). Status vojakov oziroma bojevnikov iz grobišč julijsko-klavdijskega obdobja v Sloveniji ni jasen. Teoretično bi se lahko rekrutacija rednih pomožnih enot na tem območju začela že kmalu po Oktavijanovih ilirskih vojnah,202 v obdobju, ki sovpada s prvim izpopolnjevanjem legij po demobilizaciji veteranov bitke pri Akciju v letih 27–20 pr. n. št.,203 skoraj zagotovo pa pred panonskimi vojnami (14–9 pr. n. št.). Podobno kot v vzhodneje ležečih delih Ilirika je bil to eden od ukrepov za stabilizacijo regije,204 ki pa se je očitno izvajal v obliki vsakokratne zagotovitve določenega števila mož za posamezne vojaške kampanje. Rimske zahteve za kontingente, ki bi jih morali za pohod proti markomanskemu kralju Marbodu (Maroboduus) zagotoviti Dezidijati, so bile poleg obnašanja rimskih oblastnikov in načina izterjave tributa tudi glavni povod za Batonovo vstajo. Upor so vodili možje, ki so, tako kot Marbod in Arminij, prej služili v rimski vojski kot nižji častniki,205 kar pomeni, da se je ta ali druga oblika novačenja v pomožne enote tam začela uveljavljati najpozneje kmalu po Tiberijevih panonskih vojnah. Večina pokopov pomožnih vojakov jugovzhodno(pred) alpskega območja izvira iz staroselskih nekropol, lociranih v ruralnem okolju (Mihovo, Verdun, Strmec nad Belo Cerkvijo, Bobovek, Reka pri Cerknem, Idrija pri Bači) in pripadajo preminulim veteranom206 ali vojakom, umrlim med službovanjem in prenesenim v domači kraj.207 Sovpadanje predlagane starosti vojaških grobov s Kongresnega trga in datacije tabora na lokaciji Prule-Tribuna bi lahko napeljevalo na sklepanje, da sta v grobovih z orožjem pokopana ali pripadnika v bližini stacionirane enote regularne auxilie, ki sta morda umrla med gradnjo mesta, ali celo zgodnja naseljenca – doslužena vojaka oziroma veterana, po rodu iz okolice oziroma regije. Tezo o pokopavanju umrlih aktivnih vojakov v bližini kraja služenja oziroma tabora enote je Waurick oprl na grobove z orožjem iz bližine utrdb Urmitz in Mainz-Weisenau ter na nekaterih drugih vojaških grobovih z obmejnega območja v srednjem Porenju, pri katerih sočasni tabori niso dokazani (Andernach, Koblenz-Neuendorf, Bongen, Speyer, Straßburg).208 Nasprotno je zgodnjerimske vojaške grobove iz Wederatha, v katerih sta Hafner in Schuma200 201 203 204 205 206 207 208 160 209 Gilliver 2011, 185. Dio LIV 22.5; Dzino 2010, 172–173. Vell. Pat., II 110. 2, 5; Dio LIV 29,1. Waurick 1994, 23–25. Nicolay 2007, 200. Waurick 1994, 4–12. Schumacher 1989. 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 Windl 1975. Guštin 1991, t. 30: 1. Istenič 2005, 84. Gilliver 2011, 185. Dio LIV 22,5; Dzino 2010, 172–173. Vell. Pat., II 110. 2, 5; Dio LIV 29,1. Waurick 1994, 23–25. Nicolay 2007, 200. Waurick 1994, 4–12. who died at the age of 20–40 years. Based on the relatively short life span of the deceased soldier, Waurick presumes that he was not a professional soldier; had he been one, Waurick believes he would have been buried in proximity to the area of his service and not at his home necropolis, more than 100 km away.210 he implied possibility that the Early Roman cemetery at Kongresni trg is linked to the construction of Emona is similar to the situation at Sirmium. Here, the eastern necropolis included 79 graves dating to the time between the Late Augustan period and the beginning of the 2nd century AD. Grave goods, partly associated with graves in the shape of a well (7–8.5 m deep) included pottery, crafted in the Celtic tradition, terra sigillata, thin-walled cups, coins of Augustus, Tiberius, Caligula, Claudius, Domitian and Nerva, as well as altogether nine spearheads and three swords from approximately the same time frame.211According to Milošević, the rich grave contents indicate that either auxiliary unit veterans of Celtic origin or Early Romanized natives were buried at this necropolis.212 According to Egri, the functional composition of the ceramics ensembles containing vessels of both local and Italic origin speaks in favour of the thesis about the graves of the local Celtic population,213 but following the argumentation of Golubović the documented form of the grave pits, unknown in the regional Second Iron Age could indicate the presence of the Gaulish auxiliary units, that are epigraphically attested in the Upper Moesia from the last quarter of the 1st century AD onwards.214 Brukner, an author of ceramic inds analysis, links the oldest graves from this necropolis to not-yet-located military camp and main regional base during the Roman conquest of the western Balkans and Pannonia, which was presumably located a few meters above the Sava plain.215 Dizdar and Radman-Livaja believe the Early Roman graves with weapons from Vinkovci and Ilok belonged to soldiers from the Scordisci tribe. he Scordisci were a part of the Roman auxiliary units or allied forces and participated in battles connected to the Tiberian conquest of Pannonia and the Pannonian-Dalmatian rebellion. However, Dizdar and Radman-Livaja believe that it is also possible that the graves contained deceased members of auxiliary units of Celtic origin from other parts of the empire.216 he question as to whether it was veterans or active soldiers remains unresolved because Roman bases in eastern Slavonija were usually located in areas of Late La Tène settlements.217 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 Waurick 1994, 23–25. Brukner, Dautova-Ruševljan, Milošević 1987, 14–17, 32–34, 50. Milošević 1985, 178–181. Egri 2012, 94–97. Golubović 2008, 108–109. Brukner, Dauitova-Ruševljan, Milošević 1987, 32–34, 50, map. Dizdar, Radman-Livaja 2004, 44; Radman-Livaja 2010b. Dizdar, Radman-Livaja 2004, 46. cher prepoznala pripadnike regularne auxilie,209 zaradi v njih pridane nestandardizirane opreme oziroma nerimskega orožja interpretiral kot pokope pripadnikov lokalne milice, ki so se vrnili domov po izpolnjenih obveznostih. Waurick je svoje domneve podprl s primerom bojevnika z rimskim orožjem iz groba 2215, ki je umrl v starosti 20–40 let. Glede na razmeroma nizko starost pokojnika Waurick sklepa, da ne gre za poklicnega vojaka, saj bi bil ta v primeru smrti pokopan v bližini mesta služenja, ne pa na več kot 100 km oddaljeni domači nekropoli.210 Nakazana možnost povezave med zgodnjerimskim grobiščem na Kongresnem trgu in gradnjo Emone spominja na okoliščine v Sirmiju (Sirmium) z vzhodno nekropolo, s katere je izpričanih 79 žganih grobov iz časa med poznoavgustejskim obdobjem in začetkom 2. stoletja. Od pridatkov, ki naj bi vsaj deloma izvirali iz 7–8,5 m globoko vkopanih grobnih jam v obliki vodnjaka, se je ohranilo v keltski tradiciji izdelano posodje, italska sigilata in skodelice tankih sten, novci Avgusta, Tiberija, Kaligule, Klavdija, Domicijana in Nerve ter skupno devet suličnih osti in trije meči iz približno enakega časovnega okvira.211 Orožje in luksuzni pridatki po mnenju P. Miloševića dokazujejo, da so na tej nekropoli pokopavali predvsem veterani pomožnih enot keltskega rodu, morda pa tudi najzgodneje romanizirani staroselci.212 V prid teze o grobovih staroselskega keltskega prebivalstva po M. Egri govori zlasti funkcionalna sestava pridanega keramičnega posodja lokalnega in italskega izvora,213 po argumentaciji S. Golubović pa bi sporočena oblika grobnih jam, neznana v mlajši železni dobi regije, lahko nakazovala navzočnost galskih avksiliarnih enot oziroma veteranov, ki so na območju Zgornje Mezije epigrafsko izpričani od zadnje četrtine 1. stoletja.214 O. Brukner, avtorica obravnave keramičnih najdb, povezuje najstarejše grobove s te nekropole s še nelociranim vojaškim taborom, glavnim regijskim oporiščem v času rimskega osvajanja zahodnega Balkana in Panonije, ki se je nahajal domnevno na okoliškem terenu, nekaj metrov dvignjenem nad poplavno ravnino Save.215 Zgodnjerimske grobove z orožjem iz Vinkovcev ter Iloka Dizdar in Radman-Livaja pripisujeta vojakom iz plemena Skordiskov, ki so v okviru pomožnih oziroma zavezniških enot rimske vojske sodelovali v bojih, povezanih s Tiberijevim osvajanjem Panonije ali panonsko-delmatskim uporom, ne izključujeta pa tudi možnosti, da so bili v grobovih pokopani pripadniki pomožnih enot keltskega rodu iz drugih delov cesarstva.216 Vprašanje, ali gre za veterane 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 Schumacher 1989. Waurick 1994, 23–25. Brukner, Dautova-Ruševljan, Milošević 1987, 14–17, 32–34, 50. Milošević 1985, 178–181. Egri 2012, 94–97. Golubović 2008, 108–109. Brukner, Dauitova-Ruševljan, Milošević 1987, 32–34, 50, karta. Dizdar, Radman-Livaja 2004, 44; Radman-Livaja 2010b. 161 he direct link between the camp and the contemporaneous necropolis allegedly also existed at the Salzburg-Liefering necropolis. he graveyard was destroyed because of exploitation of gravel deposits between 1953 and 1957.218 he preserved materials include inventories of at least three cremation graves, one being the aforementioned grave with the bent gladius of the Sisak variant and the shield boss of the Bohnsack 8 type. Hell, the author of the irst publication, interpreted the burial as that of a native Norican warrior from the Augustan period, whereas Moosleitner believes they are remains of an auxiliary soldier from the south-eastern Alpine region, due to rareness of the deformed weapons in this area. He connects the burial to the nearby location of the alleged camp from the occupation phase (around 15 BC). A gravel pavement, accompanied by fragments of Auerberg type pots and bronze eye ibulae were found during excavations between 1984/1985 on a triangular terrace at the conluence of the Salzach and Saalach Rivers (location Liefering-Forellenweg), which is situated 1.8 km from the abovementioned graveyard. he location at a conluence, which is typical for camps in the Rhine area,219 might indicate that there was also a fort here. However, the link between the presumed camp and the grave is not entirely reliable. his is indicated by the bent sword of the Late La Tène scheme with a long hilt tang and a tri-rhombic blade cross-section220 and a 3.5 cm long segment of a scabbard belonging to another sword,221 which could have been part of the contents of an older grave. ali aktivne vojake, ostaja nerazrešeno, saj so bila rimska oporišča v vzhodni Slavoniji postavljena praviloma na območju poznolatenskih naselbin.217 Neposredna zveza med taborom in sočasnim grobiščem naj bi obstajala tudi pri nekropoli Salzburg-Liefering, uničeni z izkoriščanjem prodišča 1953–1957.218 Rešeno gradivo obsega pridatke vsaj treh žganih vojaških grobov, med njimi tudi že omenjenega groba z zvitim gladijem variante Sisak in ščitno grbo tipa Bohnsack 8. Hell, avtor prve objave, je v pokopanem prepoznal domačega, noriškega bojevnika iz avgustejskega obdobja, Moosleitner pa je ta grob zaradi v regiji redkega običaja deformiranja orožja pripisal avksiliarnemu vojaku z jugovzhodnoalpskega območja, časovno pa povezal z bližnjo lokacijo domnevnega tabora iz okupacijske faze (okoli 15 pr. n. št.). Na približno 1,8 km oddaljeni trikotni terasi na sotočju rek Salzach in Saalach (lokacija Liefering-Forellenweg) so namreč med raziskavami v letih 1984/1985 odkrili prodnato tlakovanje s spremljajočimi najdbami odlomkov loncev tipa Auerberg in bronaste očesne ibule, o utrdbi pa naj bi pričala tudi lega na sotočju, značilna za tabore v Porenju.219 Povezava med domnevanim taborom in grobom ni zanesljiva, o čemer govorita najdbi zvitega meča poznolatenske sheme z dolgim ročajnim trnom in trirombičnim presekom rezila220 ter 3,5 cm širokega segmenta nožnice še enega meča,221 ki bi lahko pripadali tudi inventarjem starejših grobov. 5 Sklep 5 Conclusion he documented graves are a part of a larger cemetery, whose size is diicult to determine due to the level of deterioration in the investigated area. Based on the stratigraphic record, we assume that the earliest of the newly discovered graves in the northern (gr. 1042, 1017) and southern group (gr. 1005, 1007, 1013) are earlier than the Emona walls and both of the ditches. he earliest two graves of the northern group (1042 and 1017) were both placed next to the Early Iron Age tumuli that could probably be seen when the graves were being made. his fact could mean that the beginning of the Early Roman cemetery is not connected to the construction of the city; rather, it is linked to the reusing of the old tumulus cemetery as part of the “ancestor landscape”,222 or (independent of the ethnic belonging of the deceased) emphasising their the speciic status and authority within the community by “reactivation of the burial ground as a mean to establish symbolical link with the localized mythic past.”223 he presumed continuity of the burial place is in line with the local practice of placing La Tène Dokumentirani grobovi tvorijo del večjega grobišča, katerega velikost je glede na stopnjo raziskanosti oziroma uničenosti območja težko oceniti. Glede na stratigrafski izvid domnevamo, da so najstarejši izmed novoodkritih grobov v severni (gr. 1042, 1017) in južni skupini (gr. 1005, 1007, 1013) starejši od emonskega obzidja in obeh obrambnih jarkov. Dejstvo, da sta bila najstarejša grobova severne skupine (1042 in 1017) umeščena v neposredno bližino starejšeželeznodobnih gomil, ki so bile v času nastanka grobov verjetno še dobro vidne, bi lahko pomenilo, da je bil začetek pokopavanja v zgodnjerimskem času neodvisen od nastanka mesta in povezan s ponovno uporabo starega kraja pokopavanja. Ozadje tega pojava je morda povezano z dojemanjem lokacije kot dela »pokrajine prednikov«222 ali – neodvisno od etnične pripadnosti pokojnikov – poudarjanjem posebnega statusa in avtoritete v okviru skupnosti z »reaktivacijo kraja pokopavanja kot načina za vzpostavitev simbolne povezave z lokalizirano mitsko preteklostjo.«223 Ponovna uporaba mesta pokopavanja ustreza lokalni pra217 218 219 220 221 222 162 223 Hell 1956; Moosleitner 2004, 182. Moosleitner 2004, 178–181, ig. 4. Hell 1958. Hell 1956, ig. 1: 2. Abegg 2006. Egri 2012, 516–518. 218 219 220 221 222 223 Dizdar, Radman-Livaja 2004, 46. Hell 1956; Moosleitner 2004, 182. Moosleitner 2004, 178–181, sl. 4. Hell 1958. Hell 1956, sl. 1: 2. Abegg 2006. Egri 2012, 516–518. graves at earlier necropolises. In the Ljubljana area, this can be seen in the Middle La Tène warrior grave dug into the tumulus at Molnik224 and in the remains of two graves containing weapons from the end of the 3rd century BC from the southern part of the Slovenian Academy of Sciences and Arts backyard prehistoric necropolis discovered during renovation of the Ljubljana City Museum building.225 here is a possibility that the earliest Roman graves belong to the population of the settlement below the Grajski grič (Castle Hill). he fact that the planners avoided the prehistoric necropolis during the localisation of the city in the Late Augustan era supports this. Moreover, it was done out of respect to the prohibition of desecrating graves. he rapid sequence of burial in a topographically narrow area nevertheless afected these graves. his phenomenon comes from several years of delays in the chronology of contents in successive graves 1042, 1039 in 1038 from the northern group and the stratigraphically proven sequence of the southern group. Grave 1005, one of the three earliest graves in the southern group, was cut by a ditch with funnel-shaped cross-section. Presumably, it is earlier than the northern Emona defences. he other three graves (1004, 1012 in 1006) in this group were all dug out into the latter’s illing. One of them (1012) was partially covered with a “military” oven for preparing food. he earliest discovered deposits connected to the construction of the walled city are from the period between the irst years AD and the time of Tiberius.226 he area delineating where the city with its immediate surroundings (Kongresni trg) would be in the future contains stratigraphically older contexts, which are only slightly earlier and are closely related to the Roman army. Pieces of weaponry and equipment, as well as remains of training ditches, kilns, storage pits and latrines suggest the presence of a large number of Illyrian army units (exercitus Illyricus). he stratigraphic relation of these remains towards traces of construction of the irst walls is not always apparent. he army units stayed on the plain above the left bank of the Ljubljanica River, not far from the camp and supply base in Prule-Tribuna227 approximately in the beginning of the 1st century AD, including the period of preparations for Tiberius’s march against Maroboduus228 and the operation against the Pannonians and Delmatae between AD 6 and 9. he army units also participated in the construction of Emona and the transport infrastructure in the vicinity, or, they continued the works that had been stopped due to the Bellum Batonianum.229 224 225 226 227 228 229 Puš 1996, 61. Štrajhar, Gaspari 2013. See: Plesničar Gec 2006, 65–67; Kos 2006, 74–75; Mikl Curk 2006, 93; Gaspari 2010. Hvalec et al. 2009. See: Salač, Bemmann 2009. Gaspari 2010; Andrič et al. 2012. ksi vkopavanja (latenskih) grobov na območja starejših nekropol, ki je na ljubljanskem območju izpričana s srednjelatenskim bojevniškim grobom, vkopanim v gomilo na Molniku,224 in ostanki dveh grobov z orožjem iz konca 3. stoletja pr. n. št. iz južnega dela prazgodovinske nekropole s središčem na dvorišču Slovenske akademije znanosti in umetnosti, ki sta bila odkrita pri obnovi stavbe Mestnega muzeja.225 Verjetnost, da najstarejši rimski grobovi pripadajo prebivalcem naselbine pod Grajskim gričem, je podprta tudi z vtisom, da so se pri umeščanju mesta v poznoavgustejskem obdobju ogibali prazgodovinski nekropoli, kar bi bilo v skladu s spoštovanjem izrecne prepovedi skrunitve grobov. Slednje zadeva tudi fenomen pospešenega pokopavanja na topografsko ozko omejenem prostoru, ki izhaja iz le nekajletnih zamikov v kronologiji pridatkov sukcesivnih grobov 1042, 1039 in 1038 iz severne skupine ter stratigrafsko dokazanega sosledja v južni skupini. Grob 1005, eden od treh najstarejših grobov južne skupine, je bil presekan z jarkom lijakastega preseka, ki je domnevno starejši od severnih emonskih utrdb. Ostali trije grobovi (1004, 1012 in 1006) v tej skupini so bili vkopani v njegovo polnilo, enega od njih (1012) pa je delno prekrila dvodelna »vojaška« peč za pripravo hrane. Najzgodnejši doslej ugotovljeni depoziti, ki jih lahko zanesljivo povežemo z gradnjo obzidanega mesta, sodijo glede na novčne in druge kronološko občutljivejše najdbe, odkrite v njih, okvirno v čas med prvimi leti našega štetja in nastopom Tiberija.226 Gradivo iz stratigrafsko predhodnih kontekstov na ožjem območju poznejšega mesta z neposredno okolico (Kongresni trg) nakazuje njihov ne bistveno zgodnejši nastanek in tesno povezanost z dejavnostmi rimske vojske. Kosi orožja in opreme ter ostanki vadbenih jarkov, peči, shrambnih jam in latrin, pri katerih stratigrafski odnos (sočasnost oziroma predhodnost) do sledov gradnje prvih zidov ni vedno jasen, opozarjajo na vsaj občasno navzočnost večjega števila moštva enot Ilirske vojske (exercitus Illyricus), ki se je na ravnici nad levim bregom Ljubljanice, blizu tabora oziroma oskrbovalne baze na Prulah-Tribuna,227 zadrževalo okvirno na začetku našega štetja, vključno z obdobjem priprav na Tiberijev poseg proti Marbodu228 in operacij proti Panoncem in Delmatom v letih 6–9 n. št., ter je po zadušitvi upora sodelovalo tudi pri gradnji Emone in prometne infrastrukture v okolici oziroma pri nadaljevanju z Batonovo vstajo prekinjenih del.229 224 225 226 227 228 229 Puš 1996, 61. Štrajhar, Gaspari 2013. Glej Plesničar Gec 2006, 65–67; Kos 2006, 74–75; Mikl Curk 2006, 93; Gaspari 2010. Hvalec et al. 2009. Glej Salač, Bemmann 2009. Gaspari 2010; Andrič et al. 2012. 163 Based on the presented evidence and argumentation, it is probable that the earlier (Mid- to Late Augustan) graves from both Kongresni trg groups belong to the inhabitants from the settlement below the Grajski grič. However, the later (Late Augustan) graves may belong to the period of the town construction or even its irst settlers. he intensity of what occurred during the last period of the Augustus’s rule is demonstrated through the tight temporal sequence of burials, the excavation of (military) ditches and the construction of Emona defences. All of this obviously unravelled without particular planning for or controlling the growth of the necropolis during the time before the stabilization of the city’s administration.230 Na podlagi predstavljenih dokazov in argumentacije se zdi verjetno, da starejši (srednje- do poznoavgustejski) grobovi iz obeh skupin s Kongresnega trga pripadajo prebivalcem naselbine pod Grajskim gričem, mlajši (poznoavgustejski) grobovi pa udeležencem pri gradnji mesta ali njegovim prvim naseljencem. Tesno časovno sosledje pokopavanja, izkopa (vojaških) jarkov in gradnje emonskih utrdb dokazuje intenzivnost dogajanja v zadnjem obdobju Avgustove vladavine, očitno pa je tudi pomanjkanje načrtovanja oziroma nadzora nad rastjo nekropole v času pred ustalitvijo mestne uprave.230 Translation: Niala Zakeršnik Language editing: Terry Troy Jackson BIBLIOGRAPHY / LITERATURA ABEGG, A. 2006, Orte der Toten. Nachbestattungen der Römischen Kaiserzeit in eisenzeitlichen Grabhügeln. – In/V: W.-R. Teegen et al. (eds./ur.), Studien zur Lebenswelt der Eisenzeit, Festschrift für Rosemarie Müller, Ergänzungsbände zum Reallexikon der germanischen Altertumskunde 53, Berlin, 265–278. AE: L’Année épigraphique. Revue des publications épigraphiques relatives a l’antiquité romaine. – Paris, Nendeln. ANDRIČ, M., TOŠKAN, B., DIRJEC, J., GASPARI, A. 2012, Arheološki in okoljski zapis v sedimentu vodne kotanje iz začetka 1. stoletja n. št. na lokaciji NUK II (Emona). – In/V: A. Gaspari, M. Erič (eds./ur.), Potopljena preteklost, Arheologija vodnih okolij in raziskovanje podvodne kulturne dediščine v Sloveniji, Zbornik ob 128-letnici Dežmanovih raziskav Ljubljanice na Vrhniki (1884–2012), Radovljica, 409–416. BAĆANI, I. 2010, 2. Rimski kratki mač (gladius) / 2. Roman short sword (gladius). – In/V: I. Radman-Livaja (ed./ur.), Nalazi rimske vojne opreme u Hrvatskoj / Finds of the Roman military equipment in Croatia, Zagreb, 205. BEKLJANOV ZIDANŠEK, I. 2012, Grob 1007 s Kongresnega trga v Ljubljani – In/V: I. Lazar, B. Županek (eds./ur.), Emona med Akvilejo in Panonijo / Emona between Aquileia and Pannonia, Koper, 13–26 [summary in English / povzetek v angleščini]. BIBORSKI, M. 1999, Typologische Diferenzierung der Schwerter und ihrer Scheiden im europäischen Barbaricum in der ersten Hälfte des 1. Jh. n. Chr. – In/V: J. Andrzejowski (ed./ur.), Comhlan, Studia z archeologii okresu przedrzymskiego i rzymskiego w Europie Środkowej dedykowane Teresie Dąbrowskiej w 65. rocznicę urodzin, Warszawa, 81–107. BISHOP, M. C., COULSTON, J. C. N. 1993, Roman military equipment. From the Punic Wars to the fall of Rome. – London. BOCHNAK, T. 2006, Early Circular Umbones of the Przeworsk Culture. he Role of Local Tradition and Celtic Inluences on 164 230 See: Toynbee 1971, 74. the Diversitiy of Metal Patrs of Shields at the Beginning of the Late Pre-Roman Period. – Analecta Archaeologica Ressoviensia 1, 161–194. BOCKIUS, R., ŁUCZKIEWICZ, P. 2004, Kelten und Germanen im 2.-1. Jahrhundert vor Christus. – Römisch-Germanisches Zentralmuseum, Monographien 58, Mainz. BORANGIC, C. 2009, Sica. Tipologie si functionalitate. – Nemus IV/7–8, 22–73. BOŽIČ, D. 1981, Relativna kronologija mlajše železne dobe v jugoslovanskem Podonavju. – Arheološki vestnik 32, 315–347 [summary in German / povzetek v nemščini]. BOŽIČ, D. 1999, Die Erforschung der Latènezeit in Slowenien seit Jahr 1964 / Raziskovanje latenske dobe na Slovenskem po letu 1964. – Arheološki vestnik 50, 189–213. BOŽIČ, D. 2008, Late La Tène-Roman cemetery in Novo mesto. Ljubljanska cesta and Okrajno glavarstvo / Poznolatensko-rimsko grobišče v Novem mestu. Ljubljanska cesta in Okrajno glavarstvo. – Katalogi in monograije 39, Ljubljana. BREŠČAK, D. 1985, Oblike antičnih grobov na Dolenjskem. – In/V: Dolenjski zbornik 1985, Novo mesto, 33–60 [summary in English / povzetek v angleščini]. BREŠČAK, D. 1989, Verdun pri Stopičah. Arheološke raziskave antičnega grobišča 1983–1988. – Novo mesto. BRUKNER, O., DAUTOVA-RUŠEVLJAN, V., MILOŠEVIĆ, P. 1987, Počeci romanizacije u jugoistočnom delu provincije Panonije. – Novi Sad. BUDINSKÝ-KRIČKA, V., LAMIOVÁ-SCHMIEDLOVÁ, M. 1990, A late 1st century B.C.–2nd century A.D. cemetery at Zemplín. – Slovenská archeológia 38, 245–344. 230 Glej Toynbee 1971, 74. CASARI, P. 2002, Le sepolture romane e il catalogo dei materiali. – In/V: La Necropoli di San Servolo. Veneti, Istri, Celti e Romani nel territorio di Trieste, Trieste, 95–129. FEUGÈRE, M. 1985, Les ibules en Gaule méridionale. De la conquête à la in du Ve s. ap. J.-C. – Revue Archéologique de Narbonnaise, Supplément 12, Paris. CIL: Corpus Inscriptionum Latinarum. FINGERLIN, G. 1986, Dangstetten I. Katalog der Funde (Fundstellen 1 bis 603). – Forschungen und Berichte zur Vor- und Frühgeschichte in Baden-Württemberg 22, Stuttgart. DEIMEL, M. 1987, Die Bronzekleinfunde vom Magdalensberg. – Kärntner Museumsschriften 71, Archäologische Forschungen zu den Grabungen auf dem Magdalensberg 9, Klagenfurt. DEMETZ, S. 1999, Fibeln der Spätlatène- und frühen römischen Kaiserzeit in den Alpenländern. – Frühgeschichtliche und Provinzialrömische Archäologie, Materialien und Forschungen 4, Rahden. DESCHLER-ERB, E. 1999, Ad arma! Römisches Militär des 1. Jahrhunderts n. Chr. in Augusta Raurica. – Forschungen in Augst 28, Augst. DESCHLER-ERB, E. 2007, Bemerkungen zu den Militaria von Kalkriese. – In/V: G. A. Lehmann, R. Wiegels (eds./ur.), Römische Präsenz und Herrschaft im Germanien der augusteischen Zeit, Abhandlungen der Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Göttingen, Phil.-Hist. Klasse 3/279, Göttingen, 75–88. DIZDAR, M. 2010, 29. Inventar groba 5 / 29. Inventory of grave 5. – In/V: I. Radman-Livaja (ed./ur.), Nalazi rimske vojne opreme u Hrvatskoj / Finds of the Roman military equipment in Croatia, Zagreb, 244–245. DIZDAR, M., RADMAN-LIVAJA, I. 2004, Nalaz naoružanja iz Vrtne ulice u Vinkovcima kao prilog poznavanju rane romanizacije istočne Slavonije. – Prilozi Instituta za arheologiju u Zagrebu 21, 37–53 [summary in English / povzetek v angleščini]. DOBESCH, G. 1993, Die Kelten in Österreich nach den ältesten Berichten der Antike. Das norische Königreich und seine Beziehungen zu Rom im 2. Jahrhundert v. Chr. – Wien, Köln, Weimar. DOLENZ, H. 1998, Eisenfunde aus der Stadt auf dem Magdalensberg. – Kärntner Museumsschriften 75, Archäologische Forschungen zu den Grabungen auf dem Magdalensberg 13, Klagenfurt. DROBERJAR, E. 2009, Contributions to the History and Archaeology of the Maroboduus Empire. – In/V: V. Salač, J. Bemmann (eds./ur.), Mitteleuropa zur Zeit Marbods, Praha-Bonn, 81–106. DULAR, A. 1991, Prazgodovinska grobišča v okolici Vinjega vrha nad Belo cerkvijo / Die vorgeschichtlichen Nekropolen in der Umgebung von Vinji vrh oberhalb von Bela cerkev. – Katalogi in monograije 26, Ljubljana. DULAR, J. 1982, Halštatska keramika v Sloveniji. – Dela 1. razreda SAZU 23, Ljubljana [summary in German / povzetek v nemščini]. FINGERLIN, G. 1998, Dangstetten II. Katalog der Funde (Fundstellen 604–1358). – Forschungen und Berichte zur Vor- und Frühgeschichte in Baden-Württemberg 69, Stuttgart. FRANZIUS, G. 1999, Beschläge einer Gladiusschiede und Teile eines cingulum aus Kalkriese, Lkr. Osnabrück. – Germania 77/2, 567–608. FRONTINI, P. 1985, La ceramica a vernice nera nei contesti tombali della Lombardia. – Archeologia dell'Italia Settentrionale 3, Como. FUCHS, G., HINKER, Chr. 2004, Frühe Befunde im Randbereich des römerzeitlichen Hügelgräberfeldes Rassach (VB Deutschlandsberg, Steiermark). – Fundberichte aus Österreich 42, 113–163. GARBSCH, J. 1965, Die norisch-pannonische Frauentracht im 1. und 2. Jahrhundert. – Münchner Beiträge zur Vor- und Frühgeschichte 11, München. GASPARI, A. 2010, “Apud horridas gentis ...”. Začetki rimskega mesta Colonia Iulia Emona / Beginnings of the Roman Town of Colonia Iulia Emona. – Ljubljana. GASPARI, A., MASARYK, R., NOVŠAK, M. 2014, Ščitna grba iz Emone (Ljubljana). Keltsko orožje v zgodnjerimskem kontekstu. / he shield boss from Emona (Ljubljana). Celtic weaponry in an Early Roman context. – Vjesnik Arheološkog muzeja u Zagrebu 46 (2013), 57–87. GILLIVER, K. 2011, he Augustan reform and the structure of the imperial army. – In/V: P. Erdkamp (ed./ur.), A Companion to the Roman Army, Malden, Oxford, Chichester, 183–299. GOLUBOVIĆ, S. 2008, Grobovi u obliku bunara sa nekropola Viminacijuma / Well graves in the Roman cemeteries at Viminacium. – Viminacium 2, Beograd. GOSTENČNIK, K. 2005, Die Beinfunde vom Magdalensberg. – Kärntner Museumsschriften 78, Archäologische Forschungen zu den Grabungen auf dem Magdalensberg 15, Klagenfurt. GROTE, K. 2005, Römerlager Hedemünden. – Sydecum-Schriften zur Geschichte der Stadt Münden 34, Hann. Münden. DZINO, D. 2010, Illyricum in Roman politics 229BC–AD 68. – New York. GUGL, Ch. 2001, Das Umland Teurnias von 2. Jahrhundert v. Chr. bis ins 1. Jahrhundert n. Chr. Eine Studie zur Siedlungskontinuität von der Latène- zur Römerzeit im oberen Drautal. – Arheološki vestnik 52, 303–349. EGRI, M. 2012, ‘A Warrior Never Dies’. he Manipulation of Tradition in Early Funerary Contexts from Pannonia. – In/V: S. Berecki (ed./ur.), Iron Age Rites and Rituals in the Carpathian Basin, Proceedings of the International Colloquium from Târgu Mureş, 7–9 October 2011, Târgu Mureş, 503–529. GUŠTIN, M. 1991, Posočje in der jüngeren Eisenzeit. – Katalogi in monograije 27, Ljubljana [summary in Slovene / povzetek v slovenščini]. GUŠTIN, M. 2002, Il campo militare romano a Čatež presso Brežice (Slovenia). – Quaderni friuliani di archeologia 12, 69–75. 165 GUŠTIN, M. 2011a, Carnium (Kranj, Slovenia). Insediamento dei Carni. – In/V: S. Casini (ed./ur.), “Il ilo del tempo”, Studi di preistoria e protostoria in onore di Rafaele Carlo de Marinis, Notizie archeologiche Bergomensi 19, 447–458. ISTENIČ, J. 2009b, Rimsko obdobje. – In/V: P. Turk et al. (eds./ ur.), Ljubljanica – kulturna dediščina reke, Ljubljana, 241–293 [= J. Istenič, Roman period. – In/V: P. Turk et al. (eds./ur.), Ljubljanica – a River and its Past, Ljubljana 2009, 265–317]. GUŠTIN, M. 2011b, Eastern imports from the end of Late Iron Age at Novo mesto / Slovenia. – V: D. Măgureanu, D. Măndescu, S. Matei (eds./ur.) Archeology, Making of and practice, Studies in honor of Mircea Babeş at his 70th anniversary, Piteşti, Bucureşti, 239–254. ISTENIČ, J. 2010, Late La Tène scabbards with non-ferrous openwork plates / Poznolatenske nožnice s predrtim okrasnim okovom iz bakrove litine ali srebra. – Arheološki vestnik 61, 121–164. HAGENDORN, A., DOPPLER, H. W., HUBER, A., HÜSTER PLOGMANN, H., JACOMET, S., MEYER-FREULER, C., PFÄFFLI, B., SCHIBLER, J. 2003, Zur Frühzeit von Vindonissa. Auswertung der Holzbauten der Grabung Windisch-Breite 1996–1998. – Veröfentlichungen der Gesellschaft pro Vindonissa 18, Brugg. HÄNGGI, R., DOSWALD, C., ROTH-RUBI, K.1994, Die frühen römische Kastelle und der Kastell-Vicus von Tenedo-Zurzach. – Veröfentlichungen der Gesellschaft pro Vindonissa 11, Brugg. HARNECKER, J. 1997, Die römischen Eisenfunde von Haltern aus den Grabungen der Jahre 1949–1994. – Bodenaltertümer Westfalens 35, Mainz. HARNECKER, J., FRANZIUS, G. 2008, Kalkriese 4. Katalog der römischen Funde vom Oberesch. Die Schnitte 1 bis 22. – Römisch-Germanische Forschungen 66, Mainz am Rhein. HELL, M. 1956, Keltisch-norisches Kriegergrab aus Salzburg. – Germania 34, 230–236. HELL, M. 1958, Noch ein keltisches Kriegergrab aus Salzburg. – Archaeologia Austriaca 23, 230–236. HOLDER, P. 1980, Studies in the Auxilia of the Roman Army from Augustus to Trajan. – BAR International Series 70, Oxford. HORVAT, J. 1999, Roman Provincial Archaeology in Slovenia Following the Year 1965: Settlement and Small Finds / Rimska provincialna arheologija v Sloveniji po letu 1965: poselitvena slika in drobna materialna kultura. – Arheološki vestnik 50, 215–257. HVALEC, S., MASARYK, R., BADOVINAC, D., VOJAKOVIĆ, P., HRUSTEL, J., ŽERJAL, T., PORENTA, S., ČEŠAREK, D., FIRŠT, S., BEKLJANOV-ZIDANŠEK, I., PLESTENJAK, A., ZOROVIĆ, M. 2009, Utrip Tribune. Doživetja arheološkega vsakdana. – Ljubljana. ISTENIČ, J. 2003, Augustan sword-scabbards with net-like itments / Avgustejske nožnice mečev z mrežastimi okovi. – Arheološki vestnik 54, 271–279. ISTENIČ, J. 2005, Evidence for a very late Republican siege at Grad near Reka in Western Slovenia. – “Archäologie der Schlachtfelder – Militaria aus Zerstörungshorizonten”, Carnuntum Jahrbuch 2005, Wien, 77–87 [summary in German / povzetek v nemščini]. 166 ISTENIČ, J. 2009a, Ljubljanica in rimska vojska. – In/V: P. Turk et al. (eds./ur.), Ljubljanica – kulturna dediščina reke, Ljubljana, 81–85 [= J. Istenič, he Ljubljanica and the Roman army. – In/V: P. Turk et al. (eds./ur.), Ljubljanica – a River and its Past, Ljubljana 2009, 86–91]. IVČEVIĆ, S. 2010a, 12. Vrh koplja / 12. Spearhead. – In/V: I. Radman-Livaja (ed./ur.), Nalazi rimske vojne opreme u Hrvatskoj / Finds of the Roman military equipment in Croatia, Zagreb, 61. IVČEVIĆ, S. 2010b, 14. Vrh koplja / 14. Spearhead. – In/V: I. Radman-Livaja (ed./ur.), Nalazi rimske vojne opreme u Hrvatskoj / Finds of the Roman military equipment in Croatia, Zagreb, 62. JOVANOVIĆ, B., JOVANOVIĆ, M. 1988, Gomolava. Naselje mladeg gvozdenog doba. – Gomolava 2, Posebna izdanja 21, Novi Sad, Beograd [summary in English / povzetek v angleščini]. JUNKELMANN, M. 1992, Die Reiter Roms III. Zubehör, Reitweise, Bewafnung. – Kulturgeschichte der antiken Welt 53, Mainz am Rhein. JUNKELMANN, M. 1997, Die Legionen des Augustus. Der römische Soldat im archäologischen Experiment. – Kulturgeschichte der antiken Welt 33, Mainz am Rhein. KEPPIE, L. 1996, he Army and the Navy. – In/V: A, K. Bowman, E. Champlin, A. Linott (eds./ur.), Cambridge Ancient History X, he Augustan Empire, 43 B.C– A.D. 69, Cambridge, 371–396. KEPPIE, L. 1998, he Making of the Roman Army. From Republic to Empire. – London. KEPPIE, L. 2000, Legions and Veterans. Roman Army Papers, 1971–2000. – Mavors Roman army researches 12, Stuttgart. KNEZ, T. 1992, Novo mesto 2. Keltsko-rimsko grobišče Beletov vrt / Novo mesto 2. Keltisch-römisches Gräberfeld Beletov vrt. – Carniola archaeologica 2, Novo mesto. KOS, P. 1984, Wechselbeziehungen zwischen Rom und dem keltischen Ostalpenraum aufgrund der Münzfunde. – In/V: G. Grasmann, W. Jansen in M. Brandt (eds./ur.), Keltische Numismatik und Archaeologie, Veröfentlichung der Referate des Kolloquiums keltische Numismatik vom 4. Bis. 8. Ferbruar 1981 in Würzburg, BAR International Series 200, Oxford, 185–200. KOS, P. 2006, Analiza novčnih najdb / he analysis of the coin inds. – In/V: L. Plesničar Gec, Emonski forum / Emona forum, Koper, 71–84. KRIŽ, B. 2005, Novo mesto VI. Kapiteljska njiva. Mlajšeželeznodobno grobišče. / Novo mesto VI. Kapiteljska njiva. Late Iron Age cemetery. – Carniola Archaeologica 6, Novo mesto. KRIŽ, B., STIPANČIČ, P., ŠKEDELJ PETRIČ, A. 2009, Arheološka podoba Dolenjske. Katalog stalne arheološke razstave Dolenjskega muzeja Novo mesto / he archaeological image of Dolenjska. Catalogue of the permanent archaeological exhibition at the Dolenjski muzej Novo mesto. – Novo mesto. KÜHLBORN, J.-S. 1992, Das Römerlager in Oberaden III. Die Ausgrabungen im nordwestlichen Lagerbereich und weitere Baustellenuntersuchungen der Jahre 1962–1988. – Bodenaltertümer Westfalens 27, Münster. KÜNZL, E. 1996, Gladiusdekorationen der frühen römischen Kaiserzeit: dynastische Legitimation, Victoria und Aurea Aetas. – Jahrbuch des Römisch-Germanischen Zentralmuseums Mainz 43, (1998), 383–474. LAVIZZARI PEDRAZZINI, M. P. 1987, Ceramica romana di tradizione ellenistica in Italia settentrionale. Il vasellame “tipo Aco”. – Pubblicazioni della Facolta di lettere e ilosoia dell’Universita di Pavia 42, Como. LAZAR, I., VIDRIH-PERKO, V., ZUPANČIČ, N., MUŠIČ, B., DJURIĆ, B., JOSIPOVIČ, D., ŠEMROV, A., ERIČ, M. 2006, Ilovica pri Vranskem. – Arheologija na avtocestah Slovenije 1, Ljubljana. LOŽAR, R. 1938, Rimska najdba iz Polhovega Gradca. – Glasnik Muzejskega društva za Slovenijo 19, 85–108 [summary in German / povzetek v nemščini]. ŁUCZKIEWICZ, P. 2000, Zur späteisenzeitlichen Bewafnung in Polen. Stand der Forschung. – Jahrbuch des Römisch-Germanischen Zentralmuseums Mainz 47/1, 355–437. MAZZEO SARACINO, L. 1985, Terra sigillata nord-italica. – In/V: Enciclopedia dell’ Arte Antica, Atlante delle forme ceramiche II, Ceramica Fine Romana nel Bacino Mediterraneo (Tardo Ellenismo e Primo Impero), Roma, 175–230. MIKL-CURK, I. 1979, Terra sigillata iz emonskih grobišč. – Arheološki vestnik 30, 339–371 [summary in German / povzetek v nemščini]. MIKL CURK, I. 2006, Sigillata, namizno in kuhinjsko posodje / Sigillaten, Tafel- und Hauskeramik. – In/V: L. Plesničar Gec, Emonski forum / Emona forum, Koper, 85–98. MIKS, Ch. 2007, Studien zur römischen Schwertbewafnung in der Kaiserzeit. – Kölner Studien zur Archäologie der römischen Provinzen 8, Leidorf. MÜLLER, M. 2002, Die römischen Buntmetallfunde von Haltern. – Bodenaltertümer Westfallens 37, Mainz. NICOLAY, J. 2007, Armed Batavians. Use and Signiicance of Weaponry and Horse Gear from Non-military Contexts in the Rhine Delta (50 BC to AD 450). – Amsterdam Archaeological Studies 11, Amsterdam. OCK: A. Oxe, H. Comfort, Ph. Kenrick, Corpus Vasorum Arretinorum. A Catalogue of the Signatures, Shapes, and Chronology of Italian Sigillata. – Antiquitas 3, Abhandlungen zur Vor- und Frühgeschichte, zur klassischen und provinzial-römischen Archäologie und zur Geschichte des Altertums 41, Bonn 2000. PERNET, L. 2010, Armement et auxiliaires gaulois (IIe et Ier siècles avant notre ere). – Protohistoire européenne 12, Montagnac. PERNET, L., CARLEVARO, E., TORI, L., VIETTI, G., DELLA CASA, P., SCHMID-SIKIMIĆ, B. 2006, La necropoli di Giubiasco (Ti) II. Les tombes de La Tène inale et d’époque romaine. – Collectio Archaeologica 4, Zurich. PETRU, P., VALIČ, A. 1958–1959, Drugo začasno poročilo o izkopavanjih v Bobovku pri Kranju. – Arheološki vestnik 9–10, 133–172 [summary in German / povzetek v nemščini]. PETRU, S. 1972, Emonske nekropole (odkrite med leti 1635–1960). – Katalogi in monograije 7, Ljubljana [summary in German / povzetek v nemščini]. PIETA, K. 2005, Spätlatènezeitliche Wafen und Ausrüstung im nördlichen Teil des Karpatenbeckens. – Slovenská archeologia 53, 35–84. PIETA, K. 2010, Die keltische Besiedlung der Slowakei. Jüngere Latènezeit. – Archaeologia Slovaca Monographiae 12, Nitra. PIETA, K., PLACHÁ, V. 1999, Die erster Römer im nördichen Mitteldonauraum im Lichte der neuen Grabungen in Devín. – In/V: T. Fischer, G. Precht, J. Tejral (eds./ur.), Germanen beiderseits des spätantiken Limes, Materialen des X. Internationalen Symposiums “Grundprobleme der frühgeschichtlichen Entwicklung im nördlichen Mitteldonaugebiet”, Xanten vom 2.–6. December 1997, Brno, 179–205. MILOŠEVIĆ, P. 1985, Etnički i društveno-ekonomski aspekti kulta mrtvih na ranim nekropolama Sirmijuma. Naoružanje i oprema rimskog ratnika u doba osvajanja i konsolidacije doline Save. – In/V: N. Tasić (ed./ur.), Sahranjivanje pokojnika sa aspekta ekonomskih i društvenih kretanja u praistoriji i antici, Referati održani na kongresu u Mostaru 1980. godine, Materiali 20, Beograd, 177–185. PLESNIČAR-GEC, L. 1972, Severno emonsko grobišče / he northern necropolis of Emona. – Katalogi in monograije 8, Ljubljana. MOOSLEITNER, F. 2004, Zur Kontinuität von der Spätlatènezeit zur frühen römischen Kaiserzeit im Salzburger Land. – In/V: C.-M. Hüssen, W. Irlinger, W. Zanier (eds./ur.), Spätlatènezeit und frühe römische Kaiserzeit zwischen Alpenrand und Donau, Akten des Kolloquiums in Ingolstadt am 11. und 12. Oktober 2001, Kolloquien zur Vor- und Frühgeschichte 8, Bonn, 175–186. PLESNIČAR GEC, L. 2006, Emonski forum / Emona forum. – Koper. MRÁV, Z. 2005, Ein frühkaiserzeitliches Aristokratengrab aus dem Tauriskergebiet. Der Fund 1914 von Polhov Gradec (Slowenien). – Communicationes archaeologicae Hungariae 2005, 309–361. PLESNIČAR-GEC, L. 1977, Keramika emonskih nekropol / he pottery of Emona necropolises. – Dissertationes et monographiae 20, Ljubljana. POPOVIĆ, P. 2011, Late Iron Age ritual pits at Kale-Krševica (southeastern Serbia) . – In/V: M. Guštin, M. Jevtić (eds./ur.), he Eastern Celts, he Communities between the Alps and the Black sea, Koper, 151–162. POUX, M. 2008, L’empreinte du militaire tardo-républicain dans les faciès mobiliers de La Tène inale. – In/V: M. Poux (ed./ ur.), Sur les traces de César, Militaria tardo-républicains en contexte gaulois, Collection Bibracte 14, Glux-en-Glenne, 299–432. 167 PUŠ, I. 1996, Mlajša bronasta in železna doba / Late Bronze and Iron Ages. – In/V: B. Dirjec et al. (eds./ur.), Pozdravljeni prednamci! Ljubljana od prazgodovine do srednjega veka / Ancestral encounters, Ljubljana from Prehistory to the Middle Ages, Ljubljana, 46–63. RADMAN-LIVAJA, I. 2004, Militaria Sisciensia. Nalazi rimske vojne opreme iz Siska u fundusu Arheološkoga muzeja u Zagrebu / Finds of the Roman military equipment in Sisak in the holdings of the Archeological Museum in Zagreb. – Katalozi i monograije Arheološkoga muzeja u Zagrebu 1/1, Zagreb. SCHUMACHER, F.-J. 1999, Bewafnung und Kampfesweise der Bevölkerung Nordgalliens in der Spätlatènezeit und frührömischen Zeit. – Unpublished Ph. D. thesis / Neobjavljena doktorska disertacija, Universität des Saarlandes, Saarbrücken. RADMAN-LIVAJA, I. 2010a, 9. Vojnički grob / 9. Military grave. – In/V: I. Radman-Livaja (ed./ur.), Nalazi rimske vojne opreme u Hrvatskoj / Finds of the Roman military equipment in Croatia, Zagreb, 257. SEDLMAYER, H. 2009, Die Fibeln vom Magdalensberg. Funde der Grabungsjahre 1948–2002 und Altfunde des 19. Jahrhunderts. – Kärntner Museumsschriften 79, Archäologische Forschungen zu den Grabungen auf dem Magdalensberg 16, Klagenfurt. RADMAN-LIVAJA, I. 2010b, Lokaliteti civilnog karaktera i slučajni nalazi / Non-military sites and stray inds. – In/V: I. Radman-Livaja (ed./ur.), Nalazi rimske vojne opreme u Hrvatskoj / Finds of the Roman military equipment in Croatia, Zagreb, 247–250. SÎRBU, V., LUCA, S. A., ROMAN, C. 2007, Tombs of dacian warriors (2nd–1st c. BC) found in Hunedoara – Grădina castelului (Hunedoara County). – In/V: V. Sîrbu, S. A. Luca (eds./ur.), Funerary Practices in Europe, before and after the Roman Conquest (3rd century BC–3rd century AD), Proceedings of the 8th International Colloquium of Funerary Archaeology, Acta Terrae Septemcastrensis VI/1, Sibiu, 155–177. RIHA, E. 1990, Der römische Schmuck aus Augst und Kaiseraugst. – Forschungen in Augst 10, Augst. RIHA, E. 1994, Die römischen Fibeln aus Augst und Kaiseraugst. Die Neufunde seit 1975. – Forschungen in Augst 18, Augst. RIQIUER, S. 2008, L’armement républicain dans les sépultures de Gaule Centrale. – In/V: M. Poux (ed./ur.), Sur les traces de César, Militaria tardo-républicains en contexte gaulois, Collection Bibracte 14, Glux-en-Glenne, 181–202. ROTH-RUBI, K. 2006, Dangstetten III. Das Tafelgeschirr aus dem Militärlager von Dangstetten. – Forschungen und Berichte zur Vor- und Frühgeschichte in Baden-Württemberg 103, Stuttgart. RUSTOIU, A. 2007, hracian sica and dacian falx. he history of a national weapon. – In/V: S. Nemeti et al. (eds./ur.), Dacia Felix, Studia Michaeli Bărbulescu oblata, Cluj-Napoca, 67–82. SAGADIN, M. 2003, Zgodnjeantični Kranj. – In/V: B. Jenčič et al. (eds./ur.), Avguštinov zbornik, 50 let Gorenjskega muzeja, Gorenjski kraji in ljudje 24, Kranj, 71–81 [summary in English / povzetek v angleščini]. SALAČ, V., BEMMANN, J. (eds./ur.) 2009, Mitteleuropa zur Zeit Marbods. – Praha, Bonn. SCHINDLER KAUDELKA, E. 1980, Die römische Modelkeramik vom Magdalensberg. – Kärntner Museumsschriften 66, Archäologische Forschungen zu den Grabungen auf dem Magdalensberg 7, Klagenfurt. SCHINDLER KAUDELKA, E. 1989, Die gewöhnliche Gebrauchskeramik vom Magdalensberg. – Kärntner Museumsschriften 72, Archäologische Forschungen zu den Grabungen auf dem Magdalensberg 10, Klagenfurt. 168 SCHUMACHER, F.-J. 1989, Ein Trevererkrieger in römischen Diensten. Grab 2215. – In/V: A. Hafner (ed./ur.), Gräber – Spiegel des Lebens, Zum Totenbrauchtum der Kelten und Römer am Beispiel des Treverer-Gräberfeldes Wederath-Belginum, Schriftenreihe des Rheinischen Landesmuseums Trier 2, Mainz am Rhein, 265–274. SCHINDLER KAUDELKA, E. 2000, Ceramica norditalica decorata del Magdalensberg: problemi aperti. – In/V: G. P. Brogiolo, G. Olcese (eds./ur.), Produzione ceramica in area Padana tra il II secolo a.C. e il VII secolo d. C., Nuovi dati e prospettive di ricerca, Documenti di archeologia 21, Mantova, 53–67. SPEIDEL, M. A. 2000, Sold und Wirtschaftslage der römischen Soldaten. – In/V: G. Alföldy, B. Dobson, M. Eck (eds./ur.), Kaiser, Heer und Gesellschaft in der Römischen Kaiserzeit, Gedenkschrift für Eric Birley, Heidelberger althistorische Beiträge und epigraphische Studien 31, Stuttgart, 65–96. STARE, V. 1973, Prazgodovina Šmarjete / Die Vorgeschichte von Šmarjeta. – Katalogi in monograije 10, Ljubljana. ŠAŠEL KOS, M. 1998, Caesarian inscriptions in the Emona basin? – In/V: G. Paci (ed./ur.), Epigraia romana in area adriatica, Actes de la IXe recontre franco-italienne sur l’épigraphie du monde romain, Macerata, 10–11 Novembre 1995, Pisa, Roma, 101–112. ŠAŠEL KOS, M. 2005, Appian and Illyricum. – Situla 43, Ljubljana. ŠINKOVEC, A. 2011, Keltsko grobišče iz Zagorice pri Biču. – Unpublished undergraduate thesis / Neobjavljena diplomska naloga, Oddelek za arheologijo, Filozofska fakulteta Univerze v Ljubljani, Ljubljana. ŠTRAJHAR, M., GASPARI, A. 2013, Ostanki dveh srednjelatenskih bojevniških grobov iz Turjaške palače v Ljubljani / Remains of two Middle La Tène Warrior graves from the Auersperg Palace in Ljubljana. – Prilozi Instituta za arheologiju u Zagrebu 30, 27–43. TODOROVIĆ, J. 1972, Praistorijska Karaburma. Nekropola mlađeg gvozdenog doba / he necropolis of the later Iron age. – Monograije 3, Beograd. TONC, A., RADMAN-LIVAJA, I., DIZDAR, M. 2013, he Warrior Grave from Sveta Trojica near Stari grad Paklenica. – In/V: M. Sanader, A. Rendić-Miočević, D. Tončinić, I. Radman-Livaja (eds./ur.), Proceedings of the XVIIth Roman Military Equipment Conference: Weapons and Military Equipment in a Funerary Context, XVIIth Roman Military Equipment Conference, Zagreb, 24th–27th May, 2010, Zagreb, 245–258. TOYNBEE, J. M. C. 1971, Death and Burial in the Roman World. – London. UNZ, Ch., DESCHLER-ERB, E. 1997, Katalog der Militaria aus Vindonissa. Militärische Funde, Pferdegeschirr und Jochteile bis 1976. – Veröfentlichungen der Gesellschaft Pro Vindonissa 14, Brugg. URBAN, O. H. 1984, Die Frühkaiserzeitliche Hügelgräberfeld von Katzelsdorf. – Archaeologia Austriaca 68, 73–110. VIČIČ, B. 1993, Zgodnjerimsko naselje pod Grajskim gričem v Ljubljani. Gornji trg 15. – Arheološki vestnik 44, 153–201 [summary in German / povzetek v nemščini]. VIČIČ, B. 1994, Zgodnjerimsko naselje pod Grajskim gričem v Ljubljani. Gornji trg 30, Stari trg 17 in 32. – Arheološki vestnik 45, 25–80 [summary in German / povzetek v nemščini]. VIČIČ, B. 1997, Rimske najdbe izpod Miklavškega hriba v Celju. – Arheološki vestnik 48, 41–51 [summary in German / povzetek v nemščini]. VOJAKOVIĆ, P., NOVŠAK, M., ŽERJAL, T., VERBIČ, T., KRAJŠEK, J., HRUSTEL, J. 2011, Poročilo o predhodnih arheolo- ških raziskavah na lokaciji Ljubljana – stanovanjska soseska Tribuna (december 2007–november 2008). – Ljubljana. WAURICK, G. 1994, Zur Rüstung von frühkaiserzeitlichen Hilfstruppen und Verbündeten der Römer. – In/V: C. von Carnap-Bornheim (ed./ur.), Beiträge zu römischer und barbarischer Bewafnung in den ersten vier nachchristlichen Jahrhunderten, Veröfentlichung des Vorgeschichtlichen Seminars Marburg 8, Lublin, Marburg, 1–25. WINDL, H. 1975, Das La Tène- und kaiserzeitliche Gräberfeld von Mihovo (Unterkrain - Dolenjsko). – Unpublished Ph. D. thesis / Neobjavljena doktorska disertacija, Wien. ZABEHLICKY SCHEFFENEGGER, S., SAUER, R. 2000, Metodi di distinzione dei due gruppi di sigillata padana augustea trovati sul Magdalensberg. – In/V: G. P. Brogiolo, G. Olcese (eds./ur.), Produzione ceramica in area Padana tra il II secolo a.C. e il VII secolo d. C., Nuovi dati e prospettive di ricerca, Documenti di archeologia 21, Mantova, 69–78. 169 EARLY ROMAN MILITARY FINDS FROM PREHISTORIC SETTLEMENTS IN THE GORENJSKA REGION ZGODNJERIMSKE VOJAŠKE NAJDBE S PRAZGODOVINSKIH NASELBIN NA GORENJSKEM Jana Horvat Jana Horvat Abstract Izvleček his contribution opens with an overview of sites in the area of Šmartno near Cerklje. he focus, however, is the prehistoric hilltop settlements on Straža above Šmartno and on Gobavica above Mengeš, which revealed parts of Early Roman military equipment. he material could be divided into two chronological groups. he early inds date from the mid-1st century BC to the Early Augustan period, while the late inds date from the Middle Augustan to the Late Augustan / Early Tiberian periods. hey indicate an occasional presence of the Roman army or the existence of small military posts on locations previously settled by the indigenous population. he two sites were no longer permanently settled at least from the Middle Augustan period onwards, and the centre of habitation had been transferred to the plain. Uvodoma predstavljamo topografsko sliko najdišč na območju Šmartnega pri Cerkljah ter vse znane drobne najdbe s Straže in Cerkovneka nad Šmartnim. Na prazgodovinskih gradiščih Straža nad Šmartnim in Gobavica nad Mengšem so bili odkriti deli rimske vojaške opreme, ki izvirajo iz dveh časovnih sklopov. Starejši predmeti sodijo v obdobje od sredine 1. st. pr. Kr. do zgodnjeavgustejskega časa, mlajši pa od srednje- do poznoavgustejskega oziroma zgodnjetiberijskega časa. Najdbe kažejo na občasno prisotnost rimske vojske oziroma na manjši vojaški postojanki na mestu starejših domorodnih naselij. Vsaj od srednjeavgustejskega časa dalje gradišči verjetno nista bili več strnjeno poseljeni in je bilo težišče civilne poselitve že v ravnini. Keywords: Slovenia, Gorenjska, Straža and Cerkovnek above Šmartno near Cerklje, Gobavica above Mengeš, topographic survey, hilltop settlement, La Tène period, Early Roman period, Roman army, weapons, military equipment 1 Introduction Settlement of the Gorenjska region during the La Tène period is poorly understood. Important settlements established on earlier Hallstatt centres were located in the areas of Kranj, Bled, Bohinj (Ajdovski gradec), Mengeš (Gobavica), Šmartno near Cerklje (Straža) and Lukovica (Gradišče).1 Apart from those, other settlements are suggested by stray inds of Celtic silver coins.2 his article examines small inds from Straža and Cerkovnek above Šmartno as well as Gobavica above Mengeš (ig. 1). hese inds were not recovered through systematic excavation, but nevertheless shed light on the transition from prehistory to the Roman period in Gorenjska. Ključne besede: Slovenija, Gorenjska, Straža in Cerkovnek nad Šmartnim pri Cerkljah, Gobavica nad Mengšem, topograija, gradišče, latenska doba, zgodnjerimska doba, rimska vojska, orožje, vojaška oprema 1 Uvod Poselitev Gorenjske v latenskem obdobju je slabo poznana. Pomembnejše latenske naselbine, ki so se navezale na predhodna halštatska središča, so ležale na območjih Kranja, Bleda, Bohinja (Ajdovski gradec), Mengša (Gobavica), Šmartna pri Cerkljah (Straža) in Lukovice (Gradišče).1 Posamezne najdbe keltskih srebrnikov nakazujejo še druga naselbinska jedra.2 V prispevku bomo obravnavali manjše sklope drobnih najdb s Straže in Cerkovneka nad Šmartnim in z Gobavice nad Mengšem (sl. 1). Predmeti niso bili pridobljeni s sistematičnimi izkopavanji, vendar vseeno osvetljujejo prehod iz prazgodovinskega v rimsko obdobje na Gorenjskem. 1 1 2 Gabrovec 1966; Gabrovec 1965; Gabrovec 1979, 8; Sagadin 2004, 42–44; Horvat 1983, 155, 159; Železnikar 1999, 37–39. Gabrovec 1966, 252. 2 Pregled: Gabrovec 1966. Tudi: Gabrovec 1965; Gabrovec 1979, 8; Sagadin 2004, 42–44; Horvat 1983, 155, 159; Železnikar 1999, 37–39. Gabrovec 1966, 252. 171 Figure 1. Select Early Roman sites in central Slovenia (D. Valoh). Slika 1. Izbrana zgodnjeantična najdišča v osrednji Sloveniji (izdelava D. Valoh). 2 Settlement in the area of Šmartno near Cerklje 2 Poselitev na območju Šmartna pri Cerkljah he village of Šmartno (375 m a.s.l.) lies on the border between the fertile Cerklje plain and the hilly Tunjiške dobrave at the foot of the Kamnik-Savinja Alps.3 he wider area of the village, as well as the fringes of the plain and the nearby elevations, have revealed a number of archaeological sites from various periods (ig. 2). he hill of Straža (492 m a.s.l.; ig. 2: 1; ig. 3) revealed the remains of a settlement with small inds from the Early and Late Iron Ages as well as the Early and Late Roman periods (see below). Vas Šmartno (375 m n. m.) leži na stiku med rodovitnim Cerkljanskim poljem in gričevnatimi Tunjiškimi dobravami na vznožju Kamniško-Savinjskih Alp.3 Na širšem območju vasi, na robu ravnine in po bližnjih vzpetinah, je večje število arheoloških najdišč iz različnih obdobij (sl. 2). Na griču Straža (492 m n. m.; sl. 2: 1; sl. 3) ležijo ostanki naselbine z drobnimi najdbami iz starejše in mlajše železne dobe ter iz zgodnjerimske in poznorimske dobe (glej dalje). Na Milharjevem hribu (sl. 2: 2)4 je bil najden žgan grob iz pozne bronaste oziroma iz starejše železne dobe.5 he hill of Milharjev hrib (ig. 2: 2)4 revealed a cremation burial from the Late Bronze or Early Iron Age.5 3 4 172 5 KLDB 237; KLS 170. Milharjev hrib is supposedly the location of Poženik Castle (KLDB, 236; KLS, 166). The hill is also known under the names Taber (Žižek, Tomažinčič 2007, 1) and Brnikarjev grad (Valič 1968–1969, 148; Valič 1982, XXI). Valič 1968–1969; Valič 1970, 185; Valič 1982, XXI. 3 4 5 KLDB 237; KLS 170. Na Milharjevem hribu naj bi stal Poženiški grad (KLDB, 236; KLS, 166). Grič je imenovan tudi »Taber« (Žižek, Tomažinčič 2007, 1) oziroma »Brnikarjev grad« (Valič 1968–1969, 148; Valič 1982, XXI). Valič 1968–1969; Valič 1970, 185; Valič 1982, XXI. Rescue excavations at Pristava yielded numerous remains of the past (ig. 2: 3)6 Ascribed to prehistory is a building of wooden post construction; there are also several cremation burials from the Bronze–Iron Age transition and stray inds from the La Tène period. Two roughly parallel and stone paved roads were found to have connected the areas of Šmartno and Poženik; the wider of the two led along the Pšata stream, while the narrower one was higher-lying and led across the slope of Straža. he latter was lanked by a small Roman cemetery with cremation and inhumation burials. An isolated building from the Late Roman period was uncovered in the vicinity of the cemetery.7 he area around the church of St Martin (ig. 2: 6) and the wider area of the Šmartno village (ig. 2: 5) revealed Roman building remains as well as small inds from the Roman period and Late Antiquity/Early Middle Ages.8 A vaulted tomb with Early Middle Age burials was found beside the church of St Martin.9 North-west of Šmartno, part of an Early Middle Age settlement was investigated during a rescue excavation at Pšata (ig. 2: 4).10 he hill of Cerkovnek (501 m a.s.l.; ig. 2: 7) revealed traces from the La Tène and Early Roman periods (see below). Undated tumuli were observed in the area of Brinovce (ig. 2: 8).11 he considerable number of sites in the Šmartno area indicates that the foot of the Kamnik-Savinja Alps represented a favourable settlement area. he central prehistoric settlement was probably situated on Straža, with its cemeteries extending in the foothills. In the Roman period, but probably also the Early Middle Ages, in contrast, the population gravitated towards the plain, probably to the centre of the modern village. Zaščitna izkopavanja na Pristavi (sl. 2: 3)6 so razkrila številne ostanke preteklosti. V prazgodovino sodijo ožje neopredeljena stavba, grajena z lesenimi stojkami, več žganih grobov, datiranih na prehod med bronasto in železno dobo, in posamezne latenske najdbe. Dve približno vzporedni rimski cesti, tlakovani s kamenjem, sta povezovali območji Šmartna in Poženika. Širša je potekala vzdolž potoka Pšata. Ob drugi, ožji cesti, ki je bila umeščena nekoliko višje na pobočju Straže, je ležalo manjše rimsko grobišče z žganimi in skeletnimi grobovi. V bližini grobišča je bila odkrita osamljena zidana stavba iz poznorimske dobe.7 Ob cerkvi sv. Martina (sl. 2: 6) in na širšem območju vasi Šmartno (sl. 2: 5) so bili najdeni rimski stavbni ostanki in drobne najdbe, ki sodijo v rimsko in poznoantično oziroma v zgodnjesrednjeveško dobo.8 Ob Sv. Martinu je bila odkrita grobnica z zgodnjesrednjeveškimi pokopi.9 Figure 2. Archaeological sites in the area of Šmartno near Cerklje. 1 Straža, 2 Milharjev hrib; 3 Pristava; 4 Pšata; 5 Šmartno; 6 Sv. Martin; 7 Cerkovnek; 8 Brinovce (source: TK 25, © Surveying and Mapping Authority of the Republic of Slovenia). Slika 2. Arheološka najdišča na območju Šmartnega pri Cerkljah. 1 Straža; 2 Milharjev hrib; 3 Pristava; 4 Pšata; 5 Šmartno; 6 Sv. Martin; 7 Cerkovnek; 8 Brinovce (podlaga: povečana karta TK 25, © Geodetska uprava RS). Del zgodnjesrednjeveške naselbine je bil zaščitno raziskan ob Pšati (sl. 2: 4), severozahodno od vasi Šmartno.10 2.1 Straža he forested hill of Straža rises steeply above the plain (igs. 2–3). he irst mention of it as an archaeological site probably dates to 1939, when Josip Žontar reported on a hillfort near Poženik.12 It was conirmed as an archaeological site in 1996, when it was visited by Miran Bremšak during the 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 The site is also known under the names Premuzarjev hrib, Premuzarjeva kmetija and Vas brez ovir – Taber; Žižek, Tomažinčič 2007; Šubic 2006. Žižek, Tomažinčič 2007; Šubic 2006. Valič 1969; Valič 1970–1971; Valič 1982, XXI: 5; Sagadin 1986. Valič 1969; Valič 1970–1971; Valič 1982, XXI. Žižek, Tomažinčič 2007. The existence of tumuli was brought to my attention by Miran Bremšak. The name Brinovce appears on the TTN 5 map; the name Brinovec appears on the TK 25 map. Žontar 1982, 19, 21, map III: 7. Na hribu Cerkovnek (501 m n. m.; sl. 2: 7) so bili odkriti sledovi iz latenske in zgodnjerimske dobe (glej dalje). Na območju Brinovce ležijo nedatirane gomile (sl. 2: 8).11 Številna najdišča na prostoru Šmartnega torej kažejo, da je vznožje Kamniško-Savinjskih Alp predstavljalo ugodno naselitveno območje. Na Straži je stala verjetno osrednja praz6 7 8 9 10 11 Najdišče je imenovano tudi z drugimi imeni: »Premuzarjev hrib«, »Premuzarjeva kmetija« in »Vas brez ovir – Taber«; Žižek, Tomažinčič 2007; Šubic 2006. Žižek, Tomažinčič 2007; Šubic 2006. Valič 1969; Valič 1970–1971; Valič 1982, XXI: 5; Sagadin 1986. Valič 1969; Valič 1970–1971; Valič 1982, XXI. Žižek, Tomažinčič 2007: območje »dovozna pot – zahod«. Na gomile nas je opozoril Miran Bremšak. Ime »Brinovce« na karti TTN 5, ime »Brinovec« na karti TK 25. 173 Figure 3. Straža. Locations of archaeological inds (source: TTN 5 Kamnik 24, © Surveying and Mapping Authority of the Republic of Slovenia; Scale = 1 : 5000). Slika 3. Straža. Območja z arheološkimi najdbami (podlaga: TTN 5 Kamnik 24, © Geodetska uprava RS; M = 1 : 5000). systematic topographic surveys of the foot of the KamnikSavinja Alps. he site was revisited on several occasions by Miran Bremšak, Tone Cevc and France Stele. hey found a large amount of small inds on the surface, near fallen trees and just beneath the surface, the latter with the aid of a metal detector. Straža was again visited by Miran Bremšak, Dragan Božič and Jana Horvat in 2000, when the topographic features and approximate positions of the small inds were drawn onto a map (ig. 3).13 he recovered archaeological inds are kept in the Intermunicipal Museum Kamnik. he summit of Straža (492 m a.s.l.) as well as its west, south and east slopes are covered with settlement terraces. hey come closest to the foot in the west, extending toward the abandoned quarries (ig. 3: 15). Of the settlement, its north-west edge is clearly visible (ig. 3: 18). On the south, terraces are more pronounced only near the summit (area ig. 3: 4–6), while lower down, the slope is very steep and terraces rare. A long terrace traverses the south slope from west to east (approximate location ig. 3: 16). Terraces were also observed near the summit on the east slope. On the north-east, the slope is steep and devoid of terraces. On the north, a low rampart is visible on the transition into a 13 174 Najdišči Straža in Cerkovnek pri Šmartnem pri Cerkljah (2000), report in the Archive of the Institute of Archaeology ZRC SAZU. godovinska naselbina, grobišča pa so se širila po vznožju hriba. Težišče rimske in verjetno tudi zgodnjesrednjeveške poselitve pa je bilo v ravnini, bržkone v jedru današnje vasi. 2.1 Straža Z gozdom porasel grič Straža se strmo dviguje nad ravnino (sl. 2–3). Kot arheološko točko ga verjetno prvič omenja Josip Žontar leta 1939, ko poroča o gradišču pri Poženiku.12 Da gre v resnici za arheološko najdišče, je leta 1996 odkril Miran Bremšak pri sistematičnih topografskih pregledih vznožja Kamniško-Savinjskih Alp. Najdišče so večkrat skupaj obiskali Miran Bremšak, Tone Cevc in France Stele. Večjo količino drobnih najdb so našli na površini, pri podrtih drevesih in z iskalcem kovin tik pod površino. Leta 2000 smo si Stražo ogledali Miran Bremšak, Dragan Božič in Jana Horvat ter topografske značilnosti in približne lege posameznih najdb vrisali na karto (sl. 3).13 Arheološke najdbe hrani Medobčinski muzej Kamnik. Lepe naselbinske terase ležijo na vrhu Straže (492 m n. m.) ter na zahodnem, južnem in vzhodnem pobočju. Na zahodu sežejo terase najniže, do opuščenih kamnolomov (sl. 3: 15). Jasno je viden severozahodni rob naselja (sl. 3: 18). Na 12 13 Žontar 1982, 19, 21, načrt III: 7. Najdišči Straža in Cerkovnek pri Šmartnem pri Cerkljah (2000), poročilo v arhivu Inštituta za arheologijo ZRC SAZU. saddle (ig. 3: 17), which probably delimited the settlement in its most exposed part. he inds recovered on Straža span from prehistory to the modern period. hey will be treated below with the exception of the modern ones. he summit area revealed a coin of Tiberius (location ig. 3: 7; see Catalogue). A number of metal inds were found on the upper terraces (locations ig. 3: 2–8; objects pl. 1: 1, 4, 6–9, 11, 16, 19–20; pl. 2: 1–5, 7–11, 16–17, 19–20, 25, 27, 29–33, 39–42; pl. 3: 1–6, 9–10, 12, 14; pl. 4: 1, 3–4, 6–12, 15; pl. 5: 1–2, 4; pl. 6: 25). Some inds were recovered in the east (location ig. 3: 1; objects pl. 1: 2, 12–14) and west parts of a long terrace (ig. 3: 16; pl. 2: 18, 34). he same areas also revealed numerous modern-period objects. Found near the south edge of the settlement, among the roots of a tree stump (location ig. 3: 14) were the following: over 9 kg of ceramic shards (pl. 5: 5–10; pl. 6: 1–8, 10–22, 26–27), a fragment of a stone quern,14 a number of amorphous pieces of burnt loam, slag, iron and copper alloy, as well as several orange burnt stones and animal bones. Finds further included several modern-period metal objects and two pieces of supposedly modern-period pottery. he wider surroundings of Location 14 revealed several metal objects (ig. 3: 14; pl. 1: 10, 18; pl. 2: 14–15, 21, 26, 38; pl. 4: 5, 13, 16). 2.1.1 Small inds 2.1.1.1 Bracelets Solid ribbed bracelets (pl. 1: 2) are characteristic of the Early Iron Age; they irst appear in the Stična 2 phase and are particularly frequent in the Serpentine and Certosa ibulae phases.15 hin bracelets with small ribs (pl. 1: 3), in contrast, are common in the Negova phase.16 2.1.1.2 Fibulae he iron ibula of Middle La Tène scheme (pl. 1: 4) has a high semicircular bow to which the foot is attached with a clamp, and a four-coil spring with an internal chord. It can best be compared to Middle La Tène wire-bow ibulae with a knob on the reverted foot and a four-coil spring with an internal chord, which are typical of LT C1 / Mokronog IIa phase.17 Later, in LT C2 / Mokronog IIb, all iron wire-bow ibulae have an external chord on the spring, both the variant with a low and long bow, short foot and 14 15 16 17 Reportedly. Dular 2003, 135–136, ig. 80: 6–7, 16–17; Tecco Hvala 2012, solid bracelets of Variant III, 306–308, 324–326, ig. 111: 1–3, 7. Gabrovec 1987, 74–75, ig. 6: 22; Tecco Hvala 2012, thin bracelets of Variant III, 306–308, 324–326, ig. 111: 6. Božič 1987, 874, ig. 44: 13, pl. 86: 5–6; Božič 1999, 196, 210. južnem pobočju so izrazitejše terase samo blizu vrha (območje sl. 3: 4–6), nižje postane pobočje zelo strmo in terase redke. Dolga terasa preči južno pobočje od zahoda proti vzhodu (približna lega sl. 3: 16). Terase so tudi blizu vrha na vzhodnem pobočju. Na severovzhodni strani je hrib precej strm in brez teras. Na severu leži pod vrhom sedelce, ki prehaja v nižji vrh (481 m n. m.). Na prehodu v sedelce je viden nizek okop (sl. 3: 17), ki je verjetno omejeval naselbino na najbolj izpostavljenem mestu. Drobne najdbe segajo od prazgodovine do novega veka; v nadaljevanju bomo obravnavali vse, razen novoveških. Na območju vrha je bil najden Tiberijev novec (lega sl. 3: 7; glej Katalog). Veliko kovinskih predmetov je bilo najdenih na terasah na zgornjem delu hriba (lege sl. 3: 2–8; predmeti t. 1: 1, 4, 6–9, 11, 16, 19–20; t. 2: 1–5, 7–11, 16–17, 19–20, 25, 27, 29–33, 39–42; t. 3: 1–6, 9–10, 12, 14; t. 4: 1, 3–4, 6–12, 15; t. 5: 1–2, 4; t. 6: 25). Nekaj predmetov je bilo najdeno na vzhodnem (lega sl. 3: 1; predmeti t. 1: 2, 12–14) oziroma na zahodnem delu dolge terase (sl. 3: 16; t. 2: 18, 34). Na istih območjih je bilo odkritih še precej novoveških predmetov. Blizu južnega roba naselbine je bilo v koreninah štora (lega sl. 3: 14) odkrito več kot 9 kg keramičnih črepinj (t. 5: 5–10; t. 6: 1–8, 10–22, 26–27), odlomek kamnite žrmlje14 ter več amorfnih koščkov prežgane ilovice, žlindre, železa, bakrove litine, nekaj oranžno prežganih kamnov in živalske kosti. Najdeno je bilo tudi nekaj novoveških kovinskih premetov in dva koščka domnevno novoveške keramike. V širši okolici je bilo odkritih več kovinskih predmetov (v okolici lege sl. 3: 14; t. 1: 10, 18; t. 2: 14–15, 21, 26, 38; t. 4: 5, 13, 16). 2.1.1 Drobne najdbe 2.1.1.1 Zapestnice Masivne narebrene zapestnice (t. 1: 2) so značilne za starejšo železno dobo: začnejo v stopnji Stična 2, pogoste so v stopnjah kačastih in certoških ibul.15 Tanke zapestnice z drobnimi rebri (t. 1: 3) so pogoste v negovski stopnji starejše železne dobe.16 2.1.1.2 Fibule Železna ibula srednjelatenske sheme (t. 1: 4) ima visok polkrožen lok, na katerega se priključuje noga z objemko, ter peresovino s štirimi navoji in spodvito tetivo. Najbolje jo lahko primerjamo s srednjelatenskimi žičnatimi ibulami z gumbom na podaljšku noge in s spodvito peresovino s štirimi navoji, ki so značilne za stopnjo LT C1 / Mokronog IIa.17 V mlajši stopnji LT C2 / Mokronog IIb imajo že14 15 16 17 Po poročilu. Dular 2003, 135–136, sl. 80: 6–7, 16–17; Tecco Hvala 2012, masivne zapestnice različice III, 306–308, 324–326, sl. 111: 1–3, 7. Gabrovec 1987, 74–75, sl. 6: 22; Tecco Hvala 2012, tanke zapestnice različice III, 306–308, 324–326, sl. 111: 6. Božič 1987, 874, sl. 44: 13, t. 86: 5–6; Božič 1999, 196, 210. 175 small knob on the reverted foot,18 as well as the variant with a short symmetrical bow.19 he iron ibula with a semicircular lat head and bow decorated with three transverse ribs (pl. 1: 13) forms part of Group II of iron conchoidal ibulae after Demetz. hese are typical of central European LT D2,20 which corresponds to Mokronog IIIb.21 Iron conchoidal ibulae were common throughout Bohemia, Moravia and Lower Austria, while they were rare elsewhere.22 Another ibula has an iron bow and a semicircular head, while the three moulded knobs on the bow are made of bronze (pl. 1: 14). In the shape of the bow, it closely resembles the bronze Tyrolean conchoidal ibulae I after Demetz23 or Type Birgitz after Gleirscher,24 dated to LT D2,25 though the ibula from Straža difers from these in its smaller size and in that it is probably made entirely of iron (except for the knobs). Moreover, the Tyrolean conchoidal ibulae I appear very rarely outside the Alpine valleys in the basins of the Adige and Inn rivers.26 Four iron wire-bow ibulae have a curved bow and a fourcoil spring with an external chord (pl. 1: 6–9). One of them had a frame-foot (pl. 1: 7) and another one probably had a solid foot (pl. 1: 6). hese belong to the large family of arched ibulae (geschweifte Fibeln in German), more precisely to the Kostrzewski M-a1 form (ig. 4: 1–2), which is not completely uniform. Fibulae of this form are almost always made of iron. heir bow can either have a more triangular or a more arched contour; it is usually plain and sometimes decorated with a transverse ridge or a knob. he head of the bow may be widened into a fan, the spring has four (rarely six) coils and an external chord, while the foot is either solid or frame-shaped (ig. 4: 2). he Kostrzewski M-a1 ibulae were common among the Germans along the Laba and Vistula rivers, reaching in the west to the Rhineland and in the south to the south-eastern Alpine area. hey represent one of the leading forms of the ‘arched ibulae horizon’ or LT D2 in central European chronology.27 he ibulae from Straža are made of wire of rectangular cross section, without a knob on the bow and without a widened head terminal. It is the simplest variant of Kostrzewski M-a1 ibulae, also known as Type Brücken (Fig. lezne žičnate ibule vedno zunanjo tetivo peresovine, tako različica z dolgim nizkim lokom, kratko nogo in majhnim gumbom na podaljšku noge18 kot tudi različica s kratkim simetričnim lokom.19 Železno ibulo s polkrožno razširjeno ploščato glavo in lokom, ki je okrašen s tremi prečnimi rebri (t. 1: 13), lahko uvrstimo v skupino železnih školjčnih ibul II po Demetzu. Te so značilne za srednjeevropsko stopnjo LT D220 oziroma Mokronog IIIb.21 Železne školjčne ibule so bile močno razširjene na Češkem, Moravskem in v Spodnji Avstriji, drugod pa so bile bolj redke.22 Še ena ibula ima železen lok in polkrožno razširjeno glavo, trije proilirani gumbi na loku pa so bronasti (t. 1: 14). Po obliki loka je blizu bronastim tirolskim školjčnim ibulam I po Demetzu23 oziroma tipu Birgitz po Gleirscherju,24 ki so datirane v LT D2.25 Se pa ibula s Straže od tega tipa razlikuje po tem, da je manjša in verjetno, z izjemo gumbov, izdelana iz železa. Tirolske školjčne ibule I se zelo redko pojavljajo izven alpskih dolin v porečju Adiže in Inna.26 Štiri železne žičnate ibule imajo usločen lok ter peresovino s štirimi navoji in zunanjo tetivo (t. 1: 6–9). Ena je imela okvirasto nogo (t. 1: 7), enkrat pa je bila noga verjetno polna (t. 1: 6). Sodijo v veliko družino usločenih ibul, podrobneje pa v obliko Kostrzewski M-a1 (sl. 4: 1–2), ki ni povsem enotna. Fibule te oblike so skoraj vedno iz železa. Njihov lok ima lahko bolj trikoten ali pa bolj usločen obris, običajno je gladek, včasih pa tudi okrašen s prečnim grebenom oziroma gumbom. Glava loka je lahko pahljačasto razširjena, peresovina ima štiri navoje (redko šest) in zunanjo tetivo, noga je polna ali okvirasta (sl. 4: 2). Fibule Kostrzewski M-a1 so bile razširjene pri Germanih ob Labi in Visli, na zahodu so segale do Porenja in na jugu v jugovzhodnoalpski prostor. So ena vodilnih oblik »horizonta usločenih ibul«, to je stopnje LT D2 po srednjeevropski kronologiji.27 Fibule s Straže so narejene iz žice pravokotnega preseka, brez gumba na loku in razširjenega zaključka glave. Gre za najbolj preprosto različico usločenih ibul Kostrzewski M-a1, poimenovano tudi tip Brücken (sl. 4: 1),28 ki je razmeroma pogosta na jugovzhodnoalpskem prostoru. Na 18 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 176 Božič 1987, 876, ig. 45: 7; Božič 1999, 197, 210. Božič 1999, 197, 210; Slatina in Rožna dolina, graves 10 and 13: Pirkmajer 1991, pls. 9: 55–57, 13: 84–85. Demetz 1999, 67, 72–73. Božič 2008, 144–147. Demetz 1999, 73. Demetz 1999, 73–74. Gleirscher 1987, 67. Demetz 1999, 75–76. Gleirscher 1987, 84, ig. 7; Demetz 1999, 75, map 19. Bockius, Łuczkiewicz 2004, 50–61, map 18: type Kostrzewski M-a1; Völling 1994, 193–198, insert 5: type Kostrzewski M-a. 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Božič 1987, 876, sl. 45: 7; Božič 1999, 197, 210. Božič 1999, 197, 210; Slatina v Rožni dolini, grobova 10 in 13: Pirkmajer 1991, t. 9: 55–57, 13: 84–85. Demetz 1999, 67, 72–73. Božič 2008, 144–147. Demetz 1999, 73. Demetz 1999, 73–74. Gleirscher 1987, 67. Demetz 1999, 75–76. Gleirscher 1987, 84, sl. 7; Demetz 1999, 75, karta 19. Bockius, Łuczkiewicz 2004, 50–61, karta 18: tip Kostrzewski M-a1; Völling 1994, 193–198, priloga 5: tip Kostrzewski M-a. Rieckhof 1995, 58. 4: 1),28 which is relatively frequent in the south-eastern Alpine area. Several ibulae of the type were discovered on Magdalensberg.29 Eight of them were found together with parts of military equipment within Context OR/20c c, reliably dated to the fourth decade BC.30 One example was found among the remains of a burnt-down building in the north-east part of Area OR, dated to the Early to Middle Augustan period.31 he Brücken type ibulae were also found elsewhere in Carinthia: Führholz,32 Seeboden33 and Gurina,34 but also on Velika planina in Slovenia.35 To summarize, the Kostrzewski M-a1 ibulae, including Type Brücken, are typical of central European LT D2 in the wider area of central Europe.36 On Magdalensberg, Context OR/20c c yielded such ibulae precisely dated to the fourth decade BC.37 hey are rare in later contexts; one example from Magdalensberg was found within an Early to Middle Augustan context,38 and another was found in the Middle Augustan military camp at Dangstetten.39 Very similar to Type Kostrzewski M-a1 are the iron ibulae of Types Kostrzewski N-a (ig. 4: 3) and Rey-Vodoz 1.0 (ig. 4: 4). Type Kostrzewski N-a ibulae are made of bronze or iron wire, have an arched bow and an internal chord of the spring (ig. 4: 3). hey show a similar distribution as Type Kostrzewski M-a1 with an external chord.40 As evidenced by examples found in Grave 37 from Verdun41 and on Magdalensberg,42 they were also present in the south-eastern Alps. hey probably began to be produced at the end Štalenški gori je bilo odkritih več tovrstnih ibul.29 Osem primerkov je ležalo skupaj z deli rimske vojaške opreme v sklopu OR/20c c, ki je dobro datiran v 4. desetletje pr. Kr.30 En primerek je bil najden v sežganih ostankih stavbe na severovzhodnem delu območja OR, ki sodi v zgodnjedo srednjeavgustejski čas.31 Fibule različice Brücken so bile odkrite tudi drugod na Koroškem: v Führholzu,32 v Seebodnu33 in na Gurini.34 Takšna ibula je bila najdena tudi na Veliki planini.35 Fibule Kostrzewski M-a1, vključno z različico Brücken, so torej značilne za srednjeevropsko stopnjo LT D2 na širokem prostoru srednje Evrope.36 V sklopu OR/20c c na Štalenski gori so bile natančneje datirane v 4. desetletje pr. Kr.37 V mlajših sklopih so redke: en primerek s Štalenske gore izhaja iz zgodnje- do srednjeavgustejskega sklopa,38 en primerek pa je bil odkrit v srednjeavgustejskem taboru Dangstetten.39 Fibulam tipa Kostrzewski M-a1 so zelo podobne železne ibule tipov Kostrzewski N-a (sl. 4: 3) in Rey-Vodoz 1.0 (sl. 4: 4). Fibule tipa Kostrzewski N-a so narejene iz bronaste ali železne žice, imajo usločen lok, tetiva peresovine pa je spodvita (sl. 4: 3). Razširjene so na podobnem prostoru kot tip z zunanjo tetivo Kostrzewski M-a1.40 Kot kažejo primerki iz groba 37 iz Verduna41 ali s Štalenske gore,42 segajo tudi na jugovzhodnoalpski prostor. Začeli so jih izdelovati verjetno na koncu LT D2, nadaljujejo se skozi avgustejsko obdobje in segajo še do sredine 1. st. po Kr.43 29 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 Rieckhof 1995, 58. Sedlmayer 2009, 18, pl. 3: 48–65. Sedlmayer 2009, 18, 49–50, 122–128, table 1, ig. 10; Božič 2008, 128–130, 147. Sedlmayer 2009, 18, 52, 54, table 10, ig. 17. Wedenig 2006, 64, ig. 3: 2. Gugl 2001, 313, pl. 1: 4. Jablonka 2001, 118, pl. 82: 13, 18; Gamper 2004, ig. 24: 1. Cevc 1997, 35; Horvat 1997, ig. 6: 3. Bockius, Łuczkiewicz 2004, 50–61, map 18. Sedlmayer 2009, 18. Sedlmayer 2009, 18. Fingerlin 1998, 906/10. Völling 1994, 198–207, insert 6; Bockius, Łuczkiewicz 2004, 61–67, map 23. Breščak, in this book. Sedlmayer 2009, 18–19. Figure 4. Fibulae. 1 Type Kostrzewski M-a1, Variant Brücken (Magdalensberg: Sedlmayer 2009, pl. 3: 57); 2 Type Kostrzewski M-a1 (Meisdorf: Bockius, Łuczkiewicz 2004, ig. 9: 4); 3 Type Kostrzewski N-a (Magdalensberg: Sedlmayer 2009, pl. 4: 71); 4 Type ReyVodoz 1.0 (Dangstetten: Fingerlin 1986, 519/10). Iron. Scale = 1 : 2. Slika 4. Fibule. 1 tip Kostrzewski M-a1, različica Brücken (Štalenška gora: Sedlmayer 2009, t. 3: 57); 2 tip Kostrzewski M-a1 (Meisdorf: Bockius, Łuczkiewicz 2004, sl. 9: 4); 3 tip Kostrzewski N-a (Štalenška gora: Sedlmayer 2009, t. 4: 71); 4 tip Rey-Vodoz 1.0 (Dangstetten: Fingerlin 1986, 519/10). Železo. M = 1 : 2. 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 Sedlmayer 2009, 18, t. 3: 48–65. Sedlmayer 2009, 18, 49–50, 122–128, tab. 1, sl. 10; Božič 2008, 128–130, 147. Sedlmayer 2009, 18, 52, 54, tab. 10, sl. 17. Wedenig 2006, 64, sl. 3: 2. Gugl 2001, 313, t. 1: 4. Jablonka 2001, 118, t. 82: 13, 18; Gamper 2004, sl. 24: 1. Cevc 1997, 35; Horvat 1997, sl. 6: 3. Bockius, Łuczkiewicz 2004, 50–61, karta 18. Sedlmayer 2009, 18. Sedlmayer 2009, 18. Fingerlin 1998, 906/10. Völling 1994, 198–207, priloga 6; Bockius, Łuczkiewicz 2004, 61–67, karta 23. Breščak, v tem zborniku. Sedlmayer 2009, 18–19. Völling 1994, 198–207; Bockius, Łuczkiewicz 2004, 61–67; Sedlmayer 2009, 18–19. 177 of LT D2 and continued in use throughout the Augustan period until the mid-1st century AD.43 he Rey-Vodoz 1.0 ibulae are also made of iron wire and have a four-coil spring with an external chord. hey difer from the Kostrzewski M-a1 ibulae in having a low bow that is not arched (ig. 4: 4).44 hey also have a diferent distribution, i.e. in southern and eastern Gaul, Switzerland and southern Germany.45 hose from southern Gaul are dated to the second and third quarters of the 1st century BC,46 while the examples from Dangstetten47 and Augsburg-Oberhausen48 were worn in the Augustan period. hey were also found in layers from the irst half of the 1st century AD at Vitodurum.49 his shows that they appeared at roughly the same time as the Kostrzewski M-a1 ibulae, but remained in use considerably longer.50 he iron ibula (pl. 1: 5) with a wide spring, comprised of at least eight coils, and a wide bow that bears a trace of a rivet, most probably dates to the La Tène period, though it cannot be determined more precisely. he Norico-Pannonian ibula with wings (pl. 1: 15) is of Type A 238 b2 that appeared in the Middle Augustan period and was still used in the irst third of the 1st century AD. It formed part of the typical female clothing in the Alpine area and in western Pannonia.51 he iron penannular ibula (pl. 1: 16) with upturned and rolled ends is typical of the second half of the 3rd and the 4th centuries AD.52 2.1.1.3 Finger-ring he iron inger-ring (pl. 1: 1) with a simple circular hoop and a bezel for a decorative intaglio belongs to the Guiraud 2a form, which is dated from the 1st century BC to the beginning of the 2nd century AD.53 Fibule Rey-Vodoz 1.0 so narejene iz železne žice, prav tako imajo peresovino s štirimi navoji in zunanjo tetivo. Od oblike Kostrzewski M-a1 se razlikujejo po nizkem loku, ki ni usločen (sl. 4: 4).44 Tudi razširjene so na drugem območju: v južni in vzhodni Galiji, Švici in v južni Nemčiji.45 V južni Galiji so datirane v drugo in tretjo četrtino 1. st. pr. Kr.46 Na rabo v avgustejskem obdobju kažejo npr. primerki iz Dangstettna47 in Augsburg-Oberhausna.48 V plasteh prve polovice 1. st. se pojavljajo v Vitodurumu.49 Se pravi, da so na začetku približno sočasne z obliko Kostrzewski M-a1, trajajo pa precej dalj časa.50 Železna ibula (t. 1: 5), ki je imela dolgo peresovino z najmanj osmimi navojki ter ploščat lok, na katerem je ohranjena sled zakovice, sodi najverjetneje v latensko dobo, natančneje pa je nismo mogli opredeliti. Noriško-panonsko ibula s krilci (t. 1: 15) je bila del ženske noše. Uvrstimo jo lahko v različico A 238 b2, ki se je pojavila v srednjeavgustejskem obdobju, nosili pa so jo še v prvi tretjini 1. st. po Kr. na območju Alp in zahodne Panonije.51 Železna obročasta ibula (t. 1: 16) z navzgor zavitimi zaključki je značilna za drugo polovico 3. in za 4. st.52 2.1.1.3 Prstan Železen prstan (t. 1: 1) s poglobitvijo za okrasni vložek ima preprost okrogel obris ter sodi v obliko Guiraud 2a, ki je datirana od 1. st. pr. Kr. do začetka 2. st. po Kr.53 2.1.1.4 Vojaška oprema Branik držaja meča (t. 2: 1) ima zvončasto obliko, tako da bi ga najlaže povezali z meči faze LT C254 ali LT D1.55 Velik žebelj (t. 2: 5), s polkrožno glavico premera 2,3 cm in konico dolgo skoraj 5 cm, lahko predstavlja zakovico ščitne 44 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 178 Völling 1994, 198–207; Bockius, Łuczkiewicz 2004, 61–67; Sedlmayer 2009, 18–19. Helga Sedlmayer even determined the Kostrzewski M-a1 ibulae from Magdalensberg as transitional to Type ReyVodoz 1.0; Sedlmayer 2009, 18. Sedlmayer 2009, 18. Feugère 1985, 188–189, form 2a2. Fingerlin 1986, 235/3, 256/2, 519/10, 565/2. Hübener 1973, pl. 27: 7. Rey-Vodoz 1998, 13–14. On the diferentiation between the Late La Tène and Early Imperial forms of wire-bow ibulae see Gugl 2001, 313. Demetz 1999, 43–46, map 8; Garbsch 1965, 51–52; Garbsch 1985, 567, ig. 7. Jobst 1975, 125, form 36A; Riha 1979, 209, variant 8.2.4; Feugère 1985, 416–421, form 30g2. Guiraud 1989, 181–182, 203, ig. 53; Riha 1990, 30–31: Sphendonenform; Johns 1996, 42–43; e.g. Alesia: Brouquier-Reddé, Deyber 2001, pl. 93: 76–82. 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 Helga Sedlmayer je ibule Kostrzewski M-a1 s Štalenske gore celo uvrstila na prehod k tipu Rey-Vodoz 1.0; Sedlmayer 2009, 18. Sedlmayer 2009, 18. Feugère 1985, 188–189, oblika 2a2. Fingerlin 1986, 235/3, 256/2, 519/10, 565/2. Hübener 1973, t. 27: 7. Rey-Vodoz 1998, 13–14. O razlikovanju med oblikami poznolatenskih in zgodnjecesarskih žičnatih ibul: Gugl 2001, 313. Demetz 1999, 43–46, karta 8; Garbsch 1965, 51–52; Garbsch 1985, 567, sl. 7. Jobst 1975, 125, oblika 36A; Riha 1979, 209, varianta 8.2.4; Feugère 1985, 416–421, oblika 30g2. Guiraud 1989, 181–182, 203, sl. 53; Riha 1990, 30–31: Sphendonenform; Johns 1996, 42–43; prim. npr. Alezija: BrouquierReddé, Deyber 2001, t. 93: 76–82. Mokronog IIb; Božič 1987, 875, sl. 45: 1, 4. Mokronog IIIa; npr. Magdalenska gora, grob V/42; Hencken 1978, sl. 163: c; Novo mesto, Beletov vrt, grob 169: Knez 1992, t. 60: 4. 2.1.1.4 Military equipment he ogival hilt-guard of a sword (pl. 2: 1) can best be compared to those on swords from LT C254 or LT D1.55 he large nail (pl. 2: 5) with a semiglobular head measuring 2.3 cm in diameter and an almost 5 cm long shank may represent a shield boss rivet from the Middle56 or Late La Tène period.57 Similar objects can, for example, be found among the shield boss rivets from Alesia (time of Caesar).58 Large rivets were also used on shield bosses and handgrips from the Augustan period.59 he handgrip of a shield (pl. 1: 20) takes the form of a bar of lat triangular cross section and round lattened parts bearing rivet holes. Such handgrips are known from Middle Augustan military camps at Dangstetten60 and Oberaden,61 while in the south-eastern Alps they were found in graves at Bela cerkev 62 and Verdun.63 he handgrips from the Late Augustan period, in contrast, show a diferent form.64 he lead slingshot (pl. 2: 2) is double pyramidal in shape and rectangular in cross section, which makes it a variant of Type III after Völling.65 It weighs 36.6 g and ranks among the lighter examples.66 he double-pyramidal slingshots appear on reliably dated sites of the irst third of the 1st century BC.67 In the south-eastern Alps, they are very rare. hey were found within the settlement at BardaRoba in the Natisone valleys dating to the beginning of the 1st century BC at the latest.68 he examples from Grad near Šmihel were dated indirectly into the 2nd century BC on the basis of other inds indicating a military conlict.69 An isolated example also came to light at Zgornja Slivnica below Magdalenska gora in the Dolenjska region.70 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 Mokronog IIb; Božič 1987, 875, ig. 45: 1, 4. Mokronog IIIa; e.g. Magdalenska gora, grave V/42; Hencken 1978, ig. 163: c; Novo mesto, Beletov vrt, grave 169: Knez 1992, pl. 60: 4. Mokronog IIb; Slatina in Rožna dolina, graves 10, 16, 19: Pirkmajer 1991, pls. 11: 70, 15: 100, 16: 110. Strap shield boss, beginning of Mokronog IIIa – Mokronog, grave 1: Guštin 1984, ig. 22: 4; round shield boss – Magdalenska gora, grave V/42, Mokronog IIIa: Hencken 1978, ig. 163: b; chronology of the graves Božič 1999, 198, 210–211. Sievers 2001, 146, ig. 7, pl. 46: 102–104. Verdun, graves 1, 41, 84, 112: Breščak, in this book; Reka near Cerkno, grave 11: Guštin 1991, pls. 33: 15, 34: 2. Fingerlin 1986, 426/2; Fingerlin 1998, 1152/1, 1156/12, 1221/8, 1238/5, 1254/8, 1257/8. Kühlborn 1992, pl. 31: 42–43. Dular 1991, pl. 75: 20, 23. Breščak, in this book. E.g. Kalkriese: Harnecker, Franzius 2008, pl. 4: B. Völling 1990, 34–35; Laharnar 2011, 351, 369. Laharnar 2011, 353–355, 370–371. Völling 1990, 35. Tagliaferri 1986, 125, 132, pl. 27; Chiabà 2007, 54. Horvat 1993, 334, ig. 1: 1; Horvat 2002, 144–145, 160, pl. 20: 8–9; Laharnar 2011, 351–356, 369–372; Laharnar, in this book. Horvat 1993, 335, ig. 1: 16 – determined as Type II in the publication. grbe srednjelatenskega56 ali poznolatenskega časa.57 Med zakovicami ščitnih grb iz Alezije (Cezarjev čas) so tudi takšne, ki so podobne primerku s Straže.58 Velike zakovice so bile v rabi tudi na avgustejskodobnih ščitnih grbah in držajih ščitov.59 Držaj ščita (t. 1: 20) ima prečko nizkega trikotnega preseka ter okrogle ploščate razširitve z luknjicami za zakovice. Takšni držaji so bili najdeni v srednjeavgustejskih vojaških taborih Dangstetten60 in Oberaden.61 Na jugovzhodnoalpskem prostoru so bili odkriti v grobovih v Beli cerkvi62 in na Verdunu.63 V poznoavgustejskem času so držaji drugačni.64 Svinčeni izstrelek za pračo (t. 2: 2) ima dvojnopiramidasto obliko s pravokotnim presekom, torej gre za različico tipa III po Völlingu.65 S težo 36,6 g sodi med lažje primerke.66 Dvojnopiramidasti izstrelki s pravokotnim presekom se pojavljajo na dobro datiranih najdiščih prve tretjine 1. st. pr. Kr.,67 na jugovzhodnoalpskem območju pa so zelo redki. Izstrelki z naselbine Barda-Roba v Nadiških dolinah sodijo najpozneje na začetek 1. st. pr. Kr.68 Na Gradu pri Šmihelu so posredno, po drugih najdbah, ki kažejo na vojaški spopad, datirani v 2. st. pr. Kr.69 Osamljeni izstrelek je bil odkrit v Zgornji Slivnici pod Magdalensko goro na Dolenjskem.70 Odlomek (t. 2: 3) predstavlja del obeska s konjske opreme. Gre za zelo razširjeno obliko krilatih obeskov, katerih zanka je bila oblikovana v glavo vodne ptice (tukaj odlomljena). Najstarejši primerki sodijo v poznoavgustejski / tiberijski čas, zelo razširjeni so bili v klavdijsko-neronskem obdobju, izginili pa so v zadnji tretjini 1. st. po Kr.71 Različne oblike žebljičkov za čevlje so bile odkrite na vseh območjih Straže, tako na zgornjih terasah kot tudi na spodnjem delu, okoli območja 14 (sl. 3: 14). 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 Mokronog IIb; Slatina v Rožni dolini, grobovi 10, 16, 19: Pirkmajer 1991, t. 11: 70, 15: 100, 16: 110. Trakasta ščitna grba, začetek stopnje Mokronog IIIa – Mokronog, grob 1: Guštin 1984, sl. 22: 4; okrogla ščitna grba – Magdalenska gora, grob V/42, stopnja Mokronog IIIa: Hencken 1978, sl. 163: b; kronologija grobov Božič 1999, 198, 210–211. Sievers 2001, 146, sl. 7, t. 46: 102–104. Verdun, grobovi 1, 41, 84, 112: Breščak, v tem zborniku; Reka pri Cerknem, grob 11: Guštin 1991, t. 33: 15, 34: 2. Fingerlin 1986, 426/2; Fingerlin 1998, 1152/1, 1156/12, 1221/8, 1238/5, 1254/8,1257/ 8. Kühlborn 1992, t. 31: 42–43. Dular 1991, t. 75: 20, 23. Breščak, v tem zborniku. Prim. Kalkriese: Harnecker, Franzius 2008, t. 4: B. Völling 1990, 34–35; Laharnar 2011, 351, 369. Laharnar 2011, 353–355, 370–371. Völling 1990, 35. Tagliaferri 1986, 125, 132, t. 27; prim. Chiabà 2007, 54. Horvat 1993, 334, sl. 1: 1; Horvat 2002, 144–145, 160, t. 20: 8–9; Laharnar 2011, 351–356, 369–372; Laharnar, v tem zborniku. Horvat 1993, 335, sl. 1: 16 – tam kot tip II. Deschler-Erb 1998; Deschler-Erb 1999, 49–51; Deschler-Erb 2007, 85–87, sl. 6 – Kalkriese. 179 he fragment on pl. 2: 3 represents part of a horse gear pendant. It shows a very widespread form of winged pendants, the loop of which was shaped into the head of a water bird (broken of on the example from Straža). he earliest examples of such pendants date to the Late Augustan / Tiberian period; they were most common during the Claudio-Neronian period and gradually disappeared in the last third of the 1st century AD.71 he area on and around Straža, both on the upper terraces as well as in the lower part around Location 14 (ig. 3: 14), yielded various forms of hobnails. he hobnails with large roof-shaped heads, mostly measuring 1.5–2 cm in diameter, have ribs shaped into a cross and separated by embossed dots on their lower sides (pl. 2: 6–12). Such hobnails were used to stud the footwear of the Roman soldiers in the time of Caesar’s Gallic wars and of the civil wars after Caesar’s death, but were no longer to be found in the military camps from the beginning of the Middle Augustan period.72 In the south-eastern Alpine area, they were found on Grad near Reka and Gradišče near Cerkno, dated to the fourth decade BC,73 but also on Žerovnišček,74 Stari grad above Unec75 and Baba near Slavina.76 Furthermore, they were found in Moggio,77 Gurina78 and on Steinerberg near Stein in the Jauntal.79 During the Augustan period, hobnail heads become smaller and the cross-and-dots pattern is no longer typical. he patterns, however, are now infrequent, longer lasting and consisting, for example, of dots arranged in a circle or only of ribs.80 Belonging to this later group are also several hobnails from Straža; they roughly measure a centimetre in diameter and may be without a pattern (pl. 2: 17–30), with ribs only (pl. 2: 13) or with dots only (pl. 2: 14–16). 2.1.1.5 Implements and other objects he handle (pl. 3: 2) with characteristic mouldings on the terminals may have formed part of a bronze bucket with dolphin-shaped attachments of Type Eggers 18, such as were produced in Italy in LT D1, but remained in use even later. Žebljički z velikimi strehastimi kapicami in večinoma s premerom od 1,5 do 2 cm imajo na spodnji strani križno razporejena rebra in bunčice (t. 2: 6–12). S takšnimi so bila podkovana obuvala rimskih vojakov v času Cezarjevih galskih vojn in v obdobju državljanskih vojn po njegovi smrti, ni pa jih več v vojaških taborih iz začetka srednjeavgustejske dobe.72 Na jugovzhodnoalpskem prostoru so bili odkriti na Gradu pri Reki in na Gradišču pri Cerknem, kjer so datirani v četrto desetletje pr. Kr.,73 nadalje na Žerovniščku,74 na Starem gradu nad Uncem75 in na Babi pri Slavini.76 Najdeni so bili tudi v Moggiu,77 na Gurini78 in na utrjeni naselbini Kamenska gora pri Kamnu v Podjuni (nem. Steiner Berg bei Stein).79 V avgustejskem obdobju se kapice žebljičkov za čevlje postopoma manjšajo in vzorec križa z bunčicami ni več značilen. Vzorci na spodnji strani pa so manj pogosti in dolgotrajnih oblik – npr. samo krožno razporejene bunčice ali samo rebra.80 V to mlajšo skupino sodijo žebljički s Straže s kapicami premera okoli 1 cm, ki so brez vzorca (t. 2: 17–30), lahko pa imajo samo rebra (t. 2: 13) oziroma samo bunčice (t. 2: 14–16). 2.1.1.5 Orodje in različna oprema Ročaj (t. 3: 2) z značilnimi svitkastimi odebelitvami na zaključkih je lahko sodil k bronastemu vedru z delinskimi atašami tipa Eggers 18, kakršna so izdelovali v Italiji v LT D1, v rabi pa so bila še pozneje. Bila so priljubljena pri srednjeevropskih Keltih in pri Germanih.81 Dva ročaja s svitkastimi odebelitvami sta bila najdena na Štalenski gori.82 Podobne svitkaste zaključke imajo tudi ročaji veder tipa Beaucaire (različica a: Fällanden-Vahrendorf). Pri tej obliki imajo ročaji običajno na sredini dodan še obroček. Tip Beaucaire je tudi datiran v LT D1,83 ker pa je zelo redek severno od Alp, domnevajo, da je nekoliko starejši kot tip Eggers 18.84 72 73 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 180 Deschler-Erb 1998; Deschler-Erb 1999, 49–51; Deschler-Erb 2007, 85–87, ig. 6 – Kalkriese. Istenič 2005a, 81; Brouquier-Reddé, Deyber 2001, 303–304, pl. 93: 138; Poux 2008, 376–381; Laharnar 2009, 107–108, 132–133; Martin-Kilcher 2011, 35. Istenič 2005a, 81, 83–84, ig. 5. Laharnar 2009, 107–108, 132–133, pl. 5: 10–17. Gaspari 2009, 323, ig. 7: 5–7; Laharnar, in this book. Laharnar 2012, 201, pl. 3: 11; Laharnar, in this book. Canal del Ferro valley; Faleschini 2012, 55, 144: ig. 23. Jablonka 2001, 158, pl. 112: 19–20; Gamper 2007, 371, igs. 4: 9–10, 8: 4–5, 10: 1, 4, 11: 18–61. Carinthia; Gleirscher 2001, 245, ig. 5: 9. Istenič 2005a, 81; Poux 2008, 376–381; Laharnar 2009, 107– 108, 132–133; Martin-Kilcher 2011, 35. 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 Istenič 2005a, 81; Brouquier-Reddé, Deyber 2001, 303–304, t. 93: 138; Poux 2008, 376–381; Laharnar 2009, 107–108, 132– 133; Martin-Kilcher 2011, 35. Istenič 2005a, 81, 83–84, sl. 5. Laharnar 2009, 107–108, 132–133, t. 5: 10–17. Gaspari 2009, 323, sl. 7: 5–7; Laharnar, v tem zborniku. Laharnar 2012, 201, t. 3: 11; Laharnar, v tem zborniku. Dolina Canal del Ferro; Faleschini 2012, 55, 144: sl. 23. Jablonka 2001, 158, t. 112: 19–20; Gamper 2007, 371, sl. 4: 9–10, 8: 4–5, 10: 1, 4, 11: 18–61. Gleirscher 2001, 245, sl. 5: 9. Istenič 2005a, 81; Poux 2008, 376–381; Laharnar 2009, 107– 108, 132–133; Martin-Kilcher 2011, 35. Wielowiejski 1985, 157–167; Wielowiejski 1987; Van Endert 1991, 81, t. 24: 389, 395; Bolla, Boube, Guillaumet 1991, 13–15. Deimel 1987, 26–27, t. 9: 2, 5. Fitzpatrick 1987: kot tip Fällanden; Bolla, Boube, Guillaumet 1991, 19–21; Sevinç, Treister 2003, 241–242. Fitzpatrick 1987, 107–109; Schönfelder 2003, 39–40. hey were popular among the central European Celts and the Germans.81 Two handles with moulded terminals that may have belonged to such buckets were found on Magdalensberg.82 Similar moulded terminals can also be seen on handles of Type Beaucaire buckets (Variant a: Fällanden– Vahrendorf). hese, however, usually have a small ring added in the centre. Type Beaucaire also dates to LT D1,83 but is considered somewhat earlier than Type Eggers 18 because it appears extraordinarily rarely north of the Alps.84 he cast bronze bell (pl. 3: 1) is characteristically pyramidal in shape, rectangular in plan and has an oval loop. Such bells were in use from the end of the 3rd to the beginning of the 5th centuries.85 Seven bells of this type were found in the irst and three in the second hoard ind from Gora above Polhov Gradec, dated to the second half of the 4th and the beginning of the 5th centuries.86 A similar bell was also found in the Late Roman hoard from Grdavov hrib, which is located relatively close to Straža.87 he coulter (pl. 3: 8) is a reduced imitation of large coulters that appear in contexts from the 3rd and 4th centuries.88 Miniature coulters were found on Dunaj near Jereka, where miniature plough shares were also recovered.89 Reduced parts of a plough are believed to have had a votive character.90 he small knife (pl. 3: 10) has a lat tang with a single rivet that shows a stepped transition into a straight blade. he lat tang with a single rivet is to be found on large knives with a curved blade from Magdalensberg.91 A similar tang can also be observed on a knife from Grave 228 from Verdun, dated to the third quarter of the 1st century AD.92 he curved knife (pl. 4: 1) with a socketed handle and a characteristic knob on the tip of the blade dates to the Late Roman period, i.e. the 3rd and 4th centuries. Such knives were used to prune branches.93 he inds further include four rectangular mounts with a pair of holes. he mount on pl. 3: 11 is curved, with one of the longer edges rolled outwards. he curvature, size and a pair of holes connect it with a special group of Late An81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 Wielowiejski 1985, 157–167; Wielowiejski 1987; Van Endert 1991, 81, pl. 24: 389, 395; Bolla, Boube, Guillaumet 1991, 13–15. Deimel 1987, 26–27, pl. 9: 2, 5. Fitzpatrick 1987: Type Fällanden; Bolla, Boube, Guillaumet 1991, 19–21; Sevinç, Treister 2003, 241–242. Fitzpatrick 1987, 107–109; Schönfelder 2003, 39–40. Božič 2005, 317–318. Božič 2005, 354–356, igs. 10, 13: 1–3. Sagadin 2000, ig. 2: 9. Henning 1987, 61–63, Type E3 – with a curved back; Božič 2005, 345. Gabrovec 1966, 248–249, pl. 1: 9–12, 14–16. Gabrovec 1966, 248–249. Dolenz 1998, 257–259, pls. 99–102: ME27–49. Breščak, in this book. Pohanka 1986, 180–181, 187–189, type 2. Ulit bronast zvonec (t. 3: 1) ima piramidasto obliko s pravokotno bazo in ovalno zanko, kar so značilnosti zvoncev med koncem 3. in začetkom 5. st.85 Sedem zvoncev te vrste je bilo najdenih v prvi in trije v drugi zakladni najdbi z Gore nad Polhovim Gradcem, ki sta datirani v drugo polovico 4. in na začetek 5. st.86 Podoben zvonec je bil odkrit tudi v poznorimskem zakladu z Grdavovega hriba, ki leži razmeroma blizu Straže.87 Črtalo (t. 3: 8) je pomanjšan posnetek velikih črtal, ki se pojavljajo v sklopih 3. in 4. st.88 Miniaturna črtala so znana še z Dunaja pri Jereki, kjer so bili odkriti tudi miniaturni lemeži.89 Pomanjšane oblike delov pluga imajo verjetno votivni pomen.90 Majhen nož (t. 3: 10) ima ploščato nasadišče z eno zakovico, ki preko stopničke prehaja v ravno rezilo. Ploščato nasadišče z eno zakovico imajo veliki noži z zakrivljenim rezilom s Štalenske gore.91 Podobno nasadišče lahko vidimo tudi na nožu iz groba 228 iz Verduna, ki datiran v tretjo četrtino 1. st. po Kr.92 Zakrivljen nož (t. 4: 1) s tulastim nasadiščem za držaj in z značilnim gumbom na koncu rezila sodi v poznorimsko obdobje, tj. v 3. in 4. st. Takšne nože so uporabljali za obrezovanje vej.93 Najdeni so bili štirje pravokotni okovi s po dvema luknjicama. Okov (t. 3: 11) je usločen, eden od daljših robov pa je cevkasto uvit navzven. Usločenost, velikost in dve luknjici ga povezujejo s posebno skupino poznoantičnih usločenih okovov. Za razliko od primerka s Straže pa imajo poznoantični okovi rob uvit navznoter in nesimetrično postavljene luknjice. Poznoantični usločeni okovi se pojavljajo na jugovzhodnoalpskih višinskih naselbinah 5. in 6. st., njihova funkcija pa ni jasna.94 Ostali trije okovi (t. 3: 12–14) imajo raven klinast presek, luknjice pa so bližje debelejšemu robu. Ta vrsta okovov je redka.95 Konica (t. 2: 4) je bila del obuvala kopita (hiposandale). Prva obuvala se pojavijo v sredini 1. st. pr. Kr.,96 v različnih oblikah pa so bila v rabi do konca 4. st.97 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 Božič 2005, 317–318. Božič 2005, 354–356, sl. 10, 13: 1–3. Sagadin 2000, sl. 2: 9. Henning 1987, 61–63, tip E3 – z zapognjenim hrbtom; Božič 2005, 345. Gabrovec 1966, 248–249, t. 1: 9–12, 14–16. Gabrovec 1966, 248–249. Dolenz 1998, 257–259, t. 99–102: ME27–49. Breščak, v tem zborniku. Pohanka 1986, 180–181, 187–189, tip 2. Božič, Ciglenečki 1995, 259–262, 273; Milavec 2011, 51–52. Božič, Ciglenečki 1995, 261, 273, op. 116. Poux 2008, 388–389. Plaum 2007, 305–308, 325–326. 181 tique curved mounts, though these have one of the longer edges rolled inwards and the holes placed unsymmetrically. Late Antique curved mounts are to be found on south-eastern Alpine hilltop settlements of the 5th and 6th centuries, whereby their function has not yet been explained.94 he other three mounts from Straža (pl. 3: 12–14) are lat and tapering in the cross section, with the holes lying closer to the thicker edge. his kind of mount is rare.95 Sekira (t. 5: 1) je imela ovalno luknjo za toporišče, nizko kladivasto teme in simetrično, enakomerno razširjeno trikotno rezilo. he stud on pl. 2: 4 formed part of a hipposandal. hese irst appeared in the mid-1st century BC96 and remained in use in various forms to the end of the 4th century.97 Nasprotno se uhate sekire s simetrično razširjenim rezilom v latenskem obdobju pojavljajo predvsem v alpskem prostoru, med južno Tirolsko in Posočjem.100 Sekire iz Posočja imajo uho z nizkim kladivastim temenom, rezilo pa je vitko in se simetrično razširi.101 Sekira s Straže (t. 5: 1) ima simetrično rezilo, ki pa ni tako vitko kot pri sekirah iz Posočja, prav tako nima izrazitega kladivastega temena. Torej ostaja njena datacija odprta. he axe head (pl. 5: 1) has an oval eye, a low hammer-like butt and a symmetrical, evenly widened triangular blade. Axes in the La Tène period are usually of the shaft-hole type, with a more or less pronounced hammer-like butt and a slightly unsymmetrical blade.98 his type is also typical during the Early Imperial period.99 he shaft-hole axes with a symmetrically widened blade, in contrast, appear in the La Tène period predominantly in the Alpine regions, between South Tyrol and Posočje.100 he axes from Posočje have an eye with a low hammer-like butt, while the blade is slender and symmetrical.101 he axe from Straža (pl. 5: 1) has a symmetrical blade, but it is not as slender as on the axes from Posočje; its butt is also not as pronouncedly hammer-like. he question of its date thus remains open. V latenskem obdobju so običajne uhate sekire z bolj ali manj izrazitim kladivastim temenom in nekoliko nesimetričnim rezilom, ki je zgoraj ravno, spodaj pa rahlo razširjeno.98 Ta tip je značilen tudi za zgodnjecesarsko obdobje.99 2.1.1.6 Keramika Največ keramike je bilo najdeno v spodnjem delu naselbine (območje sl. 3: 14). Odlomki, narejeni na lončarsko vreteno (t. 5: 5–6), iz prečiščene gline, svetlo oranžne in svetlo sive barve so verjetno pripadali latenskodobnim glinenkam.102 Na latensko dobo kaže tudi nekaj odlomkov iz graitne keramike (brez slike) in morda tudi grobi lonec z odebeljenim ustjem (t. 6: 8).103 Veliki lonci in pekve so iz grobozrnate gline, rjave in sive barve ter delani na roko. Pogosto so okrašeni z metličenjem (t. 5: 8–10; t. 6: 2–3, 6–7, 10–11, 15, 19), ki je tudi običajno na latenski grobi keramiki.104 2.1.2 Poselitev Straže 2.1.1.6 Pottery Most ceramic inds came to light in the lower part of the settlement (location ig. 3: 14). he shards of wheel-thrown vessels (pl. 5: 5–6) made of reined clay and light orange as well as light gray in colour probably formed part of La Tène period ceramic bottles.102 Also pointing towards the La Tène period is several shards of graphite pottery (no igure) and possibly also a coarse jar with a thickened rim (pl. 6: 8).103 Large jars and baking lids are made of coarsegrained clay, brown and grey in colour and hand thrown. Many bear decoration made with a brush (pl. 5: 8–10; pl. 6: 2–3, 6–7, 10–11, 15, 19), which is common on La Tène coarseware.104 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 182 104 Božič, Ciglenečki 1995, 259–262, 273; Milavec 2011, 51–52. Božič, Ciglenečki 1995, 261, 273, note 116. Poux 2008, 388–389. Plaum 2007, 305–308, 325–326. Jacobi 1974, 33. Pietsch 1983, 10–11; Manning 1985, 15; Pohanka 1986, 236– 237: Type 2 a; Dolenz 1998, 150, pl. 45: F13. Jacobi 1974, 33–34; Nothdurter 1979, 33–34; Zanier 1999, 57. Guštin 1991, 59, pls. 6: 2, 10: 11, 14: 4 etc. Dular, Tomanič Jevremov 2009, 171, 173. Dular, Tomanič Jevremov 2009, 171–172¸ Horvat, Bavdek 2009, 80–81. Dular, Tomanič Jevremov 2009, 172. Odlomka narebrenih zapestnic (lega sl. 3: 1; t. 1: 2; natančna lega ni znana t. 1: 3 ) in morda tudi eden od odlomkov keramike (lega sl. 3: 14; t. 6: 16) nakazujejo poselitev griča že v starejši železni dobi. Pripadajoče grobišče je verjetno ležalo na vznožju Straže – na Milharjevem hribu in na Pristavi (sl. 2: 2–3), kjer so bili odkriti grobovi s konca bronaste in začetka železne dobe (glej zgoraj). Najdbe z vseh območij naselbine kažejo na poselitev v latenskem obdobju (t. 1: 4–14; t. 2: 1; t. 3: 2; t. 5: 5–6). Iz tega časa je morda večina keramike (t. 5: 5–10; t. 6: 1–15, 17–26). Železno žičnato ibulo (t. 1: 4) postavljamo v srednjelatensko obdobje (LT C1). Nizek zvončasti branik držaja meča (t. 2: 1) je datiran v LT C2 ali LT D1. Ročaj bronastega vedra (t. 3: 2) sodi v LT D1, čeprav je možna tudi poznejša raba. 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 Jacobi 1974, 33. Pietsch 1983, 10–11; Manning 1985, 15; Pohanka 1986, 236– 237: tip 2 a; Dolenz 1998, 150, t. 45: F13. Jacobi 1974, 33–34; Nothdurter 1979, 33–34; Zanier 1999, 57. Guštin 1991, 59, t. 6: 2, 10: 11, 14: 4 itd. Dular, Tomanič Jevremov 2009, 171, 173. Dular, Tomanič Jevremov 2009, 171–172; Horvat, Bavdek 2009, 80–81. Dular, Tomanič Jevremov 2009, 172. 2.1.2 Settlement of Straža he two fragments of ribbed bracelets (location ig. 3: 1; pl. 1: 2; without exact location pl. 1: 3) and possibly also one of the ceramic shards (location ig. 3: 14; pl. 6: 16) indicates that the hill was already settled in the Early Iron Age. he cemetery was probably located at the foot of Straža – on Milharjev hrib and on Pristava (ig. 2: 2–3), where the documented graves date to the end of the Bronze and beginning of the Iron Age (see above). he inds from all parts of Straža indicate that the hill was also inhabited during the La Tène period (pl. 1: 4–14; pl. 2: 1; pl. 3: 2; pl. 5: 5–6). Most pottery dates broadly to this period (pl. 5: 5–10; pl. 6: 1–15, 17–26). A more precise date can be ascribed to the iron wire-bow ibula (pl. 1: 4), namely the Middle La Tène period (LT C1). he ogival hilt-guard of a sword (pl. 2: 1) dates to LT C2 or LT D1. he handle of a bronze bucket (pl. 3: 2) dates to LT D1, although later use is not to be excluded. Two conchoidal ibulae (pl. 1: 13–14) and four iron arched ibulae of Type Kostrzewski M-a1 (pl. 1: 6–9) date to LT D2 or Mokronog IIIb, spanning in absolute terms from 70/60 to 15 BC.105 he earliest pieces of Roman military equipment at Straža are the large hobnails with cross-shaped ribs and dots (pl. 2: 6–12), dated from the time of Caesar’s Gallic wars to the Early Augustan period (sixth to third decades BC). his time frame may also hold true of the double-pyramidal lead slingshot (pl. 2: 2), although it might be even earlier. On Magdalensberg, the arched ibulae of Type Kostrzewski M-a1 were found together with Roman military equipment in Context OR/20c c dated to the fourth decade BC.106 his points to a correlation of the two groups of inds also at Straža and also hypothetically narrows the date here. Several pieces of the Roman military equipment from Straža are of a later date. he handgrip of a shield, for example, dates to the Middle Augustan period (pl. 1: 20). he small hobnails with either a cross or a dot pattern appear throughout the Augustan period (pl. 2: 11–16). he winged pendant (pl. 2: 3), which formed part of horse gear, dates to the 1st century AD, more precisely from the reign of Tiberius onwards. he ibula with wings (pl. 1: 15) of Type A 238 b2 formed part of the female clothing in the Middle Augustan period and the irst third of the 1st century AD. A coin of Tiberius (see Catalogue) was found on the summit of Straža. Dating V stopnjo LT D2 oziroma Mokronog IIIb, ki je približno datirana od 70/60 do 15 pr. Kr.,105 sodijo dve školjčni ibuli (t. 1: 13–14) in štiri železne usločene ibule vrste Kostrzewski M–a1 (t. 1: 6–9). Najstarejši deli rimske vojaške opreme na Straži so veliki žebljički za čevlje s križnimi rebri in bunčicami (t. 2: 6–12), ki so datirani od časa Cezarjevih vojn v Galiji do zgodnjeavgustejske dobe (6. do 3. desetletje pr. Kr.). Morda sodi v ta čas tudi dvojnopiramidasti svinčeni izstrelek (t. 2: 2), lahko pa bi bil celo starejši. Na Štalenski gori so usločene ibule vrste Kostrzewski M– a1 ležale skupaj z rimsko vojaško opremo v sklopu OR/20c c, ki je datiran v 4. desetletje pr. Kr.106 To nakazuje na možno povezavo med obema skupinama najdb tudi na Straži ter hipotetično zožuje datacijo tudi tu. Posamične kose rimske vojaške opreme s Straže lahko datiramo še pozneje. Ročaj ščita sodi v srednjeavgustejsko obdobje (t. 1: 20). V celotno avgustejsko obdobje bi lahko datirali manjše žebljičke za čevlje s križnim vzorcem oziroma samo z vzorcem bunčic (t. 2: 13–16). Krilati obesek (t. 2: 3), ki je bil del konjske opreme, pa sodi v 1. st. po Kr. – od Tiberijeve vladavine dalje. Fibula s krilci vrste A 238 b2 je bila del ženske noše v srednjeavgustejskem obdobju in v prvi tretjini 1. st. po Kr. (t. 1: 15). Na vrhu Straže je bil najden Tiberijev novec (glej Katalog). V zgodnjerimski čas lahko postavimo tudi železen prstan (t. 1: 1), nožič s ploščatim držajem z eno zakovico (t. 3: 10) in morda tudi obuvalo za kopito (t. 2: 4). Ni pa bilo najdenega nobenega odlomka rimske keramike. Številni zgodnjerimski predmeti, ki so bili odkriti po vseh območjih prazgodovinske naselbine, sodijo v vojaško sfero ali pa so ji blizu. Ne moremo jih razložiti kot ostanke spopada, saj manjkajo za to značilne najdbe – npr. različni izstrelki s tipičnimi poškodbami.107 Na podlagi odsotnosti avgustejskodobne keramike in redkosti drugih najdb tega časa (t. 1: 15) sklepamo, da je najpozneje takrat naselbina na Straži zamirala oziroma je bila že opuščena. Težišče poselitve je bilo verjetno že v avgustejskem obdobju prestavljeno v ravnino, na območje vasi Šmartno. Vojaške najdbe tako najlaže razumemo kot občasno prisotnost rimske vojske, morda manjšo postojanko – od sredine 1. st. pr. Kr. (morda od 4. desetletja pr. Kr.) do zgodnjega tiberijskega obdobja. Iz poznorimske dobe, od 3. st. do začetka 5. st., izvira nekaj predmetov z območja vrha Straže: obročasta ibula (t. 1: 105 106 105 106 Horvat, Bavdek 2009, 52–53; Istenič 2010, 141, note 15. Sedlmayer 2009, 18; chronology of the context: SchindlerKaudelka 2002; Božič 2008, 128–130 107 Horvat, Bavdek 2009, 52–53; Istenič 2010, 141, op. 15. Sedlmayer 2009, 18; datacija sklopa: Schindler-Kaudelka 2002; Božič 2008, 128–130. Prim. Horvat 2002, 141–142, 158–159; Istenič 2005a; Laharnar 2012, 225–229, pril. 6a–6c; Laharnar 2010; Laharnar, v tem zborniku. 183 Figure 5. Cerkovnek. 1 iron and carnelian; 2–7 iron. Scale = 1 : 2 (drawing D. Kniic Lunder). Slika 5. Cerkovnek. 1 železo in karneol; 2–7 železo. M = 1 : 2 (risba D. Kniic Lunder). broadly to the Early Roman period are the iron inger-ring (pl. 1: 1), the small knife with a lat tang and a single rivet (pl. 3: 10) and possibly part of a hipposandal (pl. 2: 4). he site did not yield a single fragment of Roman pottery. Many of the Early Roman objects recovered from the whole area of the prehistoric settlement have a military character or are at least connected to the army. hey cannot be interpreted as the remains of a battle, since the typical battle remains are missing, for example various projectiles with typical damage.107 he virtual absence of other Augustanperiod inds, notably pottery, indicates that the settlement at Straža was already in decline or was abandoned in the Augustan period. he centre of habitation moved to the plain below, to the area of the Šmartno village, probably already in the Augustan period. he military inds on the hill can thus best be understood as occasional presence of the Roman army or even as a small military post lasting from the mid-1st century BC (possibly the fourth decade) to the Early Tiberian period. Several objects from the Straža summit date to the Late Roman period, i.e. from the 3rd to the beginning of the 5th centuries. hese are the penannular ibula (pl. 1: 16), bell (pl. 3: 1), miniature coulter (pl. 3: 8), pruning knife (pl. 4: 1) and probably also the mounts with a pair of holes (pl. 3: 11–14). he absence of contemporary pottery indicates that the human presence on the hill during the Late Roman period was only short-lived or occasional. Straža was probably not settled in Late Antiquity (second half of the 5th and the 6th centuries), as suggested by the absence of small metal inds of the period as well as the lack of visible buildings or defence walls. 2.2 Cerkovnek he hill of Cerkovnek lies to the east of Straža (ig. 2: 7).108 he hill shows no settlement terraces, though it should be said that the western summit (501 m a.s.l.) and the northern slope were subjected to much digging in the past. he hill was discovered in 1994 as an archaeological site by Miran Bremšak, who believes that these surface interventions are rather late in date as suggested by the numerous modern-period metal objects recovered. Several intriguing iron objects were found on the western summit of the hill (ig. 5: 1–2, 4–7) and one on the eastern summit (489 m a.s.l.; ig. 5: 3).109 107 108 109 184 E.g. Horvat 2002, 141–142, 158–159; Istenič 2005a; Laharnar 2012, 225–229, insert 6a–6c; Laharnar 2010; Laharnar, in this book. The name Cerkovnek appears on the TTN 5 map and in Atlas Slovenije (Ljubljana 1986); the name Cerkovnik appears on the TK 25 map. Najdišči Straža in Cerkovnek pri Šmartnem pri Cerkljah (2000), report in the Archive of the Institute for Archaeology ZRC SAZU. 16), zvonec (t. 3: 1), miniaturno črtalo (t. 3: 8), vejnik (t. 4: 1) in verjetno tudi okovi z dvema luknjicama (t. 3: 11–14). Sočasne keramike ni bilo, kar kaže na kratkotrajno ali občasno prisotnost človeka na hribu v poznorimskem času. V poznoantičnem obdobju (druga polovica 5. in 6. st.) Straža verjetno ni bila poseljena, saj ni drobnih kovinskih najdb te dobe in tudi ni videti ostankov zidanih stavb ali obzidja. 2.2 Cerkovnek Vzhodno od Straže, na drugi strani doline Šmidol, leži grič Cerkovnek s tremi vrhovi (sl. 2: 7).108 Na hribu ni videti naselbinskih teras, sta pa območje zahodnega vrha (501 m n. m.) in njegovo severno pobočje močno prekopana. Miran Bremšak, ki je najdišče odkril leta 1994, po številnih novodobnih kovinskih predmetih sodi, da gre za razmeroma mlade posege v prostor. Na zahodnem vrhu je našel več železnih arheoloških predmetov (sl. 5: 1–2, 4–7), eden pa je ležal na vzhodnem vrhu (489 m. n. m.; sl. 5: 3).109 Železna žična ibula (sl. 5: 2) ima nizek lok, peresovino s šestimi navoji in zunanjo tetivo. Premalo je ohranjena za 108 109 Ime »Cerkovnek« na karti TTN 5 in v Atlasu Slovenije (Ljubljana 1986); ime »Cerkovnik« na karti TK 25. Najdišči Straža in Cerkovnek pri Šmartnem pri Cerkljah (2000), poročilo v Arhivu Inštituta za arheologijo ZRC SAZU. he iron wire-bow ibula (ig. 5: 2) has a low bow with a six-coil spring and an external chord. It is insuiciently preserved to be precisely determined as to its type, though the above-stated features connect it to ibulae from LT C2 / Mokronog IIb.110 Figure 6. Cerkovnek. Iron ingerring with a carnelian intaglio (photo M. Zaplatil, ZRC SAZU). Slika 6. Cerkovnek. Železen prstan z gemo iz karneola (foto M. Zaplatil, ZRC SAZU). he iron signet ring with an engraved gem (ig. 5: 1; ig. 6) belongs to the simple Guiraud 2a form (circular hoop, low stone setting), which is dated between the 1st century BC and the beginning of the 2nd century AD.111 he ring is set with a carnelian intaglio showing a musician with a lyre, either Hercules or Apollo, lanked by a tripod.112 Small inds indicate human presence on Cerkovnek during the La Tène and Early Roman periods, though the absence of terraces suggests that the presence did not take the form of a settlement. 3 Gobavica above Mengeš Mengeš and its surroundings are the location of a signiicant settlement area. A large prehistoric hillfort on Gobavica appeared in the beginning of the Early Iron Age at the latest and lasted into the La Tène period.113 A prehistoric settlement was also located at the foot of Gobavica.114 In the Roman times, a large settlement was situated on the plain.115 he excavation of two Early Iron Age hoard inds on Gobavica in 1998 also revealed several Early Roman objects (ig. 7: 2–3, 5, 7–10).116 Later, a further three objects of Early Roman were brought to the Mengeš Town Museum as stray inds (ig. 7: 1, 4, 6). he inds include a ibula (ig. 7: 1) that has a triangular bow with a slit and can therefore be determined as Type Alesia Id after Demetz.117 Finds from military camps and battleields show that the Alesia ibulae were worn by Roman soldiers during Caesar’s Gallic wars and the civil wars after Caesar’s death. hey were almost entirely replaced in the beginning of the Middle Augustan period by the Aucissa ibulae.118 he Alesia ibulae were found in Slovenia only in its western and central parts, but none in the east. On Grad near Reka, for example, they were found within a context connected to the Roman siege of a stronghold of 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 Božič 1987, 876, ig. 45: 7, 10; Božič 1999, 197, 210. Another iron wire-bow ibula of Middle La Tène scheme was also found there, though it is currently not accessible. Guiraud 1989, 181–182, 203, ig. 53; Riha 1990, 30–31; Johns 1996, 42–43. Nestorović 2005, 31, cat. no. 36, pls. 4: 36, 11: 36. Gabrovec 1965, 96–100; Turk 1999; Štibernik 2003; Štibernik 2006. Sagadin 1999, 40–41. Sagadin 1995; Sagadin 1999, 39–46. Železnikar 1999, 37–38. Demetz 1999, 159; Feugère 1985, 299–311: Type 21a3. Istenič 2005b, 188–190, 204–205; Poux 2008, 381–382. natančno tipološko uvrstitev, jo pa naštete značilnosti povezujejo s ibulami obdobja LT C2 / Mokronog IIb.110 Železen pečatni prstan z okrasnim kamnom (sl. 5: 1; sl. 6) sodi v preprosto obliko Guiraud 2a (okrogel obris obročka, okrasni kamen ni dvignjen), ki je datirana od 1. st. pr. Kr. do začetka 2. st. po Kr.111 Ima vstavljeno z gemo iz karneola, na kateri je upodobljen glasbenik z liro – Herkul ali Apolon, ob njem je trinožnik.112 Drobne najdbe nakazujejo človekovo prisotnost na Cerkovneku v latenskem in zgodnjerimskem času, vendar pa, sodeč po odsotnosti teras, to ni bil prostor naselbine. 3 Gobavica nad Mengšem Pomembno naselbinsko območje leži na področju Mengša. Veliko prazgodovinsko gradišče na Gobavici je nastalo najpozneje na začetku starejše železne dobe, trajalo pa je še v latenskem obdobju.113 Prazgodovinska naselbina je ležala tudi na vznožju hriba.114 V rimskem času se je v ravnini širila večja naselbina.115 110 111 112 113 114 115 Božič 1987, 876, sl. 45: 7, 10; Božič 1999, 197, 210. Najdena je bila še ena železna žična ibula srednjelatenske sheme, ki pa je trenutno založena. Guiraud 1989, 181–182, 203, sl. 53; Riha 1990, 30–31; Johns 1996, 42–43. Nestorović 2005, 31, kat. št. 36, t. 4: 36, 11: 36. Gabrovec 1965, 96–100; Turk 1999; Štibernik 2003; Štibernik 2006. Sagadin 1999, 40–41. Sagadin 1995; Sagadin 1999, 39–46. 185 the local population.119 hey also came to light in sites in Carinthia, most numerously on Magdalensberg.120 he ibula with two knobs (ig. 7: 2) belongs to the very common Type Almgren 236c, which is a frequent ind in central and east Slovenia, in Austrian Styria and Lower Austria.121 he earliest examples were found in Late Augustan layers on Magdalensberg,122 but continued to be used throughout the 1st and in the irst third of the 2nd centuries.123 he iron inger-ring (ig. 7: 3) has a raised bezel set with a chalcedony intaglio showing Pegasus. Finger-rings with a raised signet part were in use in the Hellenistic and Roman worlds from the 4th century BC to the 1st century AD. he example from Gobavica belongs to the commonest variant of the form, namely Guiraud 1b.124 Rings of this variant were also found in Middle and Late Augustan military sites, for example at Dangstetten,125 Oberaden,126 Augsburg-Oberhausen127 and Kalkriese.128 he Pegasus motif is made in the so-called pearl style, which characterized the Roman glyptics of the 2nd and 1st centuries BC.129 Rings with decorative stones are common in military contexts.130 he junction loop (ig. 7: 5) was used as strap itting of the military horse gear and was originally attached to a ring.131 he loop proper is decorated with longitudinal ribs, while the plate is rectangular and moulded on the upper side near the loop. It belongs to Type 10 after Bishop, characterized by a rectangular plate.132 Simple rectangular and modestly decorated junction loops are known from Middle Augustan military camps at Dangstetten133 and Oberaden,134 while an undecorated rectangular junction loop was found at Vindonissa.135 he example from Gobavica is best comparable to the junction loops with longitudinal ribs on the loop proper and transverse ribs on the upper side of the plate, near the loop, which were found on the Kalkriese battleield, dated to AD 9,136 and at Augsburg-Oberhausen from the Augustan period.137 Later junction loops, from the 1st century AD, are of diferent 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 186 137 Istenič 2005b, 200, 210, ig. 8. Sedlmayer 2009, 36–38. Garbsch 1965, 29–32; Garbsch 1985, 565–570. Sedlmayer 2009, 27, 64, 66–67; tables 35, 39, igs. 35, 37. Istenič 1999, 57–58. Guiraud 1989, 180, 203, ig. 53. Fingerlin 1986, 54/9, 550/31. Kühlborn 1992, 146, pl. 33: 54. Hübener 1973, pl. 31. Harnecker, Franzius 2008, pl. 30: 419–421. Fr. style perlé; Guiraud 1988, 41–42; Guiraud 1996, 62–64; Nestorović 2005, 18–19, 32. Poux 2008, 383–384; Riha 1990, 29. Bishop 1988, 100–103; Deschler-Erb 1999, 60–61. Bishop 1988, 161, 163, ig. 51. Fingerlin 1986, 441/1, 550/5 – with three rivets. Kühlborn 1992, pl. 34: 59 – with four rivets. Unz, Deschler-Erb 1997, 46, pl. 61: 1675. Harnecker, Franzius 2008, pl. 17: 259–260. Hübener 1973, pl. 13: 3–5. Leta 1998 so pri izkopavanjih dveh zakladnih najdb z začetka starejše železne dobe na vrhu Gobavice med drugim odkrili tudi posamične zgodnjerimske najdbe (sl. 7: 2–3, 5, 7–10).116 Pozneje so v Mestni muzej Mengeš prišli še trije naključno odkriti zgodnjerimski predmeti (sl. 7: 1, 4, 6). Fibulo (sl. 7: 1) zaradi trikotnega predrtega loka lahko uvrstimo v tip Alezija Id po Demetzu.117 Najdbe iz vojaških taborov in območij bitk kažejo, da so ibule skupine Alezija nosili rimski vojaki v času Cezarjevih Galskih vojn in v času državljanskih vojn po Cezarjevi smrti. Na začetku srednjeavgustejskega obdobja so jih skoraj v celoti nadomestile ibule vrste Aucissa.118 Fibule skupine Alezija so bile najdene samo na zahodnem in osrednjem delu Slovenije. Na Gradu pri Reki sodijo v sklop najdb, povezanih z rimskim obleganjem staroselske postojanke v četrtem desetletju pr. Kr.119 Srečamo jih tudi na koroških najdiščih, največ na Štalenski gori.120 Fibula z dvema gumboma (sl. 7: 2) sodi v pogosto različico A 236 c, ki je zelo razširjena v osrednji in vzhodni Sloveniji, na avstrijskem Štajerskem in v Spodnji Avstriji.121 Najstarejši primerki so bili najdeni v poznoavgustejskih plasteh na Štalenski gori,122 v rabi so bile celo prvo stoletje ter še v prvi tretjini 2. st.123 Železen prstan (sl. 7: 3) ima dvignjen srednji del, v katerega je vstavljen okrasni kamen iz kalcedona z vrezanim motivom Pegaza. Prstani z dvignjenim pečatnim delom so bili v helenističnem in rimskem svetu v rabi od 4. st. pr. Kr. do 1. st. po Kr. Primerek z Gobavice sodi v najbolj pogosto različico te oblike – Guiraud 1b.124 Ta je med drugim prisotna na srednje- in poznoavgustejskih vojaških najdiščih, kot so npr. Dangstetten,125 Oberaden,126 Augsburg-Oberhausen127 in Kalkriese.128 Motiv Pegaza je izdelan v bisernem slogu, ki je značilen za rimsko gliptiko v 2. in 1. st. pr. Kr.129 Prstani z okrasnimi kamni so pogosti v vojaških sklopih.130 Jermenski zaključek z zanko (sl. 7: 5) sodi k vojaški konjski opremi. Na križišču jermenov je bil posamezen jermen s takim velikim in okrašenim zaključkom pritrjen na obro- 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 Železnikar 1999, 37–38. Demetz 1999, 159; Feugère 1985, 299–311: tip 21a3. Istenič 2005b, 188–190, 204–205; Poux 2008, 381–382. Istenič 2005b, 200, 210, sl. 8. Sedlmayer 2009, 36–38. Garbsch 1965, 29–32; Garbsch 1985, 565–570. Sedlmayer 2009, 27, 64, 66–67, tab. 35, 39, sl. 35, 37. Istenič 1999, 57–58. Guiraud 1989, 180, 203, sl. 53. Fingerlin 1986, 54/9, 550/31. Kühlborn 1992, 146, t. 33: 54. Hübener 1973, t. 31. Harnecker, Franzius 2008, t. 30: 419–421. Guiraud 1988, 41–42 [style perlé]; Guiraud 1996, 62–64; Nestorović 2005, 18–19, 32. Poux 2008, 383–384; Riha 1990, 29 – o tem, da železne prstane nosijo moški. Figure 7. Gobavica. 1–2, 4–7 copper-alloy; 3 iron and chalcedony; 8–9 iron; 10 ceramics. Scale = 1 : 2 (drawing D. Kniic Lunder). Slika 7. Gobavica. 1–2, 4–7 bakrova litina; 3 železo in kalcedon; 8–9 železo; 10 keramika. M = 1 : 2 (risba D. Kniic Lunder). forms138 and known in large numbers, for example from Augst139 and Vindonissa.140 he round disc on ig. 7: 6 was a phalera that formed part of horse gear. Phalerae with loops or rivets on the back side were either positioned at strap junction or served to connect the strap and the pendant.141 he example from Gobavica had four loops on the back side, which ranks it into the very frequent Type 3d.142 he two hobnails (ig. 7: 8–9) have a large head with a cross-and-dots pattern on the lower side. Such hobnails date from the mid-1st century AD to the Early Augustan period (see above). he base of a beaker (ig. 7: 10) is made of reined, oxidization-ired clay and ranks among the common forms of thin-walled pottery of the Late Republican and Augustan periods.143 3.1 Signiicance of the Early Roman inds Roman objects found in 1998 were lying isolated within a thin uniform layer that yielded predominantly prehistoric inds.144 he subsequent trenching, conducted in 2005, revealed a settlement from the Early and Late Iron Ages, but no Roman layers,145 which suggests that is less likely to expect a large Roman settlement on Gobavica. ček.131 Primerek z Gobavice ima zanko, okrašeno z vzdolžnimi rebri, ter pravokotno ploščico za pritrditev, ki je na zgornji strani, pred prehodom v zanko, proilirana. Sodi v tip 10 po Bishopu, za katerega je značilna pravokotna ploščica.132 Preproste pravokotne zaključke s skromnim okrasom na zanki poznamo iz srednjeavgustejskih vojaških taborov Dangstetten133 in Oberaden.134 Neokrašen pravokoten zaključek je bil najden tudi v Vindonissi.135 Primerku z Gobavice so najbolj podobni zaključki, za katere so značilna vzdolžna rebra na zanki ter prečna rebra vrhu ploščice, na stiku z zanko, in so bili najdeni na bojišču Kalkriese iz leta 9 po Kr.136 ter na avgustejskem najdišču AugsburgOberhausen.137 Mlajši zaključki, iz 1. st. po Kr., so drugačnih oblik 138 in v večjem številu znani npr. iz Augsta139 in iz Vindonisse.140 Ploščica (sl. 7: 6) predstavlja falero s konjske opreme. Falere so imele zanke ali zakovice na hrbtni strani ter so ležale so na križišču jermenov ali pa povezovale jermen z obeskom.141 Primerek z Gobavice je imel na hrbtni strani štiri zanke, kar ga uvršča v zelo pogosti tip 3d.142 Dva žebljička za podkovanje čevljev (sl. 7: 8–9) imata veliko kapico z vzorcem križa in bunčic na spodnji strani. Takšni žebljički sodijo čas od sredine 1. st. pr. Kr. in zgodnjeavgustejske dobe (glej zgoraj). 131 Most of the Early Roman inds are connected with the Roman army, i.e. the ibula, junction loop, phalera, hobnails 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 Bishop 1988, 100–102, 157–163, igs. 50–51. Deschler-Erb 1999, 60–61, pls. 35: 666–678, 36: 679–687. Unz, Deschler-Erb 1997, 46, pls. 61: 1676–1705, 62: 1706–1756. Bishop 1988, 94–95; Deschler-Erb 1999, 58–59. Bishop 1988, 95, ig. 41. E.g. Schindler-Kaudelka 1975, 30–31, forms 2–6, 16, 20; Horvat, Bavdek 2009, 68–72. Information by Primož Pavlin. Štibernik 2006. 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 Bishop 1988, 100–103; Deschler-Erb 1999, 60–61. Bishop 1988, 161, 163, sl. 51. Fingerlin 1986, 441/1, 550/ 5 – s tremi zakovicami. Kühlborn 1992, t. 34: 59 – s štirimi zakovicami. Unz, Deschler-Erb 1997, 46 [primerjave], t. 61: 1675. Harnecker, Franzius 2008, t. 17: 259–260. Hübener 1973, t. 13: 3–5. Bishop 1988, 100–102, 157–163, sl. 50–51. Deschler-Erb 1999, 60–61, t. 35: 666–678, 36: 679–687. Unz, Deschler-Erb 1997, 46 [primerjave], t. 61: 1676–1705, 62: 1706–1756. Bishop 1988, 94–95; Deschler-Erb 1999, 58–59. Bishop 1988, 95, sl. 41. 187 and possibly also the inger-ring (ig. 7: 1, 3, 5–6, 8–9). he hobnails and the Alesia ibula point to the pre- or Early Augustan period (ig. 7: 1, 8–9), while the strap end (ig. 7: 5) indicates the Late Augustan period. Dno kozarca (sl. 7: 10) iz prečiščene, oksidacijsko žgane keramike lahko uvrstimo med običajne oblike keramike tankih sten poznorepublikanskega in avgustejskega obdobja.143 3.1 Pomen zgodnjerimskih najdb Similarly as for Straža above Šmartno, the Early Roman inds from Gobavica can be interpreted as traces of the occasional presence of the Roman army or the existence of a small military post from the pre- to the Late Augustan period. At the foot of Gobavica, in the Mengeš area, excavations have shown that a civil settlement existed on the plain as early as in the Late Augustan period.146 4 Conclusion 4.1 Roman army on Straža and Gobavica Two prehistoric hillforts in Gorenjska, on Straža above Šmartno and Gobavica above Mengeš, revealed parts of Roman military equipment and weapons dating from the mid-1st century BC to the Early Augustan period. More precisely, the objects are hobnails with a cross-and-dots pattern (ig. 7: 8–9; pl. 2: 6–12), an Alesia ibula (ig. 7: 1), probably a double-pyramidal slingshot (pl. 2: 2) and possibly arched Kostrzewski M–a1 ibulae (pl. 1: 6–9). hese do not represent battle remains, because they do not include objects typically found on Early Roman battleields such as arrowheads, catapult projectiles with typical damage and a large quantity of lead slingshots.147 hey are more likely traces of indeterminate activities of the Roman army or of small military posts. he scarce remains do not reveal whether the two settlements were still inhabited during the Roman military presence or had been abandoned previously. Straža and Gobavica also yielded a later group of inds, dating from the Middle Augustan to the Tiberian period. On Straža, such inds are a handgrip of a shield (pl. 1: 20), small hobnails with either a cross or dots pattern (pl. 2: 13–16) and a winged pendant (pl. 2: 3), while on Gobavica it is a junction loop (ig. 7: 5). Even the less precisely datable inds, such as the phalera (ig. 7: 6), small hobnails without a pattern (pl. 2: 17–30) and iron inger-rings (ig. 7: 3; pl. 1: 1), can be connected with the Early Roman army. hese prove that the hills of Straža and Gobavica either saw an occasional presence of the Roman army or were the locations of small military posts still at the beginning of the 1st century AD. Straža and Gobavica revealed no archaeological layers from the Early Roman period (Straža: an extensive intervention on location ig. 3: 14; Gobavica: several trial Pri sondiranjih leta 1998 so rimski predmeti ležali posamič v tanki enotni plasti, ki je vsebovala predvsem prazgodovinske najdbe.144 Sondiranja leta 2005 so pokazala poselitev v starejši in mlajši železni dobi, ni pa bilo rimskih plasti.145 Na podlagi teh raziskav lahko sklepamo, da na Gobavici ni bilo obsežnejše rimske naselbine. Večina zgodnjerimskih predmetov je povezana z rimsko vojsko: ibula, jermenski zaključek, falera, žebljički za čevlje in lahko tudi prstan (sl. 7: 1, 3, 5–6, 8–9). Žebljički in ibula vrste Alezija kažejo na predavgustejski oziroma zgodnjeavgustejski čas (sl. 7: 1, 8–9), jermenski zaključek (sl. 7: 5) pa na poznoavgustejsko obdobje. Podobno kot na Straži nad Šmartnim lahko razumemo tudi najdbe na Gobavici kot sled občasne prisotnosti rimske vojske oziroma manjše vojaške postojanke od predavgustejskega do poznoavgustejskega obdobja. Po drugi strani pa so izkopavanja na vznožju Gobavice, na območju Mengša, pokazala, da je civilna naselbina obstajala v nižini najpozneje že v poznoavgustejskem obdobju.146 4 Sklep 4.1 Rimska vojska na Straži in Gobavici Na dveh prazgodovinskih gradiščih na Gorenjskem, na Straži nad Šmartnim in na Gobavici nad Mengšem, so bili odkriti deli rimske vojaške opreme in orožja, ki sodijo v čas od sredine 1. st. pr. Kr. do zgodnjeavgustejske dobe. To so žebljički za čevlje z vzorcem križnih reber in bunčic (sl. 7: 8–9; t. 2: 6–12), ibula vrste Alezija (sl. 7: 1), verjetno dvojnopiramidasti izstrelek za pračo (t. 2: 2) in morda tudi usločene ibule vrste Kostrzewski M-a1 (t. 1: 6–9). Ti predmeti ne predstavljajo ostankov spopada, saj med njimi manjkajo najdbe, značilne za zgodnjerimska bojišča, kot so npr. puščične konice, katapultni izstrelki s tipičnimi poškodbami in večje število svinčenih izstrelkov.147 Prej gre za sledi nedoločenih aktivnosti rimske vojske oziroma manjših vojaških postojank. Po drugi strani pa iz skromnih najdb ne moremo razbrati, če sta bili v času rimske vojaške prisotnosti naselbini še obljudeni ali pa že prej opuščeni. 143 144 145 146 147 188 Sagadin 1995, 230. E.g. Horvat 2002; Istenič 2005a; Laharnar 2010; Laharnar, in this book. 146 147 Prim. Schindler-Kaudelka 1975, 30–31, oblike 2–6, 16, 20; Horvat, Bavdek 2009, 68–72. Podatek Primož Pavlin. Štibernik 2006. Sagadin 1995, 230. Npr. Horvat 2002; Istenič 2005a; Laharnar 2010; Laharnar, v tem zborniku. trenches within the settlement).148 With the exception of a single shard (ig. 7: 10), they also revealed no Roman pottery. In contrast to this, the Augustan period settlements in the south-eastern Alpine area, both the autochthonous and the new Roman ones, are characterized by large quantities of imported Italian pottery.149 he absence of layers containing Roman pottery leads to the inference that the hillforts on Straža and Gobavica were no longer permanently inhabited in the Augustan period and that the centre of habitation had moved to the plain. he beginning of the lowland settlement at Mengeš below Gobavica should probably be sought in the Late Augustan period,150 while the beginning of the settlement at Šmartno below Straža is not known. 4.2 Some characteristics of the Roman military activity in the south-eastern Alpine area 4.2.1 Mid-1st century BC to the Early Augustan period A pre-Augustan Roman military camp was found on Grociana piccola above Trieste (Mala Gročanica in Slovenian),151 while the camp on Nadleški hrib may also have been established in this period.152 Military equipment or even possible traces of skirmishes between the Romans and the local population dating to the second third of the 1st century BC were detected at the autochthonous settlements along key routes traversing western Slovenia, namely on Baba near Slavina after 74 BC, on Žerovnišček after 47 BC, on Stari grad above Unec after 42 BC,153 on Grad near Reka and Gradišče in Cerkno (the latter two around 35 BC).154 In contrast, the area to the south of the Ljubljana basin revealed no contemporary traces of the Roman army.155 he sites on Straža and Gobavica attest to the activity of the Roman army in the wider area of the Ljubljana basin, which was either contemporary to the skirmishes documented in western Slovenia or followed immediately afterwards. he Roman military posts on strategically signiicant prehistoric settlements, such as those supposed on Straža and Gobavica, are known from various parts of the Roman Empire in the early phases of expansion.156 he presence of the Roman army in the Ljubljana basin prob148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 Štibernik 2003; Štibernik 2006. Sagadin 2010; Gaspari 2010; Horvat 1990; Horvat 1995, 183– 188. Sagadin 1995, 230. Bernardini et al. 2013, 2155–2159. Laharnar, in this book; Laharnar 2013. Laharnar 2009, 115, 136–137; Laharnar 2011, 352–353, 356, 369–370, 372; Laharnar 2012, 227–229; Laharnar, in this book; Gaspari 2009, 323. Istenič 2005a; Istenič, in this book. Dular, Tecco Hvala 2007, 151–153. E.g. Dizdar, Radman-Livaja 2004, 46; Todd 2007, 115–117; Fichtl 1998. Mlajša skupina rimskih vojaških najdb s Straže in Gobavice sodi v čas od srednjeavgustejskega obdobja do Tiberija. Na Straži so to ročaj ščita (t. 1: 20), majhni žebljički za čevlje z vzorcem križa ali bunčic (t. 2: 13–16) in krilati obesek (t. 2: 3), na Gobavici jermenski zaključek (sl. 7: 5). Tudi manj natančno datirane najdbe, kot so falera (sl. 7: 6), majhni žebljički za čevlje brez vzorca (t. 2: 17–30) in železni prstani (sl. 7: 3; t. 1: 1), se dajo povezati z zgodnjerimsko vojsko. Domnevamo, da je bila na Straži in Gobavici še vedno občasno prisotna rimska vojska oziroma da sta bili nameščeni manjši vojaški postojanki. S Straže in Gobavice ne poznamo zgodnjerimskih arheoloških plasti (Straža: večji poseg na lokaciji sl. 3: 14; Gobavica: sondiranja na več mestih v naselbini).148 Razen enega odlomka (sl. 7: 10) tudi ni bilo najdenih posamičnih kosov rimske keramike. Nasprotno so za avgustejske naselbine jugovzhodnoalpskega prostora, tako domorodne kot nove rimske, značilne velike količine uvožene italske keramike.149 Po odsotnosti jasno izraženih plasti z rimsko keramiko torej lahko sklepamo, da gradišči Straža in Gobavica v avgustejskem času nista bili več strnjeno poseljeni. Takrat je bilo težišče civilne poselitve verjetno že v dolini. Nižinska naselbina v Mengšu pod Gobavico je najbrž zaživela v poznoavgustejskem obdobju,150 začetek naselbine v Šmartnem pod Stražo pa ni znan. 4.2 Nekatere značilnosti delovanja rimske vojske v jugovzhodnoalpskem prostoru 4.2.1 Od sredine 1. st. pr. Kr. do zgodnjeavgustejske dobe Predavgustejski rimski vojaški tabor je bil odkrit na Mali Gročanici nad Trstom,151 morda je v tem obdobju nastal tudi že tabor na Nadleškem hribu.152 Na staroselskih naselbinah ob pomembnih poteh prek zahodne Slovenije so bili ugotovljeni vojaški ostanki in morda celo sledi spopadov med Rimljani in domačini, ki sodijo v drugo tretjino 1. st. pr. Kr.: Baba pri Slavini – po 74 pr. Kr., Žerovnišček – po 47 pr. Kr., Stari grad nad Uncem – po 42 pr. Kr.153 ter Grad pri Reki in Gradišče v Cerknem (oboje okoli 35 pr. Kr.).154 Po drugi strani pa z območja južno od Ljubljanske kotline ne poznamo nobenih sočasnih sledi rimske vojske.155 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 Štibernik 2003; Štibernik 2006. Sagadin 2010; Gaspari 2010; Horvat 1990; Horvat 1995, 183– 188. Sagadin 1995, 230. Bernardini et al. 2013, 2155–2159. Laharnar, v tem zborniku; Laharnar 2013. Laharnar 2009, 115, 136–137; Laharnar 2011, 352–353, 356, 369–370, 372; Laharnar 2012, 227–229; Laharnar, v tem zborniku; Gaspari 2009, 323. Istenič 2005a; Istenič, v tem zborniku. Dular, Tecco Hvala 2007, 151–153. 189 ably favourably inluenced the development of the irst two settlements of Roman immigrants and trade posts, Nauportus157 and Emona,158 at key communication points in the mid-1st or the Early Augustan period at the latest. he beginnings of the supposed military posts on Straža and Gobavica can thus be understood within the wider context of the Roman activity in the hinterland of Aquileia during the time of Caesar’s proconsulship of both Galliae and of Illyricum (59–49 BC) and even more so on the eve of Octavian’s wars in Illyricum (35–33 BC).159 Najdišči Straža in Gobavica dokazujeta delovanje rimske vojske na širšem območju Ljubljanske kotline, ki je bilo bodisi sočasno spopadom ugotovljenim v zahodni Sloveniji, bodisi jim je neposredno sledilo. Rimske vojaške postojanke na strateško pomembnih prazgodovinskih naselbinah, tako kot jih domnevamo na Straži in Gobavici, so poznane iz različnih delov imperija v začetnih fazah osvajanja.156 Verjetno je prisotnost rimske vojske v Ljubljanski kotlini pripomogla, da sta se v sredini 1. st. pr. Kr. ali najpozneje v zgodnjeavgustejski dobi na ključnih prometnih točkah razvili prvi naselbini rimskih priseljencev in trgovski postojanki: Navport157 in Emona.158 4.2.2 Middle and Late Augustan periods Intense and varied activities of the Roman army continue to be detected into the Middle and Late Augustan periods on numerous sites in the south-eastern Alpine area. On Straža and Gobavica, small military posts probably continued to be active in this period, while similar posts were supposedly also located on hillforts in the Notranjska region, i.e. Ulaka, Žerovnišček and Ambroževo gradišče.160 he military camp at Emona was the main army base in central Slovenia.161 Its most vital tasks probably included the control over the communications’ crossroads through the Ljubljana Gate as well as over the military transport along the Ljubljanica river towards the middle Danube basin.162 As evidenced by small inds, the army was also closely involved in constructing the colony of Emona on the left bank of the Ljubljanica.163 Several military camps were found further down the Sava, in the area of the Brežice Gate, along the main communication leading eastwards from the south-eastern Alpine area.164 he camp on Nadleški hrib, located along one of the side passages across Notranjska, might also date to this period.165 Small inds of a military character were also documented in civil settlements established by immigrants from Italy, whereby the material culture in these settlements shows a predominantly Italian character. At Nauportus, such small inds came to light sporadically in the warehouse area at Dolge njive, dated to the pre-Augustan and Augustan periods,166 but also at Breg, in settlement layers from the Začetke domnevnih vojaških postojank na Straži in Gobavici lahko torej razumemo v sklopu rimskih aktivnosti v zaledju Akvileje v času Cezarjevega prokonzulata v obeh Galijah in Iliriku (59–49 pr. Kr.) in še bolj v luči urejanja razmer na predvečer Oktavijanovih vojn v Iliriku (35–33 pr. Kr.).159 4.2.2 Srednje- in poznoavgustejska doba Tudi v srednje- in poznoavgustejskem času na številnih najdiščih jugovzhodnoalpskega prostora razpoznamo intenzivno in raznoliko delovanje rimske vojske. Manjši vojaški postojanki sta verjetno še naprej obstajali na Straži in Gobavici, podobne postojanke pa so bile domnevno nameščene še na notranjskih gradiščih Ulaka, Žerovnišček in Ambroževo gradišče.160 Vojaški tabor v Emoni je predstavljal glavno vojaško oporišče na območju osrednje Slovenije.161 Med njegovimi pomembnejšimi nalogami je bil verjetno nadzor prometnega križišča v Ljubljanskih vratih in vojaških transportov po Ljubljanici v srednje Podonavje.162 Sodelovanje vojske je bilo, po drobnih najdbah sodeč, odločilno tudi pri gradnji kolonije Emone na levem bregu Ljubljanice.163 Več vojaških taborov je bilo odkritih nižje ob Savi, na območju Brežiških vrat, ob glavni prometni poti iz jugovzhodnoalpskega prostora proti vzhodu.164 Morda sodi v ta čas tudi tabor na Nadleškem hribu, nameščen ob enem od stranskih prehodov čez Notranjsko.165 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 190 166 Mušič, Horvat 2007. Vičič 1994; Vičič 2003, 22–23; Šašel Kos 2012, 91–92, 103–104. Šašel Kos 2000; Istenič 2005a, 84. Laharnar 2009; Laharnar 2012, 230–232, 239–240, 244–262; Laharnar, in this book. Hvalec et al. 2009; Vičič 2002. Šašel Kos 1995, 234; Mušič, Horvat 2007, 267, 283; Istenič 2009. Gaspari 2010, 88–99. Guštin 2002; Guštin, here; Mason 2008. Laharnar 2013; Laharnar, here. Horvat 1990, 114–115, 217, pls. 9: 5–7; 23. 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 Npr. Dizdar, Radman-Livaja 2004, 46; Todd 2007, 115–117; Fichtl 1998. Mušič, Horvat 2007. Vičič 1994; Vičič 2003, 22–23; Šašel Kos 2012, 91–92, 103–104. Šašel Kos 2000; Istenič 2005a, 84. Laharnar 2009; Laharnar 2012, 230–232, 239–240, 244–262; Laharnar, v tem zborniku. Hvalec et al. 2009; Vičič 2002. Šašel Kos 1995, 234; Mušič, Horvat 2007, 267, 283; Istenič 2009. Gaspari 2010, 88–99. Guštin 2002; Guštin, v tem zborniku; Mason 2008. Laharnar 2013; Laharnar, v tem zborniku. irst half of the 1st century AD.167 Finds of Roman military equipment,168 though less numerous, are also known from the newly established and heavily fortiied Roman settlement underneath modern Kranj.169 During the irst half of the 1st century AD, the northeastern part of Regio X that included Gorenjska170 became totally demilitarized. his process began shortly after the suppression of the Pannonian-Dalmatian rebellion (AD 6–9) and the death of Augustus (AD 14). he military camps at Emona, in Brežice Gate and on Nadleški hrib were abandoned, and the Roman army ceased to be present in old prehistoric settlements. Acknowledgements hanks go to Miran Bremšak, France Stele and Tone Cevc, with whom I visited the site and shared observations on the topography of the site, while they also provided me with precise information on the inds. he study of the material from the sites was enabled by Janja Železnikar (Intermunicipal Museum Kamnik) and Peter Turk (National Museum of Slovenia). I was also aided with advice and information by Milan Sagadin (Institute for the Protection of Cultural Heritage, Regional Oice Kranj), Dragan Božič and Primož Pavlin (both Institute of Archaeology, Research Centre of the Slovenian Academy for Sciences and Arts). Peter Kos (National Museum of Slovenia) identiied the Roman coin from Straža. Drawings and plans were prepared by Dragica Kniic Lunder, Drago Valoh and Mateja Belak (all Institute of Archaeology, Research Centre of the Slovenian Academy for Sciences and Arts). he Slovenian text was proofread by Marjeta Humar and translated into English by Andreja Maver. My particular thanks go to Janka Istenič and Boštjan Laharnar (both National Museum of Slovenia) for the numerous critical comments with which the article gained in accuracy and clarity. Drobne najdbe vojaškega značaja poznamo tudi iz civilnih naselbin, ki so jih ustanovili priseljenci iz Italije in v katerih prevladuje italska materialna kultura. V Navportu so bile sporadično odkrite na območju skladišč na Dolgih njivah, ki so datirana v predavgustejsko in avgustejsko dobo,166 in na Bregu, v naselbinskih plasteh prve polovice 1. st. po Kr.167 Iz nove, močno utrjene rimske naselbine na mestu današnjega Kranja168 so tudi znane sicer maloštevilne najdbe rimske vojaške opreme.169 V prvi polovici 1. st. se severovzhodni del X. regije Italije, kamor sodi obravnavani prostor,170 popolnoma demilitarizira. Razmere se spremenijo kmalu po zatrtju panonsko-delmatskega upora (6–9 po Kr.) in Avgustovi smrti (14 po Kr.). Vojaški tabori v Emoni, Brežiških vratih in na Nadleškem hribu so opuščeni, rimska vojska tudi ni več prisotna na starih prazgodovinskih naselbinah. Zahvale Na prvem mestu se zahvaljujem Miranu Bremšaku, Francetu Steletu in Tonetu Cevcu. Skupaj smo si ogledali najdišča, z menoj so delili svoja spoznanja o topograiji in mi posredovali natančne podatke o najdbah. Janja Železnikar (Medobčinski muzej Kamnik) in Peter Turk (Narodni muzej Slovenije) sta mi omogočila študij gradiva v muzejih. Z nasveti in podatki so mi pomagali Milan Sagadin (Zavod za varstvo kulturne dediščine, OE Kranj), Dragan Božič in Primož Pavlin (oba Inštitut za arheologijo ZRC SAZU). Peter Kos (Narodni muzej Slovenije) je določil rimski novec. Risbe in načrte so pripravili Dragica Kniic Lunder, Drago Valoh in Mateja Belak (vsi Inštitut za arheologijo ZRC SAZU). Slovensko besedilo je lektorirala Marjeta Humar, v angleščino ga je prevedla Andreja Maver. Še posebej pa sem hvaležna Janki Istenič in Boštjanu Laharnarju (oba Narodni muzej Slovenije) za številne kritične pripombe, s katerimi je besedilo mnogo pridobilo na natančnosti in jasnosti. Translation: Andreja Maver Language editing: Terry Troy Jackson 166 167 168 169 170 Unpubl.; Horvat, Mušič 2007, 167–170. Sagadin 2003; Sagadin 2010; Horvat 2009, 372. Sagadin, in this book. Šašel Kos 2012, 80–83, 96–97. 167 168 169 170 Horvat 1990, 114–115, 217, t. 9: 5–7; 23. Neobj.; Horvat, Mušič 2007, 167–170. Sagadin 2003; Sagadin 2010; Horvat 2009, 372. Sagadin, v tem zborniku. Šašel Kos 2012, 80–83, 96–97. 191 CATALOGUE KATALOG Straža Finds kept in the Intermunicipal Museum Kamnik. Straža Predmete hrani Medobčinski muzej Kamnik. Coin. Tiberius 35–36 As, Roma, RIC 59 Inv. No. 6005. Wt.: 8.88 g. Ф: 25 mm. Axis: 12. Worn. Location on ig. 3: 7. Identiied by Peter Kos, National Museum of Slovenia. Novec. Tiberius 35–36 As, Roma, RIC 59 Inv. št. 6005. T.: 8,88g. Ф: 25 mm. Pol. peč.: 12. Zelo močno izrabljen. Območje sl. 3: 7. Določil Peter Kos, Narodni muzej Slovenije. Plate 1. 1. Finger-ring with bezel for decorative intaglio; hoop damaged. Iron. Location on ig. 3: 3 or 4. Inv. No. 6002. 2. Fragment of a ribbed bracelet. Bronze. Location on ig. 3: 1; in the vicinity of ibulae on pl. 1: 12–14. Inv. No. 5945. 3. Fragment of a ribbed bracelet. Bronze. Without exact location. Inv. No. 6007. 4. Iron ibula of Middle La Tène scheme; high semicircular bow with the remains of the clamp for attaching the foot; foot broken of. Location on ig. 3: 8. Inv. No. 5902. 5. Iron ibula; four coils of the spring preserved; trace of a rivet on the lat bow. Damaged. Without exact location. Inv. No. 6006. 6. Iron wire-bow ibula of Late La Tène scheme. Damaged. Location on ig. 3: 8. Inv. No. 5906. 7. Iron wire-bow ibula of Late La Tène scheme. Frame-foot damaged. Location on ig. 3: 8. Inv. No. 5901. 8. Iron wire-bow ibula of Late La Tène scheme. Foot missing. Location on ig. 3: 8. Inv. No. 5903. 9. Iron wire-bow ibula of Late La Tène scheme; damaged. Found together with a damaged iron pin. Location on ig. 3: 8. Inv. Nos. 5904 and 5905. 10. Fragment of an iron ibula. Four-coil spring with an internal chord and part of the pin preserved. Vicinity of location on ig. 3: 14. Inv. No. 5936. 11. Two coils of a spring of an iron ibula. Location on ig. 3: 3 or 4. Inv. No. 6003. 12. Bow of an iron ibula; damaged. Probably a two-coil spring. Location on ig. 3: 1; together with ibulae on pl. 1: 13–14, vicinity of the bracelet on pl. 1: 2. Inv. No. 5944. 13. Iron conchoidal ibula; bow decorated with three transverse ribs. Damaged. Location on ig. 3: 1; together with ibulae on pl. 1: 12, 14, vicinity of the bracelet on pl. 1: 2. Inv. No. 5943. 14. Conchoidal ibula; bow and head partially preserved. Bow of iron and the three moulded bow knobs of bronze. Location on ig. 3: 1; together with ibulae on pl. 1: 12–13, vicinity of the bracelet on pl. 1: 2. Inv. No. 5942. 15. Fibula with wings, Type A 238 b2. Damaged. One-piece coil spring with narrow hook for the chord. Wings damaged, trace of groove decoration on one of them. Rows of dots on both sides of the bow. Copper alloy. Piece of iron rusted onto the coil. Steep southern slope, below the terrace on ig. 3: 16. Inv. No. 6099. 16. Iron penannular ibula with upturned and rolled ends. Pin preserved; one of the rolled ends broken of. Location on ig. 3: 2. Inv. No. 5929. 17. Iron spear butt. Without exact location. Inv. No. 6009. 18. Iron object with two holes. Vicinity of location on ig. 3: 14. Inv. No. 5933. 19. Iron spear butt. Summit, vicinity of locations on ig. 3: 3 and 4. Inv. No. 7000. 192 Tabla 1. 1. Prstan s celico za okrasni kamen, ki je izpadel; obroček poškodovan. Železo. Območje sl. 3: 3 ali 4. Inv. št. 6002. 2. Odlomek narebrene zapestnice. Bron. Območje sl. 3: 1; v bližini ibul t. 1: 12–14. Inv. št. 5945. 3. Zapestnica, narebrena; poškodovana. Bron. Ni locirana. Inv. št. 6007. 4. Fibula srednjelatenske sheme. Noga odlomljena, na loku ostanek objemke. Železo. Območje sl. 3: 8. Inv. št. 5902. 5. Fibula, močno poškodovana. Ohranjeni štirje navoji peresovine na eni strani. Lok ploščat, na njem morda zakovica. Železo. Ni locirana. Inv. št. 6006. 6. Fibula poznolatenske sheme. Noga in igla odlomljeni. Železo. Območje sl. 3: 8. Inv. št. 5906. 7. Fibula poznolatenske sheme. Okvirasta noga poškodovana. Železo. Območje sl. 3: 8. Inv. št. 5901. 8. Fibula poznolatenske sheme. Noga odlomljena. Železo. Območje sl. 3: 8. Inv. št. 5903. 9. Fibula poznolatenske sheme, poškodovana. Skupaj z njo je bila najdena odlomljena igla . Železo. Območje sl. 3: 8. Inv. št. 5904 in 5905. 10. Fibula. Ohranjena peresovina in del igle. Železo. Širše območje sl. 3: 14. Inv. št. 5936. 11. Peresovina ibule. Ohranjena dva navoja. Železo. Območje sl. 3: 3 ali 4. Inv. št. 6003. 12. Poškodovan lok ibule. Verjetno peresovina z dvema zavojema. Železo. Območje sl. 3: 1; skupaj s ibulama t. 1: 13–14, v bližini zapestnice t. 1: 2. Inv. št. 5944. 13. Odlomek loka školjčne ibule. Proiliran gumb. Železo. Območje sl. 3: 1; skupaj s ibulama t. 1: 12, 14, v bližini zapestnice t. 1: 2. Inv. št. 5943. 14. Odlomek loka školjčne ibule. Lok iz železa, proilirani gumbi bronasti. Območje sl. 3: 1; skupaj s ibulama t. 1: 12–13, v bližini zapestnice t. 1: 2. Inv. št. 5942. 15. Poškodovana ibula s krilci vrste A 238 b2. Enodelna peresovina, držalec tetive ozek. Krilca poškodovana, na enem sled vrezanega okrasa. Vzdolž loka na obeh straneh niz vbodenih pik. Bron ali druga bakrova litina. Ob peresovino je prirjaven košček železa. Na strmem južnem pobočju, na skali; verjetno pod teraso sl. 3: 16. Inv. št. 6099. 16. Obročasta ibula z ohranjenim trnom. Eden od končnih zavojkov odlomljen. Železo. Območje sl. 3: 2. Inv. št. 5929. 17. Sulično kopito. Na eni strani tulec razprt. Železo. Ni locirano. Inv. št. 6009. 18. Tulec, dvakrat predrt. Sled sestavljanja. Na enem koncu je kovina zapognjena, tako, da je tulec zaprt. Železo. Širše območje sl. 3: 14. Inv. št. 5933. 19. Sulično kopito. Železo. Južno območje vrha, širše območje sl. 3: 3 in 4. Inv. št. 7000. 20. Držaj ščita. Trikrat preluknjan, poškodovan. Železo. Območje sl. 3: 6. Inv. št. 5959. 20. Iron handgrip of a shield with three rivet holes; damaged. Location on ig. 3: 6. Inv. No. 5959. Plate 2. 1. Hilt-guard of a sword. Iron. Area of the upper three terraces. Inv. No. 5911. 2. Lead slingshot. Weight 36.6 g. Location on ig. 3: 2. Inv. No. 5924. 3. Horse gear pendant; damaged. Copper alloy. Locations on ig. 3: 3 or 5 or in between. Inv. No. 6001. 4. Stud of a hipposandal. Iron. Below the upper terrace. Inv. No. 5958. 5. Iron rivet. Below the upper terrace. Inv. No. 5948. 6. Hobnail. Ribs shaped into a cross and separated by embossed dots on the lower side of the head. Iron. Without exact location. Inv. No. 6008. 7. Hobnail. Ribs and embossed dots on the lower side of the head. Iron. Below the upper terrace. Inv. No. 5951. 8. Hobnail. Ribs shaped into a cross and separated by embossed dots on the lower side of the head. Damaged. Iron. Below the upper terrace. Inv. No. 5950. 9. Hobnail. Ribs on the lower side of the head. Damaged. Iron. Area of the upper three terraces. Inv. No. 5916. 10. Hobnail. Ribs and embossed dots on the lower side of the head. Iron. Below the upper terrace. Inv. No. 5949. 11. Hobnail. Ribs shaped into a cross and separated by embossed dots on the lower side of the head. Iron. Locations on ig. 3: 3 or 4. Inv. No. 6004. 12. Hobnail. Ribs shaped into a cross and separated by embossed dots on the lower side of the head. Iron. Southern part of the settlement. Inv. No. 6015. 13. Hobnail. Ribs shaped into a cross on the lower side of the head. Iron. Southern part of the settlement. Inv. No. 6016. 14. Hobnail. Embossed dots on the lower side of the head. Iron. Vicinity of location on ig. 3: 14. Inv. No. 5938. 15. Hobnail. Ribs and embossed dots on the lower side of the head. Iron. Vicinity of location on ig. 3: 14. Inv. No. 5939. 16. Hobnail. Embossed dots on the lower side of the head. Iron. Area of the upper three terraces. Inv. No. 5914. 17. Iron nail. Area of the upper three terraces. Inv. No. 5920. 18. Iron nail. Southern slope, third terrace from the top. Inv. No. 5947. 19. Iron nail. Below the upper terrace. Inv. No. 5952. 20. Iron nail. Area of the upper three terraces. Inv. No. 5921. 21. Iron nail. Vicinity of location on ig. 3: 14. Inv. No. 5937. 22. Iron nail. Without exact location. Inv. No. 6000b. 23. Iron nail. Without exact location. Inv. No. 6000d. 24. Iron nail. Without exact location. Inv. No. 6000c. 25. Iron nail. Area of the upper three terraces. Inv. No. 5913. 26. Iron nail. Vicinity of location on ig. 3: 14. Inv. No. 5940. 27. Iron nail. Below the upper terrace. Inv. No. 5953. 28. Iron nail. Without exact location. Inv. No. 6000a. 29. Iron nail. Below the upper terrace. Inv. No. 5954. 30. Iron nail. Below the upper terrace. Inv. No. 5955. 31. Iron nail. Location on ig. 3: 2. Inv. No. 5926. 32. Iron nail. Area of the upper three terraces. Inv. No. 5908. 33. Iron rivet. Area of the upper three terraces. Inv. No. 5918. 34. Iron nail. Southern slope, third terrace from the top. Inv. No. 5946. 35. Iron nail. Southern part of the settlement. Inv. No. 6017. 36. Iron nail. Without exact location. Inv. No. 5999a. 37. Iron nail. Without exact location. Inv. No. 5999b. 38. Iron nail. Vicinity of location on ig. 3: 14. Inv. No. 5941. 39. Iron nail. Area of the upper three terraces. Inv. No. 5915. 40. Iron nail. Area of the upper three terraces. Inv. No. 5912. Tabla 2. 1. Branik držaja meča. Železo. Na zgornjih treh terasah. Inv. št. 5911. 2. Izstrelek za pračo. Svinec. Teža 36,6 g. Območje sl. 3: 2. Inv. št. 5924. 3. Obesek s konjske opreme; poškodovan. Bron ali druga bakrova litina. Območji sl. 3: 3 ali 5 oziroma vmes. Inv. št. 6001. 4. Konica konjske sandale. Poškodovano. Železo. Pod zgornjo teraso, osrednji del. Inv. št. 5958. 5. Žebelj. Železo. Pod zgornjo teraso, osrednji del. Inv. št. 5948. 6. Žebljiček za čevlje. Na spodnji strani strehaste glavice reliefen križ in vmes bunčice. Železo. Ni lociran. Inv. št. 6008. 7. Žebljiček za čevlje. Na spodnji strani strehaste glavice rebra in bunčice. Železo. Pod zgornjo teraso, osrednji del. Inv. št. 5951. 8. Žebljiček za čevlje. Na spodnji strani strehaste glavice rebra in bunčice. Konica poškodovana. Železo. Pod zgornjo teraso, osrednji del. Inv. št. 5950. 9. Žebljiček za čevlje. Tanka strehasta glavica. Zelo rahla sled reber na spodnji strani. Železo. Po zgornjih treh terasah. Inv. št. 5916. 10. Žebljiček za čevlje. Na spodnji strani strehaste glavice rebra in bunčice. Železo. Pod zgornjo teraso, osrednji del. Inv. št. 5949. 11. Žebljiček za čevlje. Na spodnji strani strehaste glavice reliefen križ in vmes bunčice. Železo. Območje sl. 3: 3 ali 4. Inv. št. 6004. 12. Žebljiček za čevlje. Na spodnji strani strehaste glavice reliefen križ, vmes bunčice. Železo. Južni del naselbine. Inv. št. 6015. 13. Žebljiček za čevlje. Na spodnji strani strehaste glavice reliefen križ, brez bunčic. Železo. Južni del naselbine. Inv. št. 6016. 14. Žebljiček za čevlje. Glavica masivna, spodaj bunčice. Železo. Širše območje sl. 3: 14. Inv. št. 5938. 15. Žebljiček za čevlje. Masivna stožčasta glavica, spodaj bunčice in rebra. Železo. Širše območje sl. 3: 14. Inv. št. 5939. 16. Žebljiček za čevlje. Masivna stožčasta glavica. Spodaj rahle bunčice. Železo. Na zgornjih treh terasah. Inv. št. 5914. 17. Žebljiček. Vbočena glavica. Železo. Na zgornjih treh terasah. Inv. št. 5920. 18. Žebljiček. Masivna glavica. Železo. Južno pobočje, tretja terasa od zgoraj. Inv. št. 5947. 19. Žebljiček. Masivna glavica. Železo. Pod zgornjo teraso, osrednji del. Inv. št. 5952. 20. Žebljiček. Strehasta glavica. Železo. Na zgornjih treh terasah. Inv. št. 5921. 21. Žebljiček. Glavica rahlo strehasta. Železo. Širše območje sl. 3: 14. Inv. št. 5937. 22. Žebljiček. Železo. Ni lociran. Inv. št. 6000b. 23. Žebljiček. Železo. Ni lociran. Inv. št. 6000d. 24. Žebljiček. Železo. Ni lociran. Inv. št. 6000c. 25. Žebljiček. Masivna stožčasta glavica. Železo. Na zgornjih treh terasah. Inv. št. 5913. 26. Žebljiček. Masivna stožčasta glavica. Železo. Širše območje sl. 3: 14. Inv. št. 5940. 27. Žebljiček. Masivna in spodaj rahlo vbokla glavica. Železo. Pod zgornjo teraso, osrednji del. Inv. št. 5953. 28. Žebljiček. Železo. Ni lociran. Inv. št. 6000a. 29. Žebljiček. Masivna glavica. Železo. Pod zgornjo teraso, osrednji del. Inv. št. 5954. 30. Žebljiček. Masivna glavica. Železo. Pod zgornjo teraso, osrednji del. Inv. št. 5955. 31. Žebelj. Železo. Območje sl. 3: 2. Inv. št. 5926. 32. Žebelj. Železo. Na zgornjih treh terasah. Inv. št. 5908. 193 41. Iron nail. Area of the upper three terraces. Inv. No. 5919. 42. Iron nail. Location on ig. 3: 6. Inv. No. 5960. Plate 3. 1. Bell of bronze or other copper alloy. Iron clapper with a loop. Incisions on the outer side of the waist. Probably location on ig. 3: 3; vicinity of three iron mounts (two of them on pl. 3: 12, 14). Inv. No. 5987. 2. Handle of a bucket. Copper alloy. Location on ig. 3: 5. Inv. No. 5931. 3. Fragment of an object. Copper alloy. Eastern part of the settlement. Inv. No. 6012. 4. Ring. Copper alloy. Eastern part of the settlement. Inv. No. 6013. 5. Rivet. Copper alloy. Southern part of the settlement, below the upper terrace. Inv. No. 6011. 6. Iron rivet. Southern part of the summit, vicinity of location on ig. 3: 3. Inv. No. 7001. 7. Fragments of a sheet-metal object. Two parts fastened together with rivets. Copper alloy. Without exact location. Inv. No. 5994. 8. Miniature coulter. Iron. Without exact location. Inv. No. 5992. 9. Iron knife. Location on ig. 3: 2. Inv. No. 5923. 10. Iron knife. Flat tang with a single rivet. Damaged. Summit area. Inv. No. 5998. 11. Mount with a pair of holes; curved, with one of the longer edges rolled outwards. Iron. Without exact location. Inv. No. 5990. 12. Mount with a pair of holes. Iron. Location on ig. 3: 3; in the vicinity of the bell (pl. 3: 1) and two other mounts (one of them pl. 3: 14). Inv. No. 5985. 13. Mount with a pair of holes. Iron. Without exact location. Inv. No. 5991. 14. Mount with a pair of holes. Iron. Location on ig. 3: 3; in the vicinity of the bell (pl. 3: 1) and two other mounts (one of them on pl. 3: 12). Inv. No. 5995. 194 Plate 4. 1. Curved knife with a socketed handle and a knob on the tip of the blade. Iron. Location on ig. 3: 8. Inv. No. 5988. 2. Iron knife. Two fragments of a blade. Without exact location. Inv. No. 5993. 3. Iron object with a ring. Area of the upper three terraces. Inv. No. 5907. 4. Iron object. Area of the upper three terraces. Inv. No. 5909. 5. Iron handle. Damaged. Vicinity of location on ig. 3: 14. Inv. No. 5932. 6. Iron object. Area of the upper three terraces. Inv. No. 5917. 7. Iron nail. Area of the upper three terraces. Inv. No. 5910. 8. Iron object. Damaged. Area of the upper three terraces. Inv. No. 5922. 9. Iron object. Damaged. Eastern part of the settlement. Inv. No. 6014. 10. Lead object. Damaged. Location on ig. 3: 2. Inv. No. 5928. 11. Iron object. Damaged. Below the upper terrace. Inv. No. 5957. 12. Iron object with a rivet. Below the upper terrace. Inv. No. 5956. 13. Iron object. Damaged. Vicinity of location on ig. 3: 14. Inv. No. 5935. 14. Iron object with two holes. Damaged. Southern part of the settlement. Inv. No. 5996. 15. Iron object. Damaged. Location on ig. 3: 2. Inv. No. 5925. 16. Iron object. Vicinity of location on ig. 3: 14. Inv. No. 5934. 33. Žebelj. Železo. Na zgornjih treh terasah. Inv. št. 5918. 34. Žebelj. Železo. Južno pobočje, tretja terasa od zgoraj. Inv. št. 5946. 35. Žebelj. Železo. Južni del naselbine. Inv. št. 6017. 36. Žebelj. Železo. Ni lociran. Inv. št. 5999a. 37. Žebelj. Železo. Ni lociran. Inv. št. 5999b. 38. Žebelj. Železo. Širše območje sl. 3: 14. Inv. št. 5941. 39. Žebelj. Železo. Na zgornjih treh terasah. Inv. št. 5915. 40. Žebelj. Železo. Na zgornjih treh terasah. Inv. št. 5912. 41. Žebelj. Železo. Na zgornjih treh terasah. Inv. št. 5919. 42. Žebelj. Železo. Območje sl. 3: 6. Inv. št. 5960. Tabla 3. 1. Zvonec iz brona ali druge bakrove litine z železno zanko in kembljem. Na zunanji strani plašča poševni rezi. Verjetno območje sl. 3: 3; v bližini treh železnih plošč (dve sta t. 3: 12, 14). Inv. št. 5987. 2. Ročaj vedra s proiliranimi zaključki. Bron ali druga bakrova litina. Območje sl. 3: 5. Inv. št. 5931. 3. Predmet, na enem koncu odlomljen. Lepo obdelan – sledovi piljenja. Bron ali druga bakrova litina. Vzhodni del naselbine. Inv. št. 6012. 4. Obroček. Bron ali druga bakrova litina. Vzhodni del naselbine. Inv. št. 6013. 5. Zakovica. Rahlo strehasta glavica ima v sredini bunčico. Bron ali druga bakrova litina. Južni del naselbine, pod zgornjo teraso. Inv. št. 6011. 6. Zakovica. Železo. Južno območje vrha, okoli sl. 3: 3. Inv. št. 7001. 7. Pločevina, ki je močno zvita in poškodovana. Dva odlomka. Na robu večjega kosa 7 zakovic, ki spajajo dva dela. Na manjšem odlomku 4 zakovice. Morda del posode. Bron ali druga bakrova litina. Ni locirano. Inv. št. 5994. 8. Miniaturno črtalo. Železo. Ni locirano. Inv. št. 5992. 9. Nož. Železo. Območje sl. 3: 2. Inv. št. 5923. 10. Nož. Ploščato nasadišče z eno zakovico. Konica rezila odlomljena. Železo. Območje vrha. Inv. št. 5998. 11. Plošča, rahlo upognjena v vzdolžni in v prečni smeri. Na enem vzdolžnem robu pločevina zavihana. Dve luknjici sta bili prebiti z izbočene strani. Poškodovana. Železo. Ni locirana. Inv. št. 5990. 12. Plošča z dvema luknjicama. Ravna. Daljši rob ob luknjicah je nekoliko debelejši kot nasprotni. Železo. Območje sl. 3: 3; v bližini zvonca (t. 3: 1) in še dveh plošč (ena je t. 3: 14). Inv. št. 5985. 13. Plošča z dvema luknjicama. Ravna. Daljši rob ob luknjicah je nekoliko debelejši kot nasprotni. Železo. Ni locirana. Inv. št. 5991. 14. Plošča z dvema luknjicama. Ravna. Daljši rob ob luknjicah malo debelejši kot nasprotni rob. Železo. Območje sl. 3: 3; v bližini zvonca (t. 3: 1) in še dveh plošč (ena je t. 3: 12). Inv. št. 5995. Tabla 4. 1. Nož vejnik. Na nasadišču pravokotna predrtina. Konica odebeljena. Rezilo nekoliko zapognjeno. Železo. Območje sl. 3: 8. Inv. št. 5988. 2. Nož. Poškodovan. Dva odlomka rezila, ki pripadata verjetno istemu nožu. Železo. Ni lociran. Inv. št. 5993. 3. Predmet v obliki votle paličice, okrašene z dvojnim vrezom. Zgoraj vdet obroček. Železo. Na zgornjih treh terasah. Inv. št. 5907. 4. Premet s sploščeno glavico in dvema utoroma. Železo. Na zgornjih treh terasah. Inv. št. 5909. Plate 5. 1. Axe head. Iron. Location on ig. 3: 8. Inv. No. 5989. 2. Object with a ring. Damaged. Iron. Below the summit, southern slope. Inv. No. 5930. 3. Iron object, possibly an awl. Without exact location. Inv. No. 5997. 4. Iron object. Location on ig. 3: 2. Inv. No. 5927. 5. Jar fragment. Reined pottery; orange and light grey, mottled. Wheel-thrown. Location on ig. 3: 14. Inv. No. 5972. 6. Vessel fragment. Reined pottery; light grey; decorated with incised lines. Wheel-thrown. Location on ig. 3: 14. Inv. No. 5971. 7. Fragment of a bowl or baking lid. Coarse pottery; brown. Hand-thrown. Location on ig. 3: 14. Inv. No. 6054. 8. Eight fragments of a dish or baking lid. Coarse pottery, reddish-brown. Combed decoration in the interior. Handthrown. Location on ig. 3: 14. Inv. No. 6076. 9. Jar fragments. Coarse pottery; grey; abundant white inclusions. Horizontal combed decoration and two applied knobs with incisions. Hand-thrown. Location on ig. 3: 14. Inv. No. 6045. 10. Jar fragment. Coarse pottery; brown mottled; slightly porous; abundant white inclusions. Horizontal combed decoration. Hand-thrown. Location on ig. 3: 14. Inv. No. 6048. Plate 6. 1. Jar fragment. Coarse pottery; brown and grey; porous. Hand-thrown. Location on ig. 3: 14. Inv. No. 6043. 2. Jar fragment. Coarse pottery; light grey and brown; slightly porous; abundant white inclusions. Hand-thrown. Location on ig. 3: 14. Inv. No. 6046. 3. Jar fragments. Coarse pottery; light grey and light red; abundant white inclusions. Combed decoration. Hand-thrown. Location on ig. 3: 14. Inv. No. 6044. 4. Jar fragment. Coarse pottery; light grey and brown; slightly porous; typical abundant white inclusion. Hand-thrown. Location on ig. 3: 14. Inv. No. 6047. 5. Jar fragment. Coarse pottery; grey; abundant white inclusions. Hand-thrown. Location on ig. 3: 14. Inv. No. 6049. 6. Jar fragment. Coarse pottery; orange. Combed decoration in the interior. Hand-thrown. Location on ig. 3: 14. Inv. No. 5975. 7. Jar fragment. Coarse pottery; grey and brown. Combed decoration. Hand-thrown. Location on ig. 3: 14. Inv. No. 5966. 8. Jar fragment. Coarse pottery; very hard; dark grey exterior and interior surfaces, light grey core. Hand- or wheelthrown. Location on ig. 3: 14. Inv. No. 6018. 9. Jar or bowl fragment. Coarse pottery; light brown and grey. Hand-thrown. Western part of the third terrace from the top. Inv. No. 6028. 10. Rim and handle fragment. Coarse pottery; light grey; abundant white inclusions. Combed decoration on the interior. Handthrown. Location on ig. 3: 14. Inv. No. 6050. 11. Jar fragment. Coarse pottery; brown. Combed decoration on the exterior. Hand-thrown. Location on ig. 3: 14. Inv. No. 5961. 12. Vessel fragment. Coarse pottery; red. Hand-thrown. Location on ig. 3: 14. Inv. No. 5978. 13. Vessel fragment. Coarse pottery; brown; porous. Handthrown. Location on ig. 3: 14. Inv. No. 6039. 14. Vessel fragment. Fine pottery; smooth surface; light brown. Wheel-thrown. Location on ig. 3: 14. Inv. No. 6038. 15. Vessel fragment. Coarse pottery, grey. Combed decoration and lat appliqué with incisions. Hand-thrown. Location on ig. 3: 14. Inv. No. 6020. 5. Poškodovan ročaj. Na zaključku mogoče ostanek zakovice. Železo. Širše območje sl. 3: 14. Inv. št. 5932. 6. Poškodovan predmet. Železo. Na zgornjih treh terasah. Inv. št. 5917. 7. Žebelj. Železo. Na zgornjih treh terasah. Inv. št. 5910. 8. Poškodovan predmet z dvema luknjicama in kavljem. Železo. Na zgornjih treh terasah. Inv. št. 5922. 9. Poškodovan predmet. Železo. Vzhodni del naselbine. Inv. št. 6014. 10. Poškodovan predmet z luknjico. Svinec. Območje sl. 3: 2. Inv. št. 5928. 11. Poškodovan predmet. Železo. Pod zgornjo teraso, osrednji del. Inv. št. 5957. 12. Tulec, na eni strani odprt. Mogoče ostanek dveh zakovic. Železo. Pod zgornjo teraso, osrednji del. Inv. št. 5956. 13. Predmet. Poškodovan. Železo. Širše območje sl. 3: 14. Inv. št. 5935. 14. Tulec z dvema luknjicama za zakovice, ki ležita diametralno. Železo. Južno območje naselbine. Inv. št. 5996. 15. Paličica. Poškodovana. Železo. Območje sl. 3: 2. Inv. št. 5925. 16. Klin. Zakrivljena konica. Železo. Širše območje sl. 3: 14. Inv. št. 5934. Tabla 5. 1. Sekira. Železo. Območje sl. 3: 8. Inv. št. 5989. 2. Držaj. Na enem koncu zanka, na drugem odlomljen. Železo. Pod vrhom, na južnem pobočju. Inv. št. 5930. 3. Paličica, morda šilo. Železo. Ni locirana. Inv. št. 5997. 4. Zvita paličica, na enem koncu širša. Železo. Območje sl. 3: 2. Inv. št. 5927. 5. Odlomek ustja posode – glinenke. Prečiščena keramika, oranžna in svetlo siva, lisasta. Delana na lončarsko kolo. Območje sl. 3: 14. Inv. št. 5972. 6. Odlomek ostenja posode. Prečiščena keramika, svetlo siva. Zunaj okras vodoravnih vrezov. Delana na lončarsko kolo. Območje sl. 3: 14. Inv. št. 5971. 7. Odlomek ustja sklede ali pekve. Grobozrnata keramika, rjava. Delana na roko. Območje sl. 3: 14. Inv. št. 6054. 8. Osem odlomkov pekve ali sklede. Grobozrnata keramika, rdeče rjava. Notri metličenje. Delana na roko. Območje sl. 3: 14. Inv. št. 6076. 9. Dva odlomka ustja in ostenja lonca. Grobozrnata keramika, izrazite goste bele primesi, siva. Delano na roko. Dve nalepljeni bradavici z vrezi, zunaj vodoravno metličenje. Območje sl. 3: 14. Inv. št. 6045. 10. Odlomek ustja lonca. Grobozrnata keramika, izrazite goste bele primesi, rjava lisasta, malo porozna. Delano na roko. Zunaj in notri vodoravno metličenje. Območje sl. 3: 14. Inv. št. 6048. Tabla 6. 1. Odlomek ustja lonca. Grobozrnata keramika, porozna, rjava in siva. Delano na roko. Območje sl. 3: 14. Inv. št. 6043. 2. Odlomek ustja lonca. Grobozrnata keramika, izrazite goste bele primesi, bledo siva in rjava, malo porozna. Delano na roko. Območje sl. 3: 14. Inv. št. 6046. 3. Trije odlomki ostenja lonca. Grobozrnata keramika, izrazite goste bele primesi, bledo siva in roza. Zunaj in notri metličenje v razne smeri. Delano na roko. Območje sl. 3: 14. Inv. št. 6044. 4. Odlomek ustja lonca. Grobozrnata keramika, izrazite goste bele primesi, bledo siva in rjava, malo porozna. Delano na roko. Območje sl. 3: 14. Inv. št. 6047. 195 16. Vessel fragment. Coarse pottery; brown. Horn-like knob. Hand-thrown. Location on ig. 3: 14. Inv. No. 6069. 17. Jar fragments. Coarse pottery; brown. Applied boss. Handthrown. Location on ig. 3: 14. Inv. No. 6068. 18. Jar fragment. Coarse pottery; smooth surface; brown. Applied rib decorated with impressions. Hand-thrown. Location on ig. 3: 14. Inv. No. 6051. 19. Fragment of a large jar or a large baking lid. Coarse pottery; reddish-brown. Combed decoration. Hand-thrown. Location on ig. 3: 14. Inv. No. 6019. 20. Fragment of a baking lid handle. Coarse pottery; grey and orange. Location on ig. 3: 14. Inv. No. 5977. 21. Fragment of a baking lid handle. Coarse pottery; brown. Location on ig. 3: 14. Inv. No. 6074. 22. Fragment of a baking lid handle. Coarse pottery; brown. Location on ig. 3: 14. Inv. No. 6073. 23. Fragment of a baking lid handle. Coarse pottery; grey and brown. Without exact location. Inv. No. 6036. 24. Fragment of a baking lid handle. Coarse pottery; grey and brown. Without exact location. Inv. No. 6035. 25. Fragment of a baking lid handle. Coarse pottery; porous; grey and brown. Upper part of the settlement. Inv. No. 6032. 26. Spindle whorl. Coarse pottery; grey and brown. Impressiondecorated. Probably location on ig. 3: 14. Inv. No. 6086. 27. Damaged object. Smoothed surface. Stone. Location on ig. 3: 14. Inv. No. 5976. Cerkovnek Finds kept in the Intermunicipal Museum Kamnik. Figure 5. 1. Iron inger-ring set with carnelian intaglio showing a musician with a lyre, either Hercules or Apollo, lanked by a tripod (ig. 6). Damaged. Saddle below the western summit. Inv. No. 6087. Stone identiied by Miha Jeršek, Slovenian Museum of Natural History. Published: Nestorović 2005, 31, cat. no. 36, pls. 4: 36, 11: 36. 2. Iron wire-bow ibula; low bow with a six-coil spring and an external chord. Damaged. Western summit. Inv. No. 6089. 3. Iron object. Eastern summit. Inv. No. 6097. 4. Iron spear butt. Damaged. Western summit. Inv. No. 6092. 5. Iron spear butt. Damaged. Western summit. Inv. No. 6093. 6. Iron clapper. Damaged. Western summit. Inv. No. 6090. 7. Iron object. Damaged. Western summit. Inv. No. 6098. Gobavica 196 Figure 7. 1. Fibula, Type Alesia. Triangular bow with a slit; incised decoration. Damaged. Copper alloy. Stray ind. Mengeš Town Museum. 2. Fibula with two knobs, Type A 236 c. Copper alloy. Excavations 1998. National Museum of Slovenia, Inv. No. P 21723. Published: Železnikar 1999, 63, no. 40. 3. Iron inger-ring with raised bezel set with a chalcedony intaglio showing Pegasus. Excavations 1998. National Museum of Slovenia, Inv. No. P 21834. Published: Železnikar 1999, 64, no. 41; Nestorović 2005, 32, cat. no. 43, pls. 5: 43, 12: 43. 4. Handle in the form of a dolphin. Damaged. Copper alloy. Stray ind. Mengeš Town Museum. 5. Strap itting. Loop decorated with longitudinal ribs, rectangular plate moulded on the upper side near the loop. hree rivets on the back of the plate cast together with it. Dam- 5. Odlomek ustja lonca. Grobozrnata keramika, izrazite goste bele primesi, siva. Delano na roko. Območje sl. 3: 14. Inv. št. 6049. 6. Odlomek ustja lonca. Grobozrnata keramika. Oranžna. Notri metličenje. Delano na roko. Območje sl. 3: 14. Inv. št. 5975. 7. Odlomek ustja lonca. Grobozrnata keramika. Siva in rjava. Zunaj in notri metličenje. Delano na roko. Območje sl. 3: 14. Inv. št. 5966. 8. Lonec, odlomek ustja. Grobozrnata keramika, zelo trda; zunaj temno siva, v jedru svetlo siva. Delano na roko ali na kolo. Območje sl. 3: 14. Inv. št. 6018. 9. Odlomek ustja sklede ali lonca. Grobozrnata keramika svetlo rjave in sive barve. Delana na roko. Zahodni del tretje terase od zgoraj. Inv. št. 6028. 10. Odlomek ustja z ročajem. Grobozrnata keramika, izrazite goste bele primesi, bledo siva. Notri metličenje. Delano na roko. Območje sl. 3: 14. Inv. št. 6050. 11. Odlomek dna lonca. Grobozrnata keramika, redukcijsko žgana, rjava. Zunaj navpično metličenje. Delano na roko. Območje sl. 3: 14. Inv. št. 5961. 12. Odlomek dna velike posode. Grobozrnata keramika, rdeča. Delano na roko. Območje sl. 3: 14. Inv. št. 5978. 13. Odlomek dna. Grobozrnata keramika, porozna, rjava. Delano na roko. Območje sl. 3: 14. Inv. št. 6039. 14. Odlomek dna. Fina prečiščena keramika, gladka površina, svetlo rjava. Delano na kolo. Območje sl. 3: 14. Inv. št. 6038. 15. Ostenje posode. Grobozrnata keramika, siva. Zunaj metličenje ter ploščata nalepka, ki je glavničena. Delano na roko. Območje sl. 3: 14. Inv. št. 6020. 16. Odlomek ostenja manjše posode. Grobozrnata keramika, rjava. Rogat izrastek. Delano na roko. Območje sl. 3: 14. Inv. št. 6069. 17. Dva odlomka ostenja lonca. Grobozrnata keramika, rjava. Nalepljena bunčica. Delano na roko. Območje sl. 3: 14. Inv. št. 6068. 18. Odlomek ostenja lonca. Grobozrnata keramika, gladka površina, rjava. Rebro z odtisi. Delano na roko. Območje sl. 3: 14. Inv. št. 6051. 19. Odlomek ostenja velikega lonca ali pekve. Grobozrnata keramika, rdeče rjava. Zunaj in notri metličenje v različne smeri. Delano na roko. Območje sl. 3: 14. Inv. št. 6019. 20. Odlomek pekve ali svitka. Grobozrnata keramika, siva in oranžna. Območje sl. 3: 14. Inv. št. 5977. 21. Odlomek ročaja pekve. Grobozrnata keramika, rjava. Območje sl. 3: 14. Inv. št. 6074. 22. Odlomek ročaja pekve. Grobozrnata keramika, rjava. Območje sl. 3: 14. Inv. št. 6073. 23. Odlomek ročaja pekve. Grobozrnata keramika, sive in rjave barve. Ni locirano. Inv. št. 6036. 24. Odlomek ročaja pekve. Grobozrnata keramika, sive in rjave barve. Ni locirano. Inv. št. 6035. 25. Odlomek ročaja pekve. Groba, porozna keramika, rjave in sive barve. Zgornji del naselbine. Inv. št. 6032. 26. Vretence. Grobozrnata keramika, sive in rjave barve. Okrašeno z vtisi. Verjetno območje sl. 3: 14. Inv. št. 6086. 27. Poškodovan predmet. Zaglajena površina. Kamen. Območje sl. 3: 14. Inv. št. 5976. Cerkovnek Predmete hrani Medobčinski muzej Kamnik. Slika 5. 1. Železen prstan. Obroč poškodovan. Vstavljena gema iz temno rdečega karneola z vrezanim motivom Apolona ali Herkula, ki igra na liro; zraven trinožnik (sl. 6). Sedlo pod zaho- 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. aged. Copper alloy. Excavations 1998. National Museum of Slovenia, Inv. No. P 21724. Published: Železnikar 1999, 63, no. 39. Strap distributor with ive depressions on the upper side and four loops on the lower side. Damaged. Copper alloy. Stray ind. Mengeš Town Museum. Probably part of a cosmetic tool. Damaged. Copper alloy. Excavations 1998. National Museum of Slovenia, Inv. No. P 21835 Hobnail. Ribs shaped into a cross and separated by embossed dots on the lower side of the head. Iron. Excavations 1998. National Museum of Slovenia, Inv. No. P 28340. Hobnail. Ribs shaped into a cross and separated by embossed dots on the lower side of the head. Iron. Excavations 1998. National Museum of Slovenia, Inv. No. P 28339. Base of a beaker; reined, oxidization-ired pottery. Excavations 1998. National Museum of Slovenia, Inv. No. P 28341. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. dnim vrhom. Inv. št. 6087. Kamen je določil Miha Jeršek, Prirodoslovni muzej Slovenije. Objava: Nestorović 2005, 31, kat. št. 36, t. 4: 36, 11: 36. Odlomek železne ibule. Peresovina s šestimi navoji, zunanja tetiva. Zahodni vrh. Inv. št. 6089. Železen predmet s tečajem. Vzhodni vrh. Inv. št. 6097. Sulično kopito. Železo. Zahodni vrh. Inv. št. 6092. Sulično kopito. Železo. Zahodni vrh. Inv. št. 6093. Kembelj zvonca. Železo. Zahodni vrh. Inv. št. 6090. Železen predmet. Zahodni vrh. Inv. št. 6098. Gobavica Slika 7. 1. Fibula tipa Alezija. Predrt lok, okrašen z vrezanimi cikcakastimi črtami. Bakrova litina. Naključna najdba. Mestni muzej Mengeš. 2. Fibula z dvema gumboma, tip A 236 c. Bron ali druga bakrova litina. Izkopavanja 1998. Narodni muzej Slovenije, inv. št. P 21723. Objava: Železnikar 1999, 63, št. 40. 3. Železen pečatni prstan. Okrasni kamen je iz kalcedona z vrezanim motivom Pegaza. Izkopavanja 1998. Narodni muzej Slovenije, inv. št. P 21834. Objava: Železnikar 1999, 64, št. 41; Nestorović 2005, 32, kat. št. 43, t. 5: 43, 12: 43. 4. Ročajček v obliki delina. Bron ali druga bakrova litina. Naključna najdba. Mestni muzej Mengeš. 5. Jermenski zaključek z zanko. Zanka ima vzdolžna rebra. Pravokotna ploščica za pritrditev je v zgornjem delu, pred prehodom v zanko proilirana. Tri zakovice na spodnjem delu ploščice so bile vlite skupaj s celotnim predmetom. Zaključek je imel prvotno še drugo ploščico, ki pa je bila odlomljena. Bron ali druga bakrova litina. Izkopavanja 1998. Narodni muzej Slovenije, inv. št. P 21724. Objava: Železnikar 1999, 63, št. 39. 6. Razdelilni gumb. Na zgornji površini pet vdolbin, spodaj štiri zanke, izmed katerih je ena poškodovana. Bron ali druga bakrova litina. Naključna najdba. Mestni muzej Mengeš. 7. Verjetno del kozmetičnega orodja. Bron ali druga bakrova litina. Izkopavanja 1998. Narodni muzej Slovenije, inv. št. P 21835 8. Žebljiček za podkovanje čevlja. Strehasta glavica ima na spodnji strani reliefni križni vzorec z bunčicami. Izkopavanja 1998. Narodni muzej Slovenije, inv. št. P 28340. 9. Žebljiček za podkovanje čevlja. Strehasta glavica ima na spodnji strani reliefni križni vzorec z bunčicami. Izkopavanja 1998. Narodni muzej Slovenije, inv. št. P 28339. 10. Dno kozarca iz prečiščene, oksidacijsko žgane keramike. Izkopavanja 1998. Narodni muzej Slovenije, inv. št. P 28341. 197 BIBLIOGRAPHY / LITERATURA BERNARDINI, F. et al. 2013, Airborne LiDAR application to karstic areas: the example of Trieste province (north-eastern Italy) from prehistoric sites to Roman forts. – Journal of Archaeological Science 40/4, 2152–2160. BISHOP, M. C. 1988, Cavalry Equipment of the Roman Army in the irst century A. D. – In/V: J. C. Coulston (ed./ur.), Military Equipment and the Identity of Roman Soldiers, BAR International Series 394, Oxford, 67–195. BOCKIUS, R., ŁUCZKIEWICZ, P. 2004, Kelten und Germanen im 2.-1. Jahrhundert vor Christus. – Römisch-Germanisches Zentralmuseum, Monographien 58, Mainz. BOLLA, M., BOUBE, Ch., GUILLAUMET, J.-P. 1991, Les situles. – In/V: M. Feugère, C. Rolley (eds./ur.), La vaisselle tardo-républicaine en bronze, Université de Bourgogne, Centre de recherches sur les techniques gréco-romaines 13, Dijon, 7–22. BOŽIČ, D. 1987, Zapadna grupa [he western group]. – In/V: A. Benac (ed./ur.), Praistorija jugoslavenskih zemalja V – Željezno doba, Sarajevo, 855–897. BOŽIČ, D. 1999, Die Erforschung der Latènezeit in Slowenien seit Jahr 1964 / Raziskovanje latenske dobe na Slovenskem po letu 1964. – Arheološki vestnik 50, 189–213. BOŽIČ, D. 2005, Die spätrömischen Hortfunde von der Gora oberhalb von Polhov Gradec. – Arheološki vestnik 56, 293–368. BOŽIČ, D. 2008, Late La Tène-Roman cemetery in Novo mesto. Ljubljanska cesta and Okrajno glavarstvo / Poznolatensko-rimsko grobišče v Novem mestu. Ljubljanska cesta in Okrajno glavarstvo. – Katalogi in monograije 39, Ljubljana. BOŽIČ, D., CIGLENEČKI, S. 1995, Zenonov tremis in poznoantična utrdba Gradec pri Veliki Strmici / Der Tremissis des Kaisers Zeno und die spätantike Befestigung Gradec bei Velika Strmica. – Arheološki vestnik 46, 247–277. BROUQUIER-REDDÉ, V., DEYBER, A. 2001, Fourniment, harnachement, quincaillerie, objets divers. – In/V: M. Reddé, S. von Schnurbein (eds./ur.), Alésia 2 – Le matériel, Mémoires de l’Académie des inscriptions et belles-lettres 22, Paris, 293–362. CEVC, T. 1997, Davne sledi človeka v Kamniških Alpah (Uralte Spuren des Menschen in den Kamniker Alpen). – Ljubljana [summary in German / povzetek v nemščini]. CHIABÀ, M. 2007, La romanizzazione tra Natisone e Isonzo: problemi e spunti per una rilessione. – In/V: M. Chiabà, P. Maggi, C. Magrini (eds./ur.), Le Valli del Natisone e dell’Isonzo tra Centroeuropa e Adriatico, Studi e ricerche sulla Gallia Cisalpina 20, Trieste, Roma, 53–58. 198 DESCHLER-ERB, E. 1998, “Gelügelte” Pferdegeschirranhänger. – Mille iori, Festschrift für Ludwig Berger, Forschungen in Augst 25, Augst, 115–122. DESCHLER-ERB, E. 1999, Ad arma! Römisches Militär des 1. Jahrhunderts n. Chr. in Augusta Raurica. – Forschungen in Augst 28, Augst. DESCHLER-ERB, E. 2007, Bemerkungen zu den Militaria von Kalkriese. – In/V: G. A. Lehmann, R. Wiegels (eds./ur.), Römische Präsenz und Herrschaft im Germanien der augusteischen Zeit, Abhandlungen der Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Göttingen, Phil.–Hist. Klasse, 3/279, Göttingen, 75–88. DIZDAR, M., RADMAN-LIVAJA, I. 2004, Nalaz naoružanja iz Vrtne ulice u Vinkovcima kao prilog poznavanju rane romanizacije istočne Slavonije (Warrior Equipment from Vrtna Street in Vinkovci as a Contribution to Understanding the Process of the Early Romanization of Eastern Slavonia). – Prilozi Instituta za arheologiju u Zagrebu 21, 37–53 [summary in English / povzetek v angleščini]. DOLENZ, H. 1998, Eisenfunde aus der Stadt auf dem Magdalensberg. – Kärntner Museumsschriften 75, Archäologische Forschungen zu den Grabungen auf dem Magdalensberg 13, Klagenfurt. DULAR, A. 1991, Prazgodovinska grobišča v okolici Vinjega vrha nad Belo cerkvijo / Die vorgeschichtlichen Nekropolen in der Umgebung von Vinji vrh oberhalb von Bela cerkev. – Katalogi in monograije 26, Ljubljana. DULAR, J. 2003, Halštatske nekropole Dolenjske / Die hallstattzeitlichen Nekropolen in Dolenjsko. – Opera Instituti Archaeologici Sloveniae 6, Ljubljana. DULAR, J., TECCO HVALA, S. 2007, South-Eastern Slovenia in the Early Iron Age / Jugovzhodna Slovenija v starejši železni dobi. – Opera Instituti Archaeologici Sloveniae 12, Ljubljana. DULAR, J., TOMANIČ JEVREMOV, M. 2009, Sledovi poznolatenske poselitve v Ormožu (Spuren spätlatènezeitlicher Besiedlung in Ormož). – Arheološki vestnik 60, 159–193 [summary in German / povzetek v nemščini]. FALESCHINI, M. 2012, Problemi relativi alla viabilità ed alle modalità insediative nel territorio del Friuli nord-orientale (zona del Canal del Ferro/Val Canale) tra età romana e alto medioevo 2. Il catalogo. – Unpublished Ph. D. thesis / Neobjavljena doktorska disertacija, Udine. FEUGÈRE, M. 1985, Les ibules en Gaule méridionale. – Revue Archéologique de Narbonnaise, Supplément 12, Paris. DEIMEL, M. 1987, Die Bronzekleinfunde vom Magdalensberg. – Kärntner Museumsschriften 71, Archäologische Forschungen zu den Grabungen auf dem Magdalensberg 9, Klagenfurt. FICHTL, S. 1998, La présence militaire romaine sur les oppida dans la Gaule du nord et de l’est. – A. Müller-Karpe et al. (eds./ur.), Studien zur Archäologie der Kelten, Römer und Germanen in Mittel- und Westeuropa, Alfred Hafner zum 60. Geburtstag gewidmet, Internationale Archäologie, Studia honoraria 4, Rahden, 153–168. DEMETZ, S. 1999, Fibeln der Spätlatène- und frühen römischen Kaiserzeit in den Alpenländern. – Frühgeschichtliche und Provinzialrömische Archäologie 4, Rahden. FINGERLIN, G. 1986, Dangstetten I. – Forschungen und Berichte zur Vor- und Frühgeschichte in Baden-Württemberg 22, Stuttgart. FINGERLIN, G. 1998, Dangstetten II. – Forschungen und Berichte zur Vor- und Frühgeschichte in Baden-Württemberg 69, Stuttgart. GUIRAUD, H. 1989, Bagues et anneaux à l’époque romaine en Gaule. – Gallia 46, 173–211. GUIRAUD, H. 1996, Intailles et camées romains. – Paris. FITZPATRICK, A. 1987, Die Eimer vom Typus Fällanden: Ein italischer Bronzegefässtyp des 1. Jh. v. Chr. – Jahrbuch der Schweizerischen Gesellschaft für Ur- und Frühgeschichte 70, 101–112. GABROVEC, S. 1965, Kamniško ozemlje v prazgodovini [he Kamnik area in prehistory]. – Kamniški zbornik 10, 89–134. GUŠTIN, M. 1984, Die Kelten in Jugoslawien. – Jahrbuch des Römisch-Germanischen Zentralmuseums in Mainz 31, 305–363. GUŠTIN, M. 1991, Posočje in der jüngeren Eisenzeit. – Katalogi in monograije 27, Ljubljana [summary in Slovene / povzetek v slovenščini]. GABROVEC, S. 1966, Latensko obdobje na Gorenjskem (Die Latènezeit in Oberkrain). – Arheološki vestnik 17, 243–270 [summary in German / povzetek v nemščini]. GUŠTIN, M. 2002, Il campo militare romano a Čatež presso Brežice (Slovenia). – Quaderni Friulani di Archeologia 12, 69–75. GABROVEC, S. 1979, Mesto Kamnika v prazgodovini Slovenije [he place of Kamnik in the prehistory of Slovenia]. – In/V: J. Žontar et al. (eds./ur.), Kamnik 1229–1979, Kamnik, 5–9. HARNECKER, J., FRANZIUS, G. 2008, Kalkriese 4. Katalog der römischen Funde vom Oberesch. – Römisch-Germanische Forschungen 66, Mainz. GABROVEC, S. 1987, Dolenjska grupa [he group of Dolenjska]. – In/V: A. Benac (ed./ur.), Praistorija jugoslavenskih zemalja V – Željezno doba, Sarajevo, 29–119. HENCKEN, H. 1978, he Iron Age Cemetery of Magdalenska gora in Slovenia. – Mecklenburg Collection, Part II, American School of Prehistoric Research, Bulletin 32, Cambridge, Mass. GAMPER, P. 2004, Vorbericht zur Grabungskampagne 2004 auf der Gurina im Oberen Gailtal, Kärnten. – Archaeologia Austriaca 88, 121–168. HENNING, J. 1987, Südosteuropa zwischen Antike und Mittelalter. Archäologische Beiträge zur Landwirtschft des 1. Jahrtausends u. Z. – Schriften zur Ur- und Frühgeschichte 42, Berlin. GAMPER, P. 2007, Risultati della campagna di scavo 2006 sulla Gurina. – Aquileia Nostra 78, 345–386. HORVAT, J. 1983, Prazgodovinske naselbinske najdbe pri farni cerkvi v Kranju (Vorgeschichtliche Siedlungsfunde bei der Pfarrkirche in Kranj). – Arheološki vestnik 34, 140–218 [summary in German / povzetek v nemščini]. GARBSCH, J. 1965, Die norisch-pannonische Frauentracht im 1. und 2. Jahrhundert. – Münchner Beiträge zur Vor- und Frühgeschichte 11, München. GARBSCH, J. 1985, Die norisch-pannonische Tracht. – In/V: H. Temporini (ed./ur.), Aufstieg und Niedergang der römischen Welt II/12/3, Berlin, New York, 546–577. GASPARI, A. 2009, Some Iron Age and Early Roman inds from Stari grad above Unec (Notranjska, Slovenia). – In/V: G. Tiefengraber, B. Kavur, A. Gaspari (eds./ur.), Keltske študije II, Studies in Celtic Archaeology, Papers in honour of Mitja Guštin, Protohistoire Européenne 11, Montagnac, 315–329. GASPARI, A. 2010, “Apud horridas gentis ...”. Začetki rimskega mesta Colonia Iulia Emona / Beginnings of the Roman Town of Colonia Iulia Emona. – Ljubljana. GLEIRSCHER, P. 1987, Tiroler Schüssel- und Palmettenibeln. – Germania 65/1, 67–88. GLEIRSCHER, P. 2001, Römisches Militär am Steiner Berg? – In/V: F. W. Leitner (ed./ur.), Carinthia romana und die römische Welt, Festschrift für G. Piccottini, Aus Forschung und Kunst 34, Klagenfurt, 239–248. GUGL, Ch. 2001, Das Umland Teurnias vom 2. Jahrhundert v. Chr. bis ins 1. Jahrhundert n. Chr. – Eine Studie zur Siedlungskontinuität von der Latène- zur Römerzeit im oberen Drautal. – Arheološki vestnik 52, 303–349. GUIRAUD, H. 1988, Intailles et camées de l’époque romaine en Gaule. – Gallia, Supplément 48, Paris. HORVAT, J. 1990, Nauportus (Vrhnika). – Dela 1. razreda SAZU 33, Ljubljana. HORVAT, J. 1993, Svinčeni izstrelki za pračo na jugovzhodnoalpskem področju (Lead slingshot in the southeastern Alpine region). – In/V: B. Lamut (ed./ur.), Ptujski arheološki zbornik ob 100-letnici muzeja in Muzejskega društva, Ptuj, 331–340 [summary in English / povzetek v angleščini]. HORVAT, J. 1995, Notranjska na začetku rimske dobe: Parti pri Stari Sušici, Ambroževo gradišče in Baba pri Slavini (Notranjska [Inner Carniola] at the Beginning of the Roman Period: Parti near Stara Sušica, Ambroževo gradišče and Baba near Slavina). – Arheološki vestnik 46, 177–216 [summary in English / povzetek v angleščini]. HORVAT, J. 1997, Vorgeschichtliche und römische Besiedlung der Kamniške Alpe (Slowenien). – In/V: Ph. Della Casa (ed./ ur.), Prehistoric alpine environment, society, and economy, Papers of the international colloquium PAESE ‘ 97 in Zürich, Universitätsforschungen zur prähistorischen Archäologie 55, Bonn, 183–188. HORVAT, J. 2002, he Hoard of Roman Republican Weapons from Grad near Šmihel / Zaklad rimskega republikanskega orožja z Gradu pri Šmihelu pod Nanosom. – Arheološki vestnik 53, 117–192. HORVAT, J. 2009, Selected Aspects of Romanisation in Western and Central Slovenia. – In/V: G. Cuscito (ed./ur.), Aspetti e problemi della romanizzazione, Venetia, Histria e Arco Alpino orientale, Antichità Altoadriatiche 68, 355–381. 199 HORVAT, J., BAVDEK, A. 2009, Okra. Vrata med Sredozemljem in Srednjo Evropo / Ocra. he gateway between the Mediterranean and Central Europe. – Opera Instituti Archaeologici Sloveniae 17, Ljubljana. HORVAT, J., MUŠIČ, B. 2007, Nauportus, a commercial settlement between the Adriatic and the Danube. – In/V: M. Chiabà, P. Maggi, C. Magrini (eds./ur.), Le Valli del Natisone e dell’Isonzo tra Centroeuropa e Adriatico, Studi e ricerche sulla Gallia Cisalpina 20, Roma, 165–174. HÜBENER, W. 1973, Die römischen Metallfunde von AugsburgOberhausen. – Materialhefte zur Bayerischen Vorgeschichte 28, Kallmünz. LAHARNAR, B. 2011, Roman lead slingshots (glandes plumbeae) in Slovenia / Rimski svinčeni izstrelki za pračo (glandes plumbeae) iz Slovenije. – Arheološki vestnik 62, 339–374. LAHARNAR, B. 2012, Notranjska med prazgodovino in antiko (he Notranjska region [SW Slovenia] between prehistory and antiquity). – Unpublished Ph. D. thesis / Neobjavljena doktorska disertacija, Oddelek za arheologijo, Filozofska fakulteta Univerze v Ljubljani [summary in English / povzetek v angleščini]. HVALEC, S. et al. 2009, Utrip Tribune [he pulse of Tribuna]. – Ljubljana. LAHARNAR, B. 2013, he Roman stronghold at Nadleški hrib, Notranjska region / Rimska utrdba na Nadleškem hribu na Notranjskem. – Arheološki vestnik 64, 123–147. ISTENIČ, J. 1999, Poetovio, zahodna grobišča I / Poetovio, the western cemeteries I. – Katalogi in monograije 32, Ljubljana. MANNING, W. H. 1985, Catalogue of the Romano-British iron tools, ittings and weapons in the British Museum. – London. ISTENIČ, J. 2005a, Evidence for a very late Republican siege at Grad near Reka in Western Slovenia. – Carnuntum Jahrbuch 2005, 77–87. MARTIN-KILCHER, S. 2011, Römer und gentes Alpinae im Konlikt – archäologische und historische Zeugnisse des 1. Jahrhunderts v. Chr. – In/V: G. Moosbauer, R. Wiegels (eds./ur.), Fines imperii – imperium sine ine?, Osnabrücker Forschungen zu Altertum und Antike-Rezeption 14, Rahden, 27–62. ISTENIČ, J. 2005b, Brooches of the Alesia group in Slovenia / Fibule skupine Alesia v Sloveniji. – Arheološki vestnik 56, 187–212. ISTENIČ, J. 2009, he early Roman military route along the River Ljubljanica (Slovenia). – In/V: A. Morillo, N. Hanel, E. Martín (eds./ur.), Limes XX, XXth International Congress of Roman Frontier Studies, Madrid, 855–865. ISTENIČ, J. 2010, Late La Tène scabbards with non-ferrous openwork plates / Poznolatenske nožnice s predrtim okrasnim okovom iz bakrove litine ali srebra. – Arheološki vestnik 61, 121–164. JABLONKA, P. 2001, Die Gurina bei Dellach im Gailtal. – Aus Forschung und Kunst 33, Klagenfurt. JACOBI, G. 1974, Werkzeug und Gerät aus dem Oppidum von Manching. – Die Ausgrabungen in Manching 5, Wiesbaden. JOBST, W. 1975, Die römischen Fibeln aus Lauriacum. – Forschungen in Lauriacum 10, Linz. JOHNS, C. 1996, he Jewellery of Roman Britain. – Ann Arbor. KLDB: Krajevni leksikon Dravske banovine. – Ljubljana 1937. KLS: R. Savnik (ed./ur.), Krajevni leksikon Slovenije I. – Ljubljana 1968. KNEZ, T. 1992, Novo mesto II. Keltsko-rimsko grobišče / Keltischrömisches Gräberfeld. Beletov vrt. – Carniola Archaeologica 2, Novo mesto. KÜHLBORN, J.-S. 1992, Das Römerlager in Oberaden III. – Bodenaltertümer Westfalens 27, Münster. 200 LAHARNAR, B. 2010, Arheologija bojišč rimske dobe (Roman Battleield Archaeology). – Arheo 27, 73–80 [summary in English / povzetek v angleščini]. LAHARNAR, B. 2009, he Žerovnišček Iron Age hillfort near Bločice in the Notranjska region / Železnodobno gradišče Žerovnišček pri Bločicah na Notranjskem. – Arheološki vestnik 60, 97–157. MASON, Ph. 2008, he Roman Fort at Obrežje and Augustan Military Activity in the Sava Valley in Slovenia. – In/V: Rom auf dem Weg nach Germanien: Geostrategie, Vormarschtrassen und Logistik, Bodenaltertümer Westfalens 45, Mainz, 187–198. MILAVEC, T. 2011, Kovinske najdbe / Metal inds. – In/V: Z. Modrijan, T. Milavec, Poznoantična utrjena naselbina Tonovcov grad pri Kobaridu, Najdbe / Late Antique fortiied settlement Tonovcov grad near Kobarid, Finds, Opera Instituti Archaeologici Sloveniae 24, Ljubljana, 21–81. MUŠIČ, B., HORVAT, J. 2007, Nauportus – an Early Roman trading post at Dolge njive in Vrhnika / Nauportus – zgodnjerimska trgovska postojanka na Dolgih njivah na Vrhniki. – Arheološki vestnik 58, 219–283. NESTOROVIĆ, A. 2005, V dragulje vbrušene podobe sveta. Rimske geme Slovenije. – Ljubljana [= A. Nestorović, Images of the world ingraved in jewls. Roman gems from Slovenia. – Ljubljana 2005]. NOTHDURFTER, J. 1979, Die Eisenfunde von Sanzeno im Nonsberg. – Römisch-Germanische Forschungen 38, Mainz a. R. PFLAUM, V. 2007, he supposed Late Roman hoard of tools and a steelyard from Vodice near Kalce / Domnevna poznorimska zakladna najdba orodja in hitre tehtnice z Vodic pri Kalcah. – Arheološki vestnik 58, 285–332. PIETSCH, M. 1983, Die römischen Eisenwerkzeuge von Saalburg, Feldberg und Zugmantel. – Saalburg Jahrbuch 39, 5–132. PIRKMAJER, D. 1991, Kelti na Celjskem / Die Kelten in der Region Celje. – Celje. POHANKA, R. 1986, Die eisernen Agrargeräte der Römischen Kaiserzeit in Österreich. – BAR International Series 298, Oxford. POUX, M. 2008, L’empreinte du militaire tardo-républicain dans les faciès mobiliers de La Tène inale. – In/V: M. Poux (ed./ur.), Sur les traces de César, Collection Bibracte 14, Glux-enGlenne, 299–432. REY-VODOZ, V. 1998, Les ibules. – In/V: Beiträge zum römischen Oberwinterthur – VITUDURUM 8, Monographien der Kantonsarchäologie Zürich 30, Zürich, Egg, 11–62. RIECKHOFF, S. 1995, Süddeutschland im Spannungsfeld von Kelten, Germanen und Römern. – Trierer Zeitschrift, Beiheft 19, Trier. RIHA, E. 1979, Die römischen Fibeln aus Augst und Kaiseraugst. – Forschungen in Augst 3, Augst. RIHA, E. 1990, Die römische Schmuck aus Augst und Kaiseraugst. – Forschungen in Augst 10, Augst. SAGADIN, M. 1986, Šmartno pri Cerkljah. – Varstvo spomenikov 28, 274–276. SAGADIN, M. 1995, Mengeš v antiki (Mengeš in the Roman Period). – Arheološki vestnik 46, 217–245 [summary in English / povzetek v angleščini]. SAGADIN, M. 1999, Rimsko obdobje [Roman period]. – In/V: Železnikar 1999, 39–46. SAGADIN, M. 2000, Late Antique wood-working tools from Grdavov hrib near Kamnik (Slovenia). – In/V: M. Feugère, M. Guštin (eds./ur.), Iron, Blacksmiths and Tools, Ancient European Crafts, Monographies instrumentum 12, Montagnac, 205–208. SAGADIN, M. 2003, Zgodnjeantični Kranj (Ancient Kranj). – In/V: B. Jenčič et al. (eds./ur.), Avguštinov zbornik, 50 let Gorenjskega muzeja, Kranj, 71–81 [summary in English / povzetek v angleščini]. SAGADIN, M. 2004, Arheološka preteklost občine Lukovica [he archaeology of Lukovica]. – In/V: S. Pelc et al. (eds./ur.), Zbornik občine Lukovica 2004, Ljubljana, Lukovica, 41–50. SAGADIN, M. 2010, Zgodnjeantično obzidje Karnija [he Early Roman defence walls of Carnium]. – In/V: Jubilejni Kranjski zbornik 2010, Kranj, 16–25. SCHINDLER-KAUDELKA, E. 1975, Die dünnwandige Gebrauchskeramik vom Magdalensberg. – Kärntner Museumsschriften 58, Archäologische Forschungen zu den Grabungen auf dem Magdalensberg 3, Klagenfurt. SCHINDLER-KAUDELKA, E. 2002, La datation des premiers contextes du Magdalensberg. – In/V: SFECAG, Actes du Congrès de Bayeux, La Normandie antique du 1er siècle avant J.-C. à la in du bas-empire, Marseille, 263–274. SCHÖNFELDER, M. 2003, La vaisselle en bronze. – In/V: F. Perrin, M. Schönfelder (eds./ur.), La tombe à char de Verna (Isère): témoinage de l’aristocratie celtique en territoire allobroge, Documents d’Archéologie en Rhône-Alpes et en Auvergne 24, Lyon, 38–69. SEDLMAYER, H. 2009, Die Fibeln vom Magdalensberg. – Kärntner Museumsschriften 79, Archäologische Forschungen zu den Grabungen auf dem Magdalensberg 16, Klagenfurt. SEVINÇ, N., TREISTER, M. 2003, Metalwork from the Dardanos tumulus. – Studia troica 13, 215–260. SIEVERS, S. 2001, Les armes d’Alésia. – In/V: M. Reddé, S. von Schnurbein (eds./ur.), Alésia 2 – Le matériel, Mémoires de l’Académie des inscriptions et belles-lettres 22, Paris, 121–291. ŠAŠEL KOS, M. 1995, he 15th legion at Emona – some thoughts. – Zeitschrift für Papyrologie und Epigraphik 109, 227–244. ŠAŠEL KOS, M. 2000, Caesar, Illyricum, and the hinterland of Aquileia. – In/V: G. Urso (ed./ur.), L’ultimo Cesare, Centro ricerche e documentazione sull’antichità classica, Monograie 20, Roma, 277–304. ŠAŠEL KOS, M. 2012, Colonia Iulia Emona – the genesis of the Roman city / Colonia Iulia Emona – nastanek rimskega mesta. – Arheološki vestnik 63, 79–104. ŠTIBERNIK, G. 2003, Depoja z gradišča Gobavica nad Mengšem in drugi depoji starejše železne dobe [he hoards from the hillfort Gobavica above Mengeš and the other hoards of the Early Iron Age]. – Mengeš. ŠTIBERNIK, G. 2006, 164. Gobavica. – Varstvo spomenikov, Poročila 39–41 / 2000–2004, 98–99. ŠUBIC, S. 2006, Presenetljiva arheološka odkritja [he astonishing archaeological discoveries]. – Novice izpod Krvavca, Priloga Gorenjskega glasa za občanke in občane v občini Cerklje, september 2006, št. 5, str. 4. TAGLIAFERRI, A. 1986, Coloni e legionari romani nel Friuli celtico 1. – Pordenone. TECCO HVALA, S. 2012, Magdalenska gora. Družbena struktura in grobni rituali železnodobne skupnosti / Magdalenska gora. Social structure and burial rites of the Iron Age community. – Opera Instituti Archaeologici Sloveniae 26, Ljubljana. TODD, M. 2007, Roman Military Occupation at Hembury (Devon). – Britannia 38, 107–123. TURK P. 1999, Starejša železna doba – halštatsko obdobje. – In/V: Železnikar 1999, 31–37. UNZ, Ch., DESCHLER-ERB, E. 1997, Katalog der Militaria aus Vindonissa. –Veröfentlichungen der Gesellschaft Pro Vindonissa 14, Brugg. VALIČ, A. 1968–1969, Šmartno pri Cerkljah. – Varstvo spomenikov 13–14, 148–149. VALIČ, A. 1969, Šmartno pri Cerkljah na Gorenjskem – staroslovanska grobnica in kasnoantična arhitektura [Šmartno near Cerklje in Gorenjska – the Early Slav vault and the Late Antiquity architecture]. – Arheološki pregled 11, 213. VALIČ, A. 1970, Arheološke najdbe v Kranju in okolici od leta 1960 do 1970 (Archäologische Ausgrabungen in Kranj und Umgebung in der Zeit von 1960 bis 1970). – In/V: F. Puhar et al. (eds./ur.), Kranjski zbornik 1970, Kranj, 185–191 [summary in German / povzetek v nemščini]. 201 VALIČ, A. 1970–1971, Šmartno pri Cerkljah na Gorenjskem (Šmartno bei Cerklje in Gorenjsko [Oberkrain]). – Arheološki vestnik 21–22, 275–287 [summary in German / povzetek v nemščini]. VALIČ, A. 1982, Arheološka raziskovanja na kranjskem območju v preteklih štirih desetletjih (Les recherches archéologiques dans la région de Kranj au cours des quatre décennies dernières). – In/V: Žontar 1982, V–XXIV [summary in French / povzetek v francoščini]. VAN ENDERT, D. 1991, Die Bronzefunde aus dem Oppidum von Manching. – Die Ausgrabungen in Manching 13, Stuttgart. VIČIČ, B. 1994, Zgodnjerimsko naselje pod Grajskim gričem v Ljubljani. Gornji trg 30, Stari trg 17 in 32 (Die frührömische Siedlung unterhalb des Schloßbergs in Ljubljana. Gornji trg 30, Stari trg 17 und 32). – Arheološki vestnik 45, 25–80 [summary in German / povzetek v nemščini]. VIČIČ, B. 2002, Zgodnjerimsko naselje pod Grajskim gričem v Ljubljani. Gornji trg 3 (Frührömische Siedlung unter dem Schloßberg in Ljubljana. Gornji trg 3). – Arheološki vestnik 53, 193–221 [summary in German / povzetek v nemščini]. 202 VÖLLING, h. 1994, Studien zu Fibelformen der jüngeren vorrömischen Eisenzeit und ältesten römischen Kaiserzeit. – Bericht der Römisch-Germanischen Kommission 75, 147–282. WEDENIG, R. 2006, Spätkeltische bis neuzeitliche Einzelfunde aus Führholz (Unterkärnten). – In/V: Ch. Gutjahr, M. Roscher, G. P. Obersteiner (eds./ur.), Homo efodiens – der Grabende, Festgabe für H. Ecker-Eckhofen, Hengist-Studien 1, Wildon, 62–77. WIELOWIEJSKI, J. 1985, Die spätkeltischen und römischen Bronzegefäße in Polen. – Bericht der Römisch-Germanischen Kommission 66, 123–320. WIELOWIEJSKI, J. 1987, Die Bronzeeimer mit Delphinattaschen in Mitteleuropa im Lichte der archäologischen und metallurgischen Untersuchung. – Zeitschrift für Archäologie 21/1, 25–45. ZANIER, W. 1999, Der spätlatène- und römerzeitliche Brandopferplatz im Forggensee (Gde. Schwangau). – Münchner Beiträge zur Vor- und Frühgeschichte 52, München. ŽELEZNIKAR, J. (ed./ur.) 1999, Poselitvena podoba Mengša in okolice [he settlement of Mengeš and its sourroundings]. – Mengeš. VIČIČ, B. 2003, Colonia Iulia Emona. – In/V: M. Šašel Kos, P. Scherrer (eds./ur.), he autonomous towns of Noricum and Pannonia / Die autonomen Städte in Noricum und Pannonien, Pannonia 1, Situla 41, Ljubljana, 21–45. ŽIŽEK, T., TOMAŽINČIČ, Š. 2007, Poročilo o zaščitnih arheoloških izkopavanjih Šmartno pri Cerkljah (Kranj) [he report of the archaeological excavations in Šmartno near Cerklje (Kranj)] – Unpublished / Neobjavljeno, arhiv ZVKD, OE Kranj. VÖLLING, h. 1990, Funditores im römischen Heer. – Saalburg Jahrbuch 45, 24–58. ŽONTAR, J. 1982, Zgodovina mesta Kranja [he history of Kranj]. – Kranj [reprint / ponatis knjige iz leta 1939]. Plate 1. Straža. 1–3, 15 copper-alloy; rest iron. Scale = 1 : 2 (drawing D. Kniic Lunder). Tabla 1. Straža. 1–3, 15 bakrova litina; drugo železo. M = 1 : 2 (risba D. Kniic Lunder). 203 Plate 2. Straža. 2 lead; 3 copper-alloy; rest iron. Scale = 1 : 2 (drawing D. Kniic Lunder). Tabla 2. Straža. 2 svinec; 3 bakrova litina; drugo železo. M = 1 : 2 (risba D. Kniic Lunder). 204 Plate 3. Straža. 1–5 copper-alloy; rest iron. Scale = 1 : 2 (drawing D. Kniic Lunder). Tabla 3. Straža. 1–5 bakrova litina; drugo železo. M = 1 : 2 (risba D. Kniic Lunder). 205 Plate 4. Straža. Iron. Scale = 1 : 2 (drawing D. Kniic Lunder). Tabla 4. Straža. Železo. M = 1 : 2 (risba D. Kniic Lunder). 206 Plate 5. Straža. 1–4 iron; rest ceramics. Scale 1–4 = 1 : 2; rest 1 : 3 (drawing D. Kniic Lunder). Tabla 5. Straža. 1–4 železo; drugo keramika. M 1–4 = 1 : 2; drugo 1 : 3 (risba D. Kniic Lunder). 207 Plate 6. Straža. 27 stone; rest ceramics. Scale = 1 : 3 (drawing D. Kniic Lunder). Tabla 6. Straža. 27 kamen; drugo keramika. M = 1 : 3 (risba D. Kniic Lunder). 208 EVIDENCE OF THE ROMAN ARMY IN EARLY ROMAN KRANJ SLEDOVI RIMSKE VOJSKE V ZGODNJEANTIČNEM KRANJU Milan Sagadin Milan Sagadin Abstract Izvleček he author discusses certain settlement inds from Kranj, belonging to parts of Roman defensive and ofensive weaponry, i.e. clearly discernible parts of a Mainz type sword scabbard and a Weisenau-type helmet. Two inds can be attributed to shield ittings: an anchor-like ending of an iron rail and – a fairly rare ind – a guttering fastener. A small buckle usually used for fastening the suit of armour (lorica segmentata) was also present, as well as numerous bronze rivets, fragments of bronze sheet metal, a fasteninghook, etc., which are all regularly interpreted as workshop refuse. We can conditionally also include iron nails with a conic head among the military gear, as shoes (including army boots) were nailed with these. he accompanying inds and the comparative materials enable a dating into the Middle and Late Augustan periods, to which the remains of the earliest town walls in Kranj also belong. Avtor obravnava nekatere naselbinske najdbe iz Kranja, ki pripadajo delom rimskega napadalnega in obrambnega orožja. Jasno so opredeljivi deli nožnice gladija tipa Mainz ter čelade tipa Weisenau. Dve najdbi pripadata okovom ščita: sidrasto razcepljeni konec železne opornice in dokaj redka najdba – prižema robnega okova. Jasno opredeljiva je tudi manjša spona, ki se je uporabljala navadno za spenjanje oklepa (lorica segmentata), številne bronaste zakovice, deli bronaste pločevine, kaveljček ipd. pa se najpogosteje interpretirajo kot delavniški odpadki. Pogojno lahko med vojaško opremo štejemo tudi železne žebljičke s stožčasto glavico, s katerimi so bila okovana (tudi vojaška) obuvala. Spremljajoče najdbe in primerjalno gradivo omogočajo datacijo v srednje in poznoavgustejsko obdobje, kamor sodijo tudi ostanki najstarejšega obzidja v Kranju. Keywords: Kranj, Middle and Late Augustan period, settlement, town walls, weaponry, gladius, helmet, shield Ključne besede: Kranj, srednje in poznoavgustejsko obdobje, naselbina, obzidje, orožje, gladij, čelada, ščit An assessment of the archaeological potential of the conglomerate pier above the conluence the Sava and Kokra Rivers has in the past been based primarily on the rich Late Antiquity and Migration Period or Early Medieval inds, mainly the result of excavations of vast cemeteries, i.e. at the locations of Lajh,1 the parish church of St. Kanzian,2 as well as the crossroads in front of the Iskra factory next to the river Sava.3 Ocena arheološkega potenciala naselbine na konglomeratnem pomolu nad sotočjem Save in Kokre se je v preteklosti opirala predvsem na bogate najdbe iz obdobja pozne antike oz. preseljevanja ljudstev in zgodnjega srednjega veka. V obeh primerih je šlo za rezultate raziskav velikih grobišč, in sicer na lokaciji Lajh,1 župna cerkev sv. Kancijana in tovarišev2 ter cestno križišče pred tovarno Iskra ob Savi.3 he Early Roman settlement of Kranj was seriously discussed for the irst time in two articles by Mikl-Curk;4 while an earlier supposition that the Early Roman settlement had only been limited to Pungart – the southernmost end of the conglomerate pier on which the town centre is located – was disproven. his thesis had been based Zgodnjeantična poselitev Kranja je bila resneje obravnavana najprej v dveh člankih I. Mikl-Curk.4 S tem je bila tudi odpravljena starejša teza, po kateri naj bi bila zgodnjeantična naselbina omejena zgolj na Pungart – skrajni južni konec konglomeratnega pomola, na katerem stoji mestno jedro. Ta teza je temeljila na naključnih zgodnje- 1 2 3 4 Stare 1980. Valič 1975. Sagadin 1988. Curk 1974, 41–44; Curk 1975, 178–181. 1 2 3 4 Stare 1980. Valič 1975. Sagadin 1988. Curk 1974, 41–44; Curk 1975, 178–181. 209 Figure 1. Locations of Early Roman military equipment inds and Early Roman town wall segments in Kranj. 1 south courtyard of Kieselstein castle; 2 north courtyard of Kieselstein castle; 3 Tomšičeva 42; 4 Tomšičeva 38; 5 Glavni trg 21; 6 Kieselstein castle (Tomšičeva 44); 7 Reginčeva ulica; 8 Glavni trg 18; 9 Glavni trg 21; 10 Early Roman town walls (M. Sagadin and D. Valoh). Slika 1. Najdišča zgodnjeantične vojaške opreme in odseki zgodnjeantičnega obzidja v Kranju. 1 južno dvorišče Kieselsteina; 2 severno dvorišče Kieselsteina; 3 Tomšičeva 42; 4 Tomšičeva 38; 5 Glavni trg 21; 6 grad Kieselstein (Tomšičeva 44); 7 Reginčeva ulica; 8 Glavni trg 18; 9 Glavni trg 21; 10 zgodnjeantično obzidje (izdelava M. Sagadin in D. Valoh). 210 Figure 2. Early Roman town wall remains between Tomšičeva 38 and Tomšičeva 44 in Kranj (M. Sagadin and D. Valoh). Slika 2. Ostanki zgodnjeantičnega obzidja med Tomšičevo 38 in Tomšičevo 44 v Kranju (izdelava M. Sagadin in D. Valoh). antičnih najdbah pri Mestni hiši in na dvorišču Pavšlarjeve hiše (Glavni trg 18), ki so bile interpretirane kot grobne najdbe.5 Intenzivne zaščitne arheološke raziskave naselja, ki potekajo nekako od leta 1989 v povezavi z obnavljanjem komunalne infrastrukture in stavbnega fonda, pa so prinesle tudi številne nove najdbe iz zgodnjeantičnega obdobja. Prve sintetične objave omejujejo to obdobje na srednje- in poznoavgustejski čas.6 on chance Early Roman items from the Town Hall and the courtyard of the Pavšler house (Glavni trg 18), which had been interpreted as grave inds.5 Intensive rescue archaeological research in the town, conducted since 1989 in connection with sewage infrastructure renovations and building activities, has brought to light numerous new inds from the Early Roman period. he irst comprehensive publications have limited this period to the Middle and Late Augustan times.6 We can now ascertain that all the streets have been researched, as well as the interiors and/or courtyards of 18 buildings. Research has continuously substantiated three distinct settlement waves: the beginning of the Early Iron Age (Ha B3/Ha C1), the Early Roman period and Late Antiquity with a continuation to the Early Middle Ages. Recently, the Early Stone Age settlement of Pungart indicated in 1990 has also been conirmed. he Early Iron Age and Early Roman settlements even surpassed the size of the medieval settlement. he remains of a town wall, traced in segments in the southern and northern courtyard of Kieselstein castle, the building at Tomšičeva 42 and the courtyard of the building at Tomšičeva 38, could be connected to the Early Roman settlement phase in Kranj. At the last two aforementioned locations, two rectangular towers could also be reconstructed, probably belonging to two phases of the Early Zdaj lahko ugotavljamo, da so bile raziskane že vse ulice ter notranjosti ali dvorišča 18 stavb. Raziskave vedno znova potrjujejo tri izrazite poselitvene sunke: obdobje začetka starejše železne dobe (Ha B3/Ha C1), obdobje zgodnje antike in obdobje pozne antike z nadaljevanjem v zgodnji srednji vek. Nedavno je bila potrjena tudi še mlajšekamenodobna poselitev Pungarta, ki se je prvič rahlo nakazala leta 1990. Obseg poselitvenega območja v starejši železni dobi in zgodnji antiki je celo presegel meje srednjeveške naselbine. Z zgodnjeantično fazo naselbine v Kranju lahko povezujemo ostanke obzidja, ki smo mu v segmentih lahko sledili na južnem in severnem dvorišču gradu Kieselstein, v stavbi Tomšičeva 42 in na dvorišču stavbe Tomšičeva 38. Na zadnjih dveh lokacijah smo lahko rekonstruirali tudi dvoje pravokotnih stolpov, ki verjetno pripadata dvema fazama zgodnjeantičnega obzidja.7 Zgodnjeantično obzidje je datirano s temnorjavo kulturno plastjo, ki se je na severnem in južnem dvorišču gradu Kieselstein, v severozahodnem prostoru stavbe Tomšičeva 42 in na vrtu stavbe Tomšičeva 38 nabrala neposredno za ostanki obzidja. Plast je med drugim vsebovala tri ibule vrsta Aucissa različnih variant, ki sodijo v zadnji dve desetletji pr. Kr. in prvo polovico 1. st. po Kr. (tip 5.2., varianti 1 in 4),8 odlomek t. i. bojske ibule oz. ibule tipa Almgren 2 iz zadnjega desetletja pr. Kr. in prvih dveh desetletij po Kr.,9 primerek močno proilirane ibule iz prve polovice 1. st. po Kr.10 in ibulo tipa Alezija iz zadnjega desetletja pr. Kr.11 Keramika iz te zgodnjeantične plasti, ne5 6 7 8 9 5 6 Žontar 1939, 11. Sagadin 2003. Figure 3. Tomšičeva 42. South wall foundations of the rectangular tower; bottom ive rows (photo M. Sagadin). Slika 3. Tomšičeva 42. Temelji južne stene pravokotnega stolpa; spodnjih pet vrst (foto M. Sagadin). 10 11 Žontar 1939, 11. Sagadin 2003. Sagadin 2010. Riha 1994, 101–103. Koščević 1980, 1314; Völling 1994, 222–230. Bojović 1983, 33–34. Istenič 2005b, 195–196. 211 Figure 4. Remains of the Early Roman town walls in the southern courtyard of Tomšičeva 44. To the let is the Late Antique town wall on which the medieval town walls were built (photo M. Sagadin). Slika 4. Ostanki zgodnjeantičnega obzidja na južnem dvorišču Tomšičeve 44. Levo od njega je poznoantično obzidje, na katerem je bilo zgrajeno srednjeveško obzidje (foto M. Sagadin). Figure 5. Tomšičeva 38. Early Roman town walls with remains of the exterior rectangular tower. Let is the irst Early Roman phase, right the Late Antique town walls with the newer superstructure (photo J. Rupnik, Magelan skupina d. o. o.). Slika 5. Tomšičeva 38. Zgodnjeantično obzidje z ostanki pravokotnega stolpa na zunanji strani. Levo je starejša zgodnjeantična faza, desno poznoantično obzidje z novejšo nadzidavo (foto J. Rupnik, Magelan skupina d. o. o.). Roman town walls.7 hese walls are dated by a dark brown cultural layer, situated directly above the wall remains in the northern and southern courtyards of Kieselstein castle, the north-western area of the building at Tomšičeva 42, and the garden of the building at Tomšičeva 38. Among other inds, the layer contained three ibulae of Aucissa type variants, dated to the last two decades BC and the irst half of the 1st century AD (type 5.2, variants 1 and 4),8 a fragment of a so-called Boi ibula or Almgren 2 type ibula from the last decade BC and the irst two decades AD, 9 an example of a strongly proiled ibula from the irst half of the 1st century AD,10 and an Alesia type ibula from the last decade BC.11 he pottery from this Early Roman layer, directly connected to the wall remains, was imported from northern Italy; i.e. terra sigillata (Consp. R 12, R 13, 1.2.1, 14 – stamp of HILARI),12 and thin-walled pottery (forms 2 and 13),13 appearing in the last three decades BC and the irst two decades AD. Italian ine ware appears together with coarse and ine Late La Tène pottery typical of the inal stages of the Mokronog group (Mokronog IIIa).14 In contrast, the contexts from Kranj are missing Late Republican and Early Augustan pottery ware imports from Italy (e.g. Greek-Hellenistic lamps, black sigillata, early forms of thin-walled pottery) characteristic of the Ljubljana II phase.15 hus, the beginnings of intense Roman interventions in Kranj can be dated to the Middle Augustan period, i.e. the Ljubljana IIIa phase.16 he scope of the walled settlement area is not yet known, but surely is narrower than the area scattered with Early Roman inds. Nevertheless, the existence of a stone wall undoubtedly proves that Kranj was not an army encampment in this Early Roman phase, as the army only fortiied its stations with palisades and earthen ramparts at this early stage.17 A smaller number of metal inds can be attributed to military equipment or weapons. he majority stems from research in the building at Glavni trg 21 (pl. 1: 1, 7, 15–41) and Kieselstein castle (northern courtyard – Tomšičeva 44/1998, pl. 1: 4, 5, 9–14, 43; southern courtyard – Tomšičeva 44/1989, pl. 1: 8), while individual inds of this type are also known from buildings at Glavni trg 18 (pl. 1: 2), Tomšičeva 21 (pl. 1: 3), Tomšičeva 38 (pl. 1: 42) and Reginčeva ulica (pl. 1: 6). In particular, the inds from Glavni trg 21, Tomšičeva 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 212 17 Sagadin 2010. Riha 1994, 101–103. Koščević 1980, 1314; Völling 1994, 222–230. Bojović 1983, 33–34. Istenič 2005b, 195–196. Conspectus. Ater Schindler-Kaudelka 1975, 163–165. Dular, Tomanič Jevremov 2009, 172–173. Vičič 1994, 27–30. Vičič 1994, 30–34. Lander 1984, 15; Horvat 2010, 145–149, 150–152. posredno povezane z ostanki obzidja, je uvožena iz severne Italije. Gre za tero sigilato (oblike: Consp. R 12, R 13, 1.2.1, 14 – žig HILARI)12 in keramiko tankih sten (oblika 2 in 13),13 ki se pojavlja v zadnjih treh desetletjih pr. Kr. in v prvih dveh desetletjih po Kr. Italska ina keramika nastopa skupaj z grobo in ino poznolatensko keramiko, značilno za končne stopnje mokronoške skupine (Mokronog IIIa).14 12 13 14 Conspectus. Po Schindler-Kaudelka 1975, 163–165. Dular, Tomanič Jevremov 2009, 172–173. 21, Tomšičeva 38 and the iron and bronze nails from the northern courtyard of Kieselstein castle (Tomšičeva 44/1998) stem from closed contexts. he contents of the closed contexts from the building at Tomšičeva 38 and the northern courtyard of Tomšičeva 44/1998 are described in the dating of the Early Roman walls (see above). Several coin inds were discovered at the building at Glavni trg 21, i.e. four Celtic and two Roman Republican coins, which were in circulation from the irst half of the 2nd century BC to the reign of Tiberius or Claudius, when the use of two small Norican silvers of the Eis and the horse-type end.18 he assembly also included fragments of sigillata pottery belonging mostly to the Middle and Late Augustan periods (forms: Consp. 5.2., 12.1., 14.1., R2 – chalice, R12 – Aco cup, R13 – Sarius cup, stamp HOMERUS, perhaps also NORBANUS),19 thin-walled pottery with forms dated to the last quarter of the 1st century BC at Magdalensberg (forms: 1–5, 9, 12, 13, 27, 68),20 two fragments of cylindrical lamps (Augustan period), two bone styli, and an Aucissa type ibula (variant 22a2b – from 20/10 BC to Tiberius).21 he chronologically less characteristic inds in this context included coarse and ine La Tène pottery, as well as regular Italian pottery (a tray and two mortars). he excavated proile of the building at Glavni trg 21 showed quite a distinct stratiication, although the individual pottery fragments from the two Early Roman layers could be pieced together. It seems, therefore, that the layering was a consequence of illing-in, although it represents a relatively closed context, mainly encompassing the Middle Augustan period. Only one tray fragment can be dated to the Ljubljana II phase, i.e. the Late Republican or Early Augustan periods.22 A probably Middle Augustan period closed context is also the location of the building at Tomšičeva 21, i.e. the illing of interment I (SU 3), in which were the remains of sigillata vessels Consp. 21.1, R13 (Sarius cup), R2 (chalice), and two fragments of Dressel 7 and Dressel 6B type amphorae.23 Ofensive weaponry A round bronze button with a conical hole found in the building at Glavni trg 21 is a scabbard ending (pl. 1: 1). he bottom terminates without moulding, while the upper moulding has been broken of. Such scabbard endings, together with gutterings that adjoin them, are characteristic mainly of Mainz type gladii, which were in use from the Augustan period to the mid-1st century AD,24 but not 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Kos 1977, 34. Conspectus. Schindler-Kaudelka 1975, pls. 36–37. Ater Feugère 1985, pl. 117: 1501. Sagadin 2008, 95; comp. Vičič 1994, 30. Sagadin 2008, 39–40, 48–49; Sagadin 2003. Deschler-Erb, 1999, 23; Bishop, Coulston 2006, 78–83. Po drugi strani v kontekstih iz Kranja manjka iz Italije uvožena poznorepublikanska in zgodnjeavgustejska keramika (npr. grško-helenistične oljenke, črna sigilata, zgodnje oblike keramike tankih sten), ki je značilna za fazo Ljubljana II.15 Tako lahko datiramo začetek intenzivnega rimskega posega v Kranju v srednjeavgustejsko obdobje, to je v fazo Ljubljana IIIa.16 Obseg obzidanega areala naselbine sicer še ni znan, gotovo pa je ožji kot površina, na kateri se pojavljajo zgodnjeantične najdbe. Vsekakor pa obstoj kamnitega obzidja dokazuje, da v zgodnjeantični fazi naselbine v Kranju ne gre za vojaško postojanko, saj se je vojska v tej zgodnji fazi utrjevala izključno s palisadami in zemljenimi nasipi.17 Manjše število kovinskih najdb lahko povežemo z vojaško opremo in orožjem. Večina jih izvira iz raziskav v stavbi Glavni trg 21 (t. 1: 1, 7, 15–41) in ob gradu Kieselstein (severno dvorišče – Tomšičeva 44/1998, t. 1: 4, 5, 9–14, 43; južno dvorišče – Tomšičeva 44/1989, t. 1: 8), posamezne takšne najdbe pa poznamo še iz stavb Glavni trg 18 (t. 1: 2), Tomšičeva 21 (t. 1: 3), iz Tomšičeve 38 (t. 1: 42) in z Reginčeve ulice (t. 1: 6). Zlasti najdbe iz stavb Glavni trg 21, Tomšičeva 21, Tomšičeva 38 in železni in bronasti žebljički s severnega dvorišča gradu Kieselstein (Tomšičeva 44/1998) izhajajo iz zaprtih kontekstov. Vsebina zaprtih kontekstov iz stavbe Tomšičeva 38 in s severnega dvorišča Tomšičeve 44/1998 je opisana pri dataciji zgodnjeantičnega obzidja (glej zgoraj). Iz konteksta stavbe Glavni trg 21 je več novčnih najdb, 4 keltski in 2 rimska republikanska novca, ki so bili v obtoku od prve polovice 2. st. pr. Kr. do Tiberija oz. Klavdija, do kamor seže uporaba dveh malih noriških srebrnikov tipa Eis in tipa s konjičkom.18 V kontekstu so bili tudi odlomki sigilatnega posodja, ki pripada pretežno srednje- in poznoavgustejskemu obdobju (oblike: Consp. 5.2., 12.1., 14.1., R2 – kelih, R12 – čaša Aco, R13 – skodelica Sarius, žig HOMERUS, morda tudi NORBANUS),19 nadalje keramika tankih sten z oblikami, ki so na Štalenski gori datirane v zadnjo četrtino 1. st. pr. Kr. (oblike 1–5, 9, 12, 13, 27, 68),20 odlomka cilindričnih oljenk (avgustejsko obdobje), dvoje koščenih stilusov in ibula vrste Avcissa (varianta 22a2b – od 20/10 pr. Kr. do Tiberija).21 Od kronološko manj občutljivih najdb se v tem kontekstu pojavljajo še groba in ina latenska keramika ter navadna italska keramika (pladenj in dve melnici). Proil izkopa v stavbi Glavni trg 21 je kazal sicer dokaj izrazito stratiiciranost, vendar so bili posamezni keramični fragmenti iz dveh zgodnjeantičnih plasti sestavljivi. Kaže torej, da je plastovitost nastala z nasipavanjem, 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 Vičič 1994, 27–30. Vičič 1994, 30–34. Lander 1984, 15; Horvat 2010, 145–149, 150–152. Kos 1977, 34. Conspectus. Schindler-Kaudelka 1975, t. 36–37. Po Feugère 1985, t. 117: 1501. 213 of the later types, e.g. the Pompeii type. he shape of this button has the best analogies in Haltern, the duration of which is limited to 7 or 5 BC to AD 9.25 A good comparison was also found in Grave 17 from Idrija pri Bači, attributed to stage IVb or the last decades of the 1st century BC.26 However, later comparisons are also known – from the beginning of the 2nd century AD (Nijmegen, from approx. AD 104 to 105).27 he Glavni trg 21 context is dated to the Mid-Augustan period (see above). A bronze strap with a ribbed, proiled central part represents a deformed scabbard suspension clamp (pl. 1: 3). he example found at the site of the building at Tomšičeva 21 (interment I, SU 3) was obviously in secondary use, indicated by the hammering traces on one side of the visible proiled part, with which the taping part of the clamp loop was straightened before being bent anew. he break at the other end of the strap is also likely a consequent of the straightening and re-bending of the sheet. he formation of the rivet holes is likewise secondary, as the rivets are generally arranged symmetrically to the left and right of the proiled visible part of the strap. At Magdalensberg, these were found as refuse of a Mid-Augustan period bronzeprocessing workshop.28 Many such inds stem from Augustan military camps (e.g. Haltern, from 7 or 5 BC to AD 9; Basel Münsterhügel, late 1st century BC; Küssaberg-Dangstetten, from 15 to 9/8 BC29). he primary period of use for this object from Kranj is therefore deinable through these analogies, while its secondary use took place (according to context) in the Mid-Augustan period. he terminating knob of a scabbard (pl. 1: 1) and the scabbard fastener (pl. 1: 3) have consistent analogies in a Mainztype scabbard from the River Ljubljanica near Bevke.30 Defensive weaponry he function of the bronze strap fragment with the vertical ribbed moulding is questionable (pl. 1: 2). It difers from scabbard mouth linings in that it is cast, and the front strap moulding is not visible on the back, which is therefore lat. Similar examples from a military equipment workshop at Gornji trg 3 in Ljubljana, dated to the Late Augustan period, are interpreted by Vičič as the lining of the forehead part of a Weisenau-type helmet, which he dates to the last decade BC.31 Such determinations can also be found with other authors.32 However, if (as in our case) 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 214 Miks 2007, pl. 202: B120, 28, B120, 29, B120, 30, pl. 203: B120, 33. Guštin 1991, pl. 16: 2, 92–93. Miks 2007, pl. 202: B204, 6. Dolenz, Flügel, Öllerer 1995, 64. Immediate parallel Miks 2007, B154, 25 – pl. 196. Istenič 2009, 268–269. Vičič 2002, 195, pl. 12: 55–59; for a dating of the workshop Horvat 2012, 280–281. Dolenz, Flügel, Öllerer 1995, 64; Deimel 1987, 86, pl. 71: 15, 17, 18, pl. 72: 1–4, 6, 7; Deschler-Erb 1999, pl. 11: 148. vendar pa predstavlja relativno zaključen kontekst, obsegajoč predvsem srednjeavgustejsko obdobje. Le en odlomek pladnja sodi že v fazo Ljubljana II, to je v poznorepublikansko oziroma zgodnjeavgustejsko obdobje.22 Zaprt kontekst iz verjetno srednjeavgustejskega obdobja predstavlja tudi lokacija stavbe Tomšičeva 21 in sicer polnilo vkopa I (SE 3), v katerem so bili ostanki sigilatnega posodja Consp. 12.1, R13 (skodelica Sarius), R2 (kelih) ter odlomka amfor Dressel 7 in Dressel 6B.23 Napadalno orožje Kroglast bronasti gumb s konično predrtino, najden v stavbi Glavni trg 21, je zaključek nožnice (t. 1: 1). Spodaj je zaključen brez proilacije, zgornja proilacija pa je odlomljena. Takšni zaključki nožnic skupaj z robnimi okovi, ki se stekajo vanje, so značilni predvsem za gladije tipa Mainz, ki so bili v uporabi od avgustejskega obdobja do sredine 1. st. po Kr.,24 ne pa za mlajše tipe, npr. tip Pompeji. Oblika našega gumba ima najboljše primerjave predvsem v Halternu, katerega trajanje je omejeno na od 7 ali 5 pr. Kr. do 9 po Kr.25 Dobro primerjavo imamo tudi v grobu 17 z Idrije pri Bači, ki je uvrščen v stopnjo IVb oz. v zadnja desetletja 1. st. pr. Kr.26 Vendar pa so znane tudi mlajše primerjave – z začetka 2. st. po Kr. (Nijmegen, od okoli 104 do 105 po Kr.).27 Kontekst Glavni trg 21 je datiran v srednjeavgustejsko obdobje (glej zgoraj). Bronasti trak z rebrasto proiliranim srednjim delom predstavlja deformirano nosilno objemko nožnice (t. 1: 3). Primerek, ki je bil najden na lokaciji stavbe Tomšičeva 21 (vkop I, SE 3), je bil očitno sekundarno uporabljen, na kar kažejo sledovi udarcev na eni strani vidnega proiliranega dela, s katerimi so poravnali zankasti del zavoja objemke, preden so ga ponovno upognili. Tudi prelom traku na drugem koncu je verjetno posledica poravnavanja in ponovnega upogibanja pločevine. Razporeditev luknjic za zakovice je ravno tako sekundarna, saj so zakovice pričvrščene praviloma simetrično levo in desno od proiliranega vidnega dela traku. Na Štalenski gori jih najdemo kot odpadek obdelave brona v srednjeavgustejski delavnici.28 Veliko takšnih najdb je v avgustejskih vojaških taborih (npr. Haltern, od 7 ali 5 pr. Kr. do 9 po Kr.; Basel Münsterhügel, pozno 1. stol. pr. Kr., Küssaberg – Dangstetten, od 15 do 9/8 pr. Kr.29). Čas primarne uporabe tega predmeta iz Kranja je torej opredeljiv s temi primerjavami, sekundarno uporabljen pa je bil – glede na kontekst – v srednjeavgustejskem obdobju. 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 Sagadin 2008, 95; prim. Vičič 1994, 30. Sagadin 2008, 39–40, 48–49; Sagadin 2003. Deschler-Erb, 1999, 23; Bishop, Coulston 2006, 78–83. Miks 2007, t. 202: B120, 28, B120, 29, B120, 30, t. 203: B120, 33. Guštin 1991, t. 16: 2, 92–93. Miks 2007, t. 202: B204, 6. Dolenz, Flügel, Öllerer 1995, 64. Neposredna paralela Miks 2007, B154, 25 – t. 196. we only have the proiled part of the strap, there is no way we can discern it from a scabbard mouth lining or scabbard suspension clamp, which are fortiied on the visible side with hammered or cast horizontal ribs.33 Our ind has no irm context and cannot contribute to narrowing the abovementioned dates. However, the crest mount, found in the northern courtyard of the building at Tomšičeva 44, is clearly discernible, although without exact context (pl. 1: 4). It belongs to a Weisenau-type helmet and appears at the beginning of the 1st century AD at Magdalensberg.34 As with most such mounts, it has bent ends and a cleft holder. he helmet itself developed from Celtic traditions in the Augustan period and was used primarily by the auxiliary infantry and cavalry units, although it was soon also adopted by legionaries and used in an adapted form until the 3rd century. In Augst, Switzerland, such mounts are dated to the whole of 1st century AD.35 Defensive weaponry also includes an iron (anchor-like) cleft ending of a shield reinforcing strip (pl. 1: 5), found in the northern courtyard of Kieselstein castle, but without context that would enable a dating. Analogies from Vindonissa date it to the 1st century AD,36 although similar shield reinforcement strips also appear as late as the Antonine period.37 In this particular example, the more reliable dating is to the 1st century AD, as there are no known Antonine period inds from Kranj. According to Dragan Božič,38 item pl. 1: 6 was also part of a shield, thought to be a guttering fastener. It was found in Reginčeva ulica. An analogy from Magdalensberg is dated from the mid-1st century BC to around AD 20, without its function being deined in the publication.39 Another similar piece (deined as a belt fragment) stems from Gracarca in Carinthia, where it was found in a Late La Tène context.40 A remarkably common ind in the militaria repertoire is a small D-shaped buckle (pl. 1: 7). Larger, but similarly shaped buckles were used for buckling belts, especially in the 1st century AD.41 Smaller buckles were used for fastening suits of armour (lorica segmentata), like the ones used in multiple variants from Augustus onwards, and until the 3rd century AD.42 hey are particularly determinable as armour-related in connection with longitudinal, sometimes multi-piece sheathing. At Magdalensberg, such buckles Zaključni gumb nožnice (t. 1: 1) in objemka nožnice (t. 1: 3) imata lepo primerjavo v nožnici tipa Mainz iz Ljubljanice pri Bevkah.30 Obrambno orožje Vprašljiva je funkcija odlomka bronastega traku z vzdolžno rebrasto proilacijo (t. 1: 2). Od obrobe ustij nožnic naj bi se razlikoval predvsem po tem, da je ulit in da se čelna proilacija traku ne pozna na njegovi hrbtni strani, ki je zato ploska. Podobne primerke iz delavnice vojaške opreme na Gornjem trgu 3 v Ljubljani, ki je datirana v poznoavgustejsko obdobje, interpretira B. Vičič kot obrobo čelnega dela čelade tipa Weisenau in jih datira v zadnje desetletje pr. Kr.31 Na take opredelitve naletimo tudi pri drugih avtorjih.32 Dejstvo pa je, da če – tako kot v našem primeru – razpolagamo le s proiliranim delom traku, najdbe ne moremo ločiti od obrobe ustja nožnice ali od nosilnih objemk nožnice, ki so na vidni strani ojačani z iztolčenimi ali ulitimi horizontalnimi rebri.33 Naša najdba nima trdnega konteksta in ne more prispevati k zoženju navedenih datacij. Zanesljivo opredeljiv pa je nastavek za perjanico, najden na severnem dvorišču stavbe Tomšičeva 44 brez zanesljivega konteksta (t. 1: 4). Pripada čeladi tipa Weisenau in se na Štalenski gori pojavlja v začetku 1. st. po Kr.34 Kot večina takšnih nastavkov ima zvite konce in razcepljeno nasadilo. Čelada sama se je iz keltske tradicije razvila v avgustejskem obdobju, uporabljale pa so jo sprva pomožne enote pešcev in konjenice, kmalu pa so jo prevzeli tudi legionarji in jo v prilagojeni obliki uporabljali do 3. st. V Augstu so takšni nastavki datirani v celotno 1. st. po Kr.35 Med obrambno orožje spada tudi železen, sidrasto razcepljeni konec opornice ščita (t. 1: 5), najden na severnem dvorišču gradu Kieselstein, vendar brez konteksta, ki bi omogočal datacijo. Primerjave iz Vindonisse ga umeščajo v 1. st. po Kr.,36 čeprav se podobne opornice ščita pojavljajo še v antoninskem obdobju.37 V konkretnem primeru je vsekakor zanesljivejša datacija v 1. st. po Kr., ker najdb antoninskega obdobja v Kranju ni. Po opredelitvi kolega Dragana Božiča,38 je bil del ščita tudi predmet t. 1: 6, ki naj bi bil prižema robnih okovov. Najden je bil v Reginčevi ulici. Primerjava s Štalenske gore je datirana v čas od sredine 1. st. pr. Kr. do okoli 20 po Kr. – 30 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 Miks 2007, 213–214, pls. 195–198. Deimel 1987, 86, pl. 73: 3. Deschler-Erb 1999, 29, 138, pl. 10: 139–143, pl. 11: 144–147. Unz, Deschler-Erb 1997, pl. 25: 559, 560, 562, 564. Bishop, Coulston 2006, igs. 40: 3, 83:1. I am grateful to him for his help. Deimel 1987, 301, pl. 79: 15. Gleirscher 1996, ig. 5: 1 – bottom let. Sagadin 1979, 304–305. Deschler-Erb 1999, 35. 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 Istenič 2009, 268–269. Vičič 2002, 195, t. 12: 55–59; za datacijo delavnice Horvat 2012, 280–281. Dolenz, Flügel, Öllerer 1995, 64; Deimel 1987, 86, t. 71: 15, 17, 18, t. 72: 1–4, 6, 7; Deschler-Erb 1999, t. 11: 148. Miks 2007, 213–214, t. 195–198. Deimel 1987, 86, t. 73: 3. Deschler-Erb 1999, 29, 138, t. 10: 139–143, t. 11: 144–147. Unz, Deschler-Erb 1997, t. 25: 559, 560, 562, 564. Bishop, Coulston 2006, sl. 40: 3, 83:1. Za pomoč se mu najlepše zahvaljujem. 215 appear from the second half of the 1st century BC to the mid-1st century AD,43 and are otherwise mainly limited to the 1st century AD.44 he buckle from Kranj was found in the Mid-Augustan context of Glavni trg 21. ne da bi bila v objavi opredeljena njena funkcija.39 Drug podoben primerek (opredeljen kot del pasu) izvira iz Gracarce na avstrijskem Koroškem, kjer je bil najden v kontekstu predmetov iz poznolatenskega obdobja.40 Perhaps a small, strongly fragmented hook (pl. 1: 30), which can be compared to so-called vertical fasteners or clasps from the late 1st century BC, also belongs to a suit of armour of this type. 45 Zelo pogosta najdba v repertoarju militaria je manjša spona D-oblike (t. 1: 7). Večje, a enako oblikovane spone so se zlasti v 1. st. po Kr. uporabljale za spenjanje pasu.41 Manjše spone so služile za zapenjanje oklepa (lorica segmentata), kakršen se je uporabljal od Avgusta dalje v več variantah še do 3. st. po Kr.42 Kot del oklepa so opredeljive predvsem v povezavi s podolgovatimi, včasih večdelnimi okovi. Na Štalenski gori se take spone pojavljajo od druge polovice 1. st. pr. Kr. do sredine 1. st. po Kr.,43 sicer pa so omejene pretežno na 1. st. po Kr.44 Spona iz Kranja je bila najdena v srednjeavgustejskem kontekstu Glavnega trga 21. Other equipment Some other inds from Kranj could also conditionally be attributed to military equipment, e.g. a bronze Gorgon Medusa appliqué (pl. 1: 8), a chance ind from the southern courtyard of the building at Tomšičeva 44/1989. he holes on its edges indicate that it was in all likelihood fastened to leather bedding. Attachments and phalerae with this motif can be found, e.g. among 1st century AD military equipment in Vindonissa,46 while the expressly prophylactic role of this motif makes a military connection even more justiiable. Iron nails with a characteristic cone-shaped head (pl. 1: 9–12), with which the soles of soldiers’ and civilians’ shoes were nailed, appear from the Early Augustan47 to the Late Roman period.48 Naturally, these are a highly common ind in Augustan military camps.49 Large nails with a cross and dot ornamentation on the bottom of the nail-head are interpreted by Istenič as exclusively military and dated to the pre-Augustan period.50 he nails from Kranj are smaller (head diameter approx. 1.2 cm) and only have a relief cross on the bottom side (pl. 1: 9–11). his form is common in the Augustan period.51 Moreover, they were found in Kranj in a well discernible Middle and Late Augustan layer in the northern courtyard of Kieselstein castle. Also worth considering is the larger number of small bronze nails, rivets, bronze sheet metal fragments, small batons, etc., which stem from the building at Glavni trg 21 (pl. 1: 21–29, 31–41), similar to the suit of armour buckle (pl. 1: 7), the scabbard suspension clamp (pl. 1: 3), and the scabbard terminating knob (pl. 1: 1); partially also from the northern courtyard of Kieselstein castle (pl. 1: 13–20). he context from Glavni trg 21 is dated to the Mid-Augustan period (see above). he situation is partly reminiscent of Morda sodi k oklepu tega tipa tudi majhen, močno fragmentiran kaveljček (t. 1: 30), ki ga lahko primerjamo s t. i. vertikalnimi utrjevalci ali zankicami iz poznega 1. st. pr. Kr.45 Druga oprema Pogojno bi lahko med vojaško opremo uvrstili še nekatere najdbe iz Kranja. To je npr. bronasta aplika z upodobitvijo Gorgone Meduze (t. 1: 8), naključna najdba z južnega dvorišča stavbe Tomšičeva 44/1989. Luknjice ob robu nakazujejo, da je bila pritrjena na – po vsej verjetnosti – usnjeno podlago. Našitki in falere s tem motivom se najdejo npr. med vojaško opremo 1. st. po Kr. v Vindonissi,46 izrazito proilaktična vloga tega motiva pa še bolj upravičuje povezavo takšnih najdb z vojsko. Železni žebljički z značilno stožčasto glavico (t. 1: 9–12), s katerimi so bili okovani podplati obuval vojakov in tudi civilistov, se pojavljajo od zgodnjeavgustejskega47 do poznorimskega obdobja.48 Seveda so povsem običajna najdba tudi v avgustejskih vojaških taborih.49 Velike žebljičke z ornamentom križca in bunkic na spodnjem delu glavice Isteničeva opredeljuje kot izključno vojaške in jih datira še v predavgustejsko obdobje.50 Žebljički iz Kranja so manjši – premer glavice okoli 1,2 cm, na spodnji strani imajo zgolj reliefni križec (t. 1: 9–11). Ta oblika je običajna v avgustejskem obdobju.51 Tudi v Kranju so bili najdeni v dobro 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 216 51 Deimel 1987, 90, 284–288, pl. 75: 19–29, pl. 76: 1–11, 13, 14. Deschler-Erb 1999, 36–37, ig. 34. Thomas 2003, 90, ig. 60: 4; 107, ig. 66. Unz, Deschler-Erb 1997, 8, pl. 84: 2434, 2435, 2436, 2437. Gleirscher 2001, 245, n. 19. Steinklauber 2002, 179. Hübener 1973, 36–37. Istenič 2005a, 81; Laharnar 2009, 107–108, 132–133. Istenič 2005a, 81; Laharnar 2009, 107–108, 132–133. 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 Deimel 1987, 301, t. 79: 15. Gleirscher 1996, sl. 5: 1 – levo spodaj. Sagadin 1979, 304–305. Deschler-Erb 1999, 35. Deimel 1987, 90, 284–288, t. 75: 19–29, t. 76: 1–11, 13, 14. Deschler-Erb 1999, 36–37, sl. 34. Thomas 2003, 90, sl. 60: 4; 107, sl. 66. Unz, Deschler-Erb 1997, 8, t. 84: 2434, 2435, 2436, 2437. Gleirscher 2001, 245, op. 19. Steinklauber 2002, 179. Hübener 1973, 36–37. Istenič 2005a, 81; Laharnar 2009, 107–108, 132–133. Istenič 2005a, 81; Laharnar 2009, 107–108, 132–133. the ind composition of the Late Augustan bronze workshop discovered at Gornji trg 3 in Ljubljana.52 opredeljivi srednje- in poznoavgustejski plasti na severnem dvorišču Kieselsteina. Some earlier inds, which can conditionally be associated with the presence of the Roman army, do not prove its presence absolutely. hese inds include the Nova vas type ibula (pl. 1: 43) from the irst half of the 1st century BC53 or the irst three decades of the 1st century BC, i.e. from 100 to 70 BC;54 as well as an Alesia-type ibula (pl. 1: 42) (Demetz Alesia type IIc55 or Guštin group 1, variant 356) belonging to the beginning of the Early Augustan period.57 Pozornost zbuja tudi večje število bronastih žebljičkov, zakovic, delcev bronaste pločevine, paličic itd., ki – tako kot sponka za oklep (t. 1: 7), nosilna objemka nožnice (t. 1: 3) in gumbasti zaključek nožnice (t. 1: 1) – izvirajo iz stavbe Glavni trg 21 (t. 1: 21–29, 31–41), delno pa tudi s severnega dvorišča Kieselsteina (t. 1: 13–20). Sklop z Glavnega trga 21 je datiran v srednjeavgustejsko obdobje (glej zgoraj). Situacija delno spominja na sestavo najdb iz poznoavgustejske delavnice bronastih izdelkov, odkrite na Gornjem trgu 3 v Ljubljani.52 When trying to link the beginnings of intense Roman interventions in Kranj with historic events, this would in our opinion coincide with the annexation of Noricum, probably making it necessary to establish new traic connections of the Emona ager with the North.58 Nevertheless, the fact is that the irst imports of Italian pottery in Kranj are already connected to Roman army traces. Translation: Vesna Pintarič Kocuvan Language editing: Terry Troy Jackson Nekatere starejše najdbe, ki se pogojno lahko povezujejo tudi z navzočnostjo rimske vojske, te navzočnosti ne dokazujejo absolutno. To sta predvsem ibula tipa Nova vas (t. 1: 43), ki sodi v 1. polovico 1. st. pr. Kr.53 ali v prva 3 desetletja 1. st. pr. Kr. oz. od 100 do 70 pr. Kr.,54 in ibula tipa Alezija (t. 1: 42) – varianta Demetz Alesia IIc55 oz. Guštin, skupina 1, različica 3,56 ki sodi v začetek zgodnjeavgustejskega obdobja.57 Če skušamo začetke intenzivnega rimskega posega v naselbino v Kranju povezati z zgodovinskimi dogodki, je to po našem mnenju priključitev Norika, ki je verjetno povzročila potrebo po novih prometnih povezavah emonskega agra s severom.58 Dejstvo pa je, da se prvi import italskega posodja v Kranju že povezuje tudi s sledovi rimske vojske. 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 Vičič 2002, 196. Guštin 1987, 543–549. Božič 2008, 81–87. Demetz 1999, 164, 275, list 2.2, pl. 41: 1. Guštin 1986, 683. Istenič 2005b, 195–196. Šašel Kos 1997, 31–33. 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 Vičič 2002, 196. Guštin 1987, 543–549. Božič 2008, 81–87. Demetz 1999, 164, 275, seznam 2.2, t. 41: 1. Guštin 1986, 683. Istenič 2005b, 195–196. Šašel Kos 1997, 31–33. 217 BIBLIOGRAPHY / LITERATURA BISHOP, M. C., COULSTON, J. C. N. 2006, Roman Military Equipment. From the Punic Wars to the Fall of Rome. – Oxford. BOJOVIĆ, D. 1983, Rimske ibule Singidunuma. – Beograd [summary in German / povzetek v nemščini]. BOŽIČ, D. 2008, Late La Tène-Roman cemetery in Novo mesto. Ljubljanska cesta and Okrajno glavarstvo / Poznolatensko-rimsko grobišče v Novem mestu. Ljubljanska cesta in Okrajno glavarstvo. – Katalogi in monograije 39, Ljubljana. Conspectus: E. Ettlinger et al., Conspectus formarum terrae sigillatae Italico mondo confectae. – Materialien zur römisch-germanischen Keramik 10, Bonn 1990. CURK, I. 1974, Vom Beginn der Römerzeit im nördlichen Jugoslawien. – Archaeologia Iugoslavica 14, 41–44. CURK, I. 1975, Preučevanje rimske keramike kot vir za slovensko krajevno zgodovino. – Arheološki vestnik 26, (1976), 178–181 [summary in German / povzetek v nemščini]. DEIMEL, M. 1987, Die Bronzekleinfunde vom Magdalensberg. – Kärntner Museumsschriften 71, Archäologische Forschungen zu den Grabungen auf dem Magdalensberg 9, Klagenfurt. DEMETZ, S. 1999, Fibeln der Spätlatène- und frühen römischen Kaiserzeit in den Alpenländern. – Frühgeschichtliche und Provinzialrömische Archäologie, Materialien und Forschungen 4, Rahden. DESCHLER-ERB, E. 1999, Ad arma! Römisches Militär des 1. Jahrhunderts n. Chr. in Augusta Raurica. – Forschungen in Augst 28, Augst. DOLENZ, H., FLÜGEL, Ch., ÖLLERER, Ch. 1995, Militaria aus einer Fabrica auf dem Magdalensberg (Kärnten). – In/V: W. Czysz et al. (eds./ur.), Provinzialrömische Forschungen, Festschrift für Günter Ulbert zum 65. Geburtstag, Espelkamp, 51–80. DULAR, J., TOMANIČ JEVREMOV, M. 2009, Sledovi poznolatenske poselitve v Ormožu. – Arheološki vestnik 60, 159–193 [summary in German / povzetek v nemščini]. FEUGÈRE, M. 1985, Les ibules en Gaule méridionale. De la conquête à la in du Ve s. ap. J.-C. – Revue Archéologique de Narbonnaise, Supplément 12, Paris. GLEIRSCHER, P. 1996, Spätkeltische und frührömische Funde in Bereich der Gracarca am Klopeiner See (Unterkärnten). – Arheološki vestnik 47, 229–238 [summary in Slovene / povzetek v slovenščini]. GLEIRSCHER, P. 2001, Römisches Militär am Steiner Berg? – In/V: F. W. Leitner (ed./ur.), Carinthia romana und die römische Welt, Festschrift für G. Piccottini, Aus Forschung und Kunst 34, Klagenfurt, 239–248. GUŠTIN, M. 1986, Fibule tardorepubblicane del Caput Adriae. – Aquileia nostra 36, 677–684. 218 GUŠTIN, M. 1987, Appunti sulla ibula tardo La Tène di tipo Nova vas. – In/V: D. Vitali (ed./ur.), Celti ed Etruschi nell’Italia centro-settentrionale dal V sec. a. C. alla romanizzazione, Atti del colloquio internazionale, Bologna, 12–14 aprile 1985, Fonti e studi 10, Imola, 543–549. GUŠTIN, M. 1991, Posočje in der jüngeren Eisenzeit. – Katalogi in monograije 27, Ljubljana [summary in Slovene / povzetek v slovenščini]. HORVAT, J. 2010, First century BC Roman fortiications in the Eastern Alps. – In/V: P. Herz, P. Scmid, O. Stoll (eds./ur.), Zwischen Region und Reich, Das Gebiet der oberen Donau im Imperium Romanum, Region im Umbruch 3, Berlin, 135–158. HORVAT, J. 2012, Skupek keramike iz prve polovice 1. stoletja iz Navporta. – In/V: I. Lazar, B. Županek (eds./ur.), Emona med Akvilejo in Panonijo / Emona between Aquileia and Pannonia, Koper, 273–299 [summary in English / povzetek v angleščini]. HÜBENER, W. 1973, Die römischen Metallfunde von AugsburgOberhausen. Ein Katalog. – Materialhefte zur Bayerischen Vorgeschichte 28, Kallmünz. ISTENIČ, J. 2005a, Evidence for a very late Republican siege at Grad near Reka in Western Slovenia. – “Archäologie der Schlachtfelder – Militaria aus Zerstörungshorizonten”, Carnuntum Jahrbuch 2005, Wien, 77–87 [summary in German / povzetek v nemščini]. ISTENIČ, J. 2005b, Brooches of the Alesia group in Slovenia / Fibule skupine Alesia v Sloveniji. – Arheološki vestnik 56, 187–212. ISTENIČ, J. 2009, Rimsko obdobje. – In/V: P. Turk et al. (eds./ ur.), Ljubljanica – kulturna dediščina reke, Ljubljana, 241–293 [= J. Istenič, Roman period. – In/V: P. Turk et al. (eds./ur.), Ljubljanica – a River and its Past, Ljubljana 2009, 265–317]. KOS, P. 1977, Keltski novci Slovenije / Keltische Münzen Sloweniens. – Situla 18, Ljubljana. KOŠČEVIĆ, R. 1980, Antičke ibule s područja Siska. – Zagreb [summary in English / povzetek v angleščini]. LAHARNAR, B. 2009, he Žerovnišček Iron Age hillfort near Bločice in the Notranjska region / Železnodobno gradišče Žerovnišček pri Bločicah na Notranjskem. – Arheološki vestnik 60, 97–157. LANDER, J. 1984, Roman Stone Fortiications. – BAR International Series 206, Oxford. MIKS, Ch. 2007, Studien zur römischen Schwertbewafnung in der Kaiserzeit. – Kölner Studien zur Archäologie der römischen Provinzen 8, Leidorf. RIHA, E. 1994, Die römischen Fibeln aus Augst und Kaiseraugst. Die Neufunde seit 1975. – Forschungen in Augst 18, Augst. SAGADIN, M. 1979, Antične pasne spone in garniture v Sloveniji. – Arheološki vestnik 30, 294–338 [summary in German / povzetek v nemščini]. SAGADIN, M. 1988, Kranj – križišče Iskra. Nekropola iz časa preseljevanja ljudstev in staroslovanskega obdobja / Kranj – Iskra crossroads. A cemetery from the migration period and the early Slavic period. – Katalogi in monograije 24, Ljubljana. SAGADIN, M. 2003, Zgodnjeantični Kranj. – In/V: B. Jenčič et al. (eds./ur.), Avguštinov zbornik, 50 let Gorenjskega muzeja, Gorenjski kraji in ljudje 24, Kranj, 71–81 [summary in English / povzetek v angleščini]. SAGADIN, M. 2008, Od Karnija do Kranja. Arheološki podatki o razvoju poselitve v antičnem in zgodnjesrednjeveškem obdobju. – Unpublished Ph. D. thesis / Neobjavljena doktorska disertacija, Oddelek za arheologijo, Filozofska fakulteta Univerze v Ljubljani. SAGADIN, M. 2010, Zgodnjeantično obzidje Karnija. – In/V: Jubilejni Kranjski zbornik 2010, Kranj, 16–25. SCHINDLER-KAUDELKA, E. 1975, Die dünnwandige Gebrauchskeramik vom Magdalensberg. – Kärntner Museumsschriften 58, Archäologische Forschungen zu den Grabungen auf dem Magdalensberg 3, Klagenfurt. In/V: B. Djurić, I. Lazar (eds./ur.), Akten des IV. Internationalen Kolloquiums über Probleme des provinzialrömischen Kunstschafens / Akti IV. mednarodnega kolokvija o problemih rimske provincialne umetnosti, Celje, 8.–12. Mai / maj 1995, Situla 36, Ljubljana, 21–42. THOMAS, M. D. 2003, Lorica segmentata 2. A Catalogue of Finds. – Journal of Roman Military Equipment Studies Monograph 2, Duns. UNZ, Ch., DESCHLER-ERB, E. 1997, Katalog der Militaria aus Vindonissa. Militärische Funde, Pferdegeschirr und Jochteile bis 1976. – Veröfentlichungen der Gesellschaft Pro Vindonissa 14, Brugg. VALIČ, A. 1975, Oris 20-letnih raziskovanj grobišča v Kranju. – Kranjski zbornik 1975, Kranj, 161–167 [summary in English / povzetek v angleščini]. VIČIČ, B. 1994, Zgodnjerimsko naselje pod Grajskim gričem v Ljubljani. Gornji trg 30, Stari trg 17 in 32. – Arheološki vestnik 45, 25–80 [summary in German / povzetek v nemščini]. STARE, V. 1980, Kranj. Nekropola iz časa preseljevanja ljudstev. – Katalogi in monograije 18, Ljubljana. VIČIČ, B. 2002, Zgodnjerimsko naselje pod Grajskim gričem v Ljubljani. Gornji trg 3. – Arheološki vestnik 53, 193–221 [summary in German / povzetek v nemščini]. STEINKLAUBER, U. 2002, Das spätantike Gräberfeld auf dem Frauenberg bei Leibnitz, Steiermark. – Fundberichte aus Österreich, Materialhefte 10, Wien. VÖLLING, h. 1994, Studien zu Fibelformen der jüngeren vorrömischen Eisenzeit und ältesten römischen Kaiserzeit. – Bericht der Römisch-Germanischen Kommission 75, 147–282. ŠAŠEL KOS, M. 1997, he End of the Norican Kingdom and the Formation of the Provinces of Noricum and Panonia. – ŽONTAR, J. 1939, Zgodovina mesta Kranja. – Ljubljana. 219 Plate 1. Kranj. 1, 7, 15–41 Glavni trg 21; 2 Glavni trg 18; 3 Tomšičeva 21; 4, 5, 9–14, 43 Tomšičeva 44/1998; 6 Reginčeva 13; 8 Tomšičeva 44/1989; 42 Tomšičeva 38. 5, 9–12 iron; 7 iron and bronze; rest bronze. Scale = 1 : 2 (drawing M. Sagadin and D. Valoh). Tabla 1. Kranj. 1, 7, 15–41 Glavni trg 21; 2 Glavni trg 18; 3 Tomšičeva 21; 4, 5, 9–14, 43 Tomšičeva 44/1998; 8 Tomšičeva 44/1989; 6 Reginčeva 13; 42 Tomšičeva 38. 5, 9–12 železo; 7 železo in bron; drugo bron. M = 1 : 2 (risba M. Sagadin in D. Valoh). 220 ROMAN CAMPS FOLLOWING THE ROUTE TO SEGESTICA AND THE WESTERN BALKANS Mitja Guštin RIMSKI VOJAŠKI TABORI V SMERI PROTI SEGESTIKI IN ZAHODNEMU DELU BALKANSKEGA POLOTOKA Mitja Guštin Abstract Izvleček Along the main communication route from the Ljubljana basin eastwards, in the direction of Segestica / Siscia, several remains of Roman military camps were discovered, indicating the main direction of Roman military advances towards the western Balkans. hese were mainly short-term marching camps; in most cases, the fortiication structures are poorly preserved and only partly researched. Among the discoveries of fortiication ditches and inds of military equipment, the Roman camps are characterised by numerous domed bread ovens made of clay. Na pomembni prometnici iz Ljubljanske kotline proti vzhodu, v smeri Segestike / Siscije, so bili odkriti sledovi rimskih vojaških taborov, ki dobro dokumentirajo osrednjo pohodno smer vojaškega napredovanja proti zahodnemu delu Balkanskega polotoka. Večinoma gre za kratkotrajne pohodne tabore s slabo ohranjenimi utrdbenimi strukturami, ki so raziskane le v sorazmerno majhnem obsegu. Ob odkritjih utrdbenih jarkov in vojaške opreme povezuje vojaške tabore pojav glinastih peči s kupolo, namenjenih peki kruha. Keywords: Slovenia, Posavje, Čatež na Savi, Roman camps, Roman Army, bread ovens, panis militaris Ključne besede: Slovenija, Posavje, Čatež na Savi, rimski vojaški tabori, rimska vojska, krušne peči, panis militaris he Roman military presence in the eastern hinterland of the Caput Adriae towards southern Pannonia and the western Balkans was unusually early. Ancient written sources mention punitive expeditions of Roman legions in the early 2nd, as well as in the irst half of the 1st centuries BC. Later, in the second half of the 1st century BC and in the beginning of the 1st century AD, they also describe campaigns intended to absorb the new areas into Roman Empire. hese were primarily the territories of communities or tribes banded together under the common name Taurisci, as well as their neighbours, i.e. the Carni, Histri and Iapodes; these were mentioned by ancient authors such as Livy, Strabo, Pliny the Elder, and especially Apian, later also Cassius Dio.1 Rimska vojaška navzočnost v vzhodnem zaledju Caput Adriae v smeri proti južni Panoniji in zahodnemu delu Balkanskega polotoka je bila že zelo zgodnja. O tem govorijo antični pisni viri, ki omenjajo že v zgodnjem obdobju 2. in prvi polovici 1. stoletja pr. n. št. kazenske ekspedicije rimskih legij. Pozneje, v drugi polovici 1. stoletja pr. n. št. in v začetku našega štetja, opisujejo tudi sistematične osvajalne pohode, namenjene priključitvi novih območij k Rimskemu cesarstvu. To so bila predvsem ozemlja rodov oz. plemen, združenih pod skupnim imenom Tavriskov in njihovih sosedov, Karnov, Histrov in Japodov, ki jih omenjajo antični avtorji, npr. Livij, Strabon, Plinij Starejši, predvsem pa Apijan ter pozneje še Kasij Dion.1 he earliest reports on Roman legions in the hinterland of the Caput Adriae, in the south-eastern Alpine and southwestern Pannonian areas, primarily along the route leading towards the Balkans, mention the campaign of Roman consul C. Cassius Longinus dating to 171–170 BC. By the mid2nd century BC, the consul Cornelius (the exact person is not identiied, perhaps this was L. Cornelius Lentulus Lupus, consul in 156 BC) fought the Pannonians and was defeated. Afterwards, no consul dared to wage war on the Pannonians Najstarejša poročila o rimskih legijah v zaledju Caput Adriae, na jugovzhodnem alpskem in jugozahodnem panonskem območju, predvsem ob poti, ki je vodila proti Balkanskemu polotoku, omenjajo plenilni pohod rimskega konzula Gaja Kasija Longina (C. Cassius Longinus) in segajo v leta 171–170 pr. n. št. Že sredi 2. stoletja pr. n. št. se je proti Panoncem bojeval konzul Kornelij (oseba ni natačno znana, morda L. Cornelius Lentulus Lupus, konzul 156 pr. n. št.) ter doživel popoln poraz. Ta je povzročil, da si 1 Šašel 1976; Šašel Kos 1986; Šašel Kos 2005; Šašel Kos 2011. 1 Šašel 1976; Šašel Kos 1986; Šašel Kos 2005; Šašel Kos 2011. 221 Figure 1. Military Equipment depicted on the 1st century tombstone of centurio M. Petronius Classicus Marrucinus, a Roman army veteran: crested centurion’s helmet, greaves, vitis and commendations: corona civica, armillae and phalerae (Regional museum Ptuj Ormož; photo Boris Farič). Slika 1. Na nagrobniku rimskega centuriona Marka Petronija Klasika iz prve polovice 1. stoletja so upodobljene militarije: s perjanico okrašena stotniška čelada, golenice, stotniška palica in odlikovanja – hrastov venec, zapestnice in falere na oklepu (Pokrajinski muzej Ptuj Ormož; foto Boris Farič). dolga desetletja noben konzul ni upal začeti vojne proti Panoncem. Leta 129 pr. n. št. se je konzul Gaj Sempronij Tuditan (C. Sempronius Tuditanus) bojeval proti Tavriskom, Japodom in Histrom, morda tudi proti Karnom. Deset let zatem sta se Lucij Avrelij Kota (L. Aurelius Cotta) in eden od Cecilijev Metelov bojevala proti Segestanom. Težke posledice je moral pustiti pohod Marka Emilija Skavra (M. Aemilius Scaurus) leta 115 pr. n. št. proti Karnom, močen odmev na širšem območju pa je sledil spopadu rimske vojske s Kimbri leta 113 pr. n. št., ko je konzul Gnej Papirij Karbon (Cn. Papirius Carbo) doživel hud poraz. Po postavitvi močnih rimskih postojank v severni Furlaniji je vzhodno zaledje Caput Adriae pod nenehnim pritiskom rimske države, še posebej po Oktavijanovi (Avgustovi) ilirski vojni med letoma 35–33 pr. n. št., alpski vojaški odpravi Publija Silija Nerve (P. Silius Nerva) v letu 16 ter Druza in Tiberija v letu 15 pr. n. št., postopoma prihajalo pod rimsko oblast.2 Kmalu po osvojitvi Alp je bilo zasedeno tudi jugovzhodno alpsko območje in del Panonije do Siscije, kar se je dokončno zgodilo po panonski vojni med letoma 14 in 8 pr. n. št. in po zatrtju velikega panonsko-dalmatinskega upora med letoma 6 in 9 n. št.3 Ustrezne vojaške najdbe, povezane z rimskimi vojaškimi in osvajalnimi pohodi v smeri proti južni Panoniji in zahodnemu delu Balkanskega polotoka, so redke, še najbolj ilustrativno je številno napadalno orožje z obleganega Gradu pri Šmihelu pod Nanosom iz 2. stoletja pr. n. št.4 in najmanj stoletje mlajšega najdišča Grad pri Reki,5 in rimska vojaška oprema (gladiji, čelade), ki se pojavlja v poznolatenskih in avgustejskih grobnih inventarjih v Posočju in na Dolenjskem.6 Ob zasedbi ozemlja in že vzpostavljeni rimski državni administraciji se še pojavljajo grobovi, ki jih lahko neposredno povežemo z vojaki, npr. v Ljubljani na Kongresnem trgu.7 Zelo nazorne priče obstoja rimske vojaške, predvsem veteranske populacije so številni nagrobniki, na katerih so tudi podatki o statusu in enotah, katerim so pokojniki pripadali (sl. 1). Med njimi velja omeniti nagrobnik vojaka iz Petnajste legije z Mosta na Soči, ki sega še v predavgustejski čas,8 in številne nekoliko mlajše postavljene iz Emone, Petovione, Celeje itd. Raziskovanje rimskih vojaških postojank, antičnih pisnih virov in epigrafskih spomenikov daje sliko o strateškem pomenu ozemlja v zaledju Caput Adriae in zgodovinskem dogaja2 3 4 5 6 7 222 8 Dobesch 1980; Šašel Kos 1986, 128ss; Šašel Kos 2005, 321ss, 393ss, s citati iz antične literature in komentarji. Šašel Kos 2011. Guštin 1979, t. 73–74, 80–83; Horvat 2002; Laharnar, v tem zborniku. Božič 1999; Istenič 2005; Istenič, v tem zborniku. Guštin 1991; Gaspari 2008, 29–48; Breščak, v tem zborniku. Gaspari et al., v tem zborniku. Svoljšak, Žbona Trkman 1986. for several decades. In 129 BC, consul C. Sempronius Tuditanus fought the Taurisci, Iapodes and Histri, perhaps also the Carni. A decade later, L. Aurelius Cotta and Caecilius Metellus fought the Segestani. he campaign of M. Aemilius Scaurus against the Carni in 115 BC, as well as the battle with the Cimbri in 113 BC, when consul Cn. Papirius Carbo sufered a serious defeat, had a strong impact in the region. After founding strong outposts in northern Friuli, the eastern Caput Adriae hinterland came under constant pressure of the Roman Empire, especially after Octavian’s Illyrian wars in 35–33 BC and the Alpine military expedition of P. Silius Nerva in 16 BC; after the expeditions of Drusus and Tiberius in 15 BC the area gradually came under Roman rule.2 Soon after the Alpine expedition, the southeastern Alpine region and part of Pannonia to Siscia were also conquered, inally establishing the Empire’s absolute rule after Pannonian war in 14–8 BC and the suppression of the great Pannonian-Dalmatian Rebellion in AD 6–9. 3 Roman military equipment associated with the campaigns towards southern Pannonia and the western Balkans are rare; the most illustrative examples are numerous 2nd century BC assault weapons from the besieged Grad near Šmihel pod Nanosom;4 at least a century later, military equipment from Grad near Reka5 and Roman military equipment (gladii, helmets) began appearing in Late La Tène grave inventories in Posočje and Dolenjska.6 Upon the conquest of the territory and the establishment of Roman civil administration, individual graves that can be directly associated with soldiers still appeared, e.g. in Ljubljana at Kongresni trg.7 Highly devoted witnesses of the Roman military presence, especially of veterans, are the numerous tombstones, on which we ind information about their status and the units in which they served (ig. 1). Notable among them is the tombstone of a soldier of the legio XV from Most na Soči, dating to the pre-Augustan period,8 and numerous others from somewhat later periods, erected in Emona, Poetovio and Celeia. he research of Roman military outposts between the Trieste gulf and the foothills of the eastern Alps and the consideration of ancient historical and epigraphic sources outline the strategic importance of the hinterland of Caput Adriae and the historic events from the irst Roman campaigns in the 2nd century BC to the decline of the Claustra Alpium Iuliarum in Late Roman period. 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Dobesch 1980; Šašel Kos 1986, 128ss; Šašel Kos 2005, 321pp, 393pp, with quotations of Antique sources and commentary. Šašel Kos 2011. Guštin 1979, pls. 73–74, 80–83; Horvat 2002; Laharnar, in this book. Božič 1999; Istenič 2005; Istenič, in this book. Guštin 1991; Gaspari 2008, 29–48; Breščak, in this book. Gaspari et al., in this book. Svoljšak, Žbona Trkman 1986. nju od prvih rimskih vojaških pohodov v 2. stoletju pr. n. št. do propada Claustra Alpium Iuliarum v pozni rimski dobi. Na eni pomembnih prometnih smeri iz Ljubljanske kotline proti vzhodu, v smeri oddaljene Segestike, poznejše Siscije, so ohranjeni sledovi številnih rimskih vojaških taborov, ki dobro dokumentirajo osrednjo pohodno smer vojaškega napredovanja proti zahodnemu delu Balkanskega polotoka. O razmeroma številnih rimskih vojaških postojankah lahko govorimo po zaslugi predvsem sodobnih arheoloških raziskav ob glavni prometnici prek Dolenjske in Posavja. Kot bomo videli v nadaljevanju, gre večinoma za kratkotrajne pohodne tabore; utrdbene strukture so v večini primerov slabo ohranjene in raziskane le v sorazmerno majhnem obsegu. Med očitnimi odkritji utrdbenih jarkov in posameznih delov vojaške opreme odlikuje in povezuje raziskane in potencialne vojaške tabore pojav večjega števila glinastih peči s kupolo, namenjenih peki kruha. Pri spremljanju gradbenih del na avtocestnem sektorju Tre banjsko Bukovje so bili odkriti: dobro ohranjena krušna peč s kupolo, dve kurišči in odlomek kamnitih žrmelj. Očitnih sledov, ki bi dokumentirali obstoj rimskega vojaštva, na tem mestu ni bilo, glede na raznovrstno rimskodobno keramiko, odlomek tegule in kamnite groblje gradbenega materiala pa je očitno, da je bil v bližini zidani objekt.9 Pri sistematičnih arheoloških raziskavah pred gradbenimi deli na trasi avtoceste je bila leta 2010 na Mačkovcu pri Novem mestu odkrita manjša krušna peč s kupolo iz rimskega obdobja in sledovi jarka, ki bi jih morda lahko pripisali rimskemu vojaškemu taboru, saj od tod izvira tudi železni odlomek, ki ga najditelji pripisujejo nastavku za vojaško perjanico.10 Pri Dolenjem Kronovem pri Beli Cerkvi so arheološke raziskave odkrile kar 11 krušnih peči iz rimskega obdobja. Peči so bile v zemljo vkopane jame na rahlem pobočju v smeri severozahod–jugovzhod, kar je omogočalo dober pretok zraka. Široke, ovalne kupole peči so v širino merile ca. 1 m; kuriščni del in jame za pepel pa med 0,5 in 1,2 m. Dno kupole je bilo do pribl. 20 cm vkopano v geološko osnovo, debelina ožgane zemlje je bila povprečno od 1 do 3 cm. Večinoma so bile uporabljene enkrat, le pri peči 1 kaže, da so jo uporabili večkrat.11 Na raziskanem območju ni bilo sledov okopov ali jarkov morebitnega vojaškega tabora; tudi med drobnim gradivom, ki ga sestavlja le rimskodobna keramika, ni predmetov, ki bi govorili za navzočnost rimskega vojaštva. Avtorja navezujeta pomen lokacije z bližnjimi rimskodobnimi najdišči Šmarjete, kakršni sta Draga in Bela Cerkev, in menita, da pripadajo peči vojaškemu taboru rimske vojske, 9 10 11 Udovič 2011, 13–24. Murko 2013, 32. Murko, Cigler 2012, 24, 33–41. 223 Figure 2. Locations of researched and assumed Roman camps in the wider Posavje area. 1 Trebanjsko Bukovje; 2 Mačkovec; 3 Dolenje Kronovo near Bela Cerkev; 4 Vihre and Sv. Urh near Gorenje Skopice; 5 Sredno polje near Čatež; 6 Brežice; 7 Cundrovec; 8 Sela pri Dobovi; 9 Obrežje (A. Preložnik). Slika 2. Lokacije raziskanih in domnevnih rimskih taborov na širšem območju Posavja. 1 Trebanjsko Bukovje; 2 Mačkovec; 3 Dolenje Kronovo pri Beli Cerkvi; 4 Vihre in Sv. Urh pri Gorenjih Skopicah; 5 Sredno polje pri Čatežu; 6 Brežice; 7 Cundrovec; 8 Sela pri Dobovi; 9 Obrežje (izdelava A. Preložnik). Along the main communication route from the Ljubljana basin eastwards, in the direction of Segestica (later Siscia), several remains of Roman camps were preserved, documenting the main direction of military advance towards the western Balkans. Our knowledge about the relatively numerous posts of Roman army is mainly due to recent archaeological research along the main traic route across Dolenjska region and Posavje region. As speciied below, these were mainly short-term marching camps; in most cases, the fortiication structures are poorly preserved and only partly researched. Among the rare discoveries of fortiication ditches and inds of military equipment, the researched and potential Roman camps are characterised by numerous domed bread ovens made of clay. During highway construction work in the sector of Trebanjsko Bukovje, a well-preserved domed bread oven was unearthed, along with two ireplaces and a fragment of a stone hand quern. here were no obvious evidence of the Roman army at the site; however, considering the diverse Roman pottery, a tegula fragment and a heap of stones with building materials, the presence of a stonebuilt building nearby seems obvious.9 Systematic archaeological research prior to construction works on the motorway section at Mačkovec near Novo mesto unearthed a small domed bread oven from the Roman period, as well as traces of a ditch, which can perhaps be associated to a Roman camp, as an iron fragment believed to belong to a military helmet crest holder was found in.10 Archaeological research revealed 11 bread ovens dated to the Roman period in Dolenje Kronovo near Bela Cerkev. he ovens were visible as pits dug into the ground on a gentle slope in the northwest-southeast direction, enabling good air circulation. Wide oval domes measured approx. 1 m in width, while the ireplaces and the ash pits were between saj ležijo morda, podobno kot številne peči na Obrežju, na območju zunaj taborskih okopov.12 Pri arheoloških raziskavah na območju naselja Vihre je bil dokumentiran od 2 do 2, 45 m širok jarek. Razširjena Voblika je podobna proilom vojaških obrambnih jarkov rimske vojske, saj konstrukcija jarka po mnenju raziskovalcev morda nakazuje obstoj lesene palisade za jarkom. Vojaški značaj in datacijo potrjujejo rimska keramika, železne zakovice, morda dela podplata čevlja in dve železni trirobi puščični osti.13 Na najdišču Sv. Urh je bilo odkritih 6 rimskodobnih krušnih peči s povprečnim premerom med 1,3 in 1,7 metra. Zgrajene so bile iz dveh delov: kupole peči za peko kruha in predprostora za nalaganje in čiščenje. Izstopata peči s skupnim manipulativnim prostorom. Med maloštevilnimi drobnimi najdbami izstopa del luskastega bronastega oklepa (lorica squamata) iz zadnje četrtine 1. st. pr. n. št., najden v predprostoru ene izmed peči.14 Leta 2002 je ekipa Filozofske fakultete Univerze v Ljubljani, streljaj od sotočja Krke in Save na savski terasi Sredno polje pod vasjo Čatež na Savi, raziskala okrog 30 000 m2 površine (sl. 3). Rezultati arheološkega izkopavanja so presenetljivi po svojem obsegu in tudi po značaju. Ob strnjenem neolitskem naselju in mlajših prazgodovinskih naselbinskih objektih so se tik pod orano površino pokazali skromno ohranjeni sledovi rimskega vojaškega tabora. Raziskani so bili ostanki dvojnega jarka V-oblike ter ducat majhnih okroglih krušnih peči s polkrožno kupolo in predprostorom iz avgustejskega obdobja.15 Razmeroma plitvo vkopani jarki in maloštevilne arheološke najdbe dopuščajo domnevo, da je bila enota na tem mestu kratek čas. Če je bilo tako, smemo sledove vojaške12 13 9 224 10 Udovič 2011, 13–24. Murko 2013, 32. 14 15 Murko, Cigler 2012, 19–22, 70. Vičič, Predan 2003a. Vičič, Predan 2003b. Guštin 2002a; Guštin 2002b; Guštin 2003; Guštin, Bekić 2002. 0.5 and 1.2 m. he dome bottom was dug into the geological base by approx. 20 cm; the thickness of burnt soil was 1 to 3 cm on average. Most of the ovens were used just once; only one oven shows that it was used multiple times.11 Figure 3. Čatež near Sredno polje. Detail of the researched area with bread ovens and parts of a ditch (A. Preložnik). Slika 3. Čatež-Sredno polje. Izsek območja raziskav s krušnimi pečmi in deli utrdbenega jarka (izdelava A. Preložnik). here were no earthwork remains of a potential Roman camp in the researched area; the small inds, mainly Roman pottery, do not include Roman military equipment. he authors link the signiicance of this location to nearby Roman sites in Šmarjeta, e.g. Draga and Bela Cerkev, and believe that the ovens belong to a Roman camp, i.e. the ovens might have been situated outside the camp, similarly to the situation at Obrežje site.12 During research near the village of Vihre, a 2 to 2.45 m wide ditch was documented. he wide V–shape cross-section resembles the cross-sections of Roman camps defence ditches. According to the researchers, its construction might point to the existence of a wooden palisade behind the ditch. he Roman period and perhaps a military character are attested by Roman pottery, iron rivets, perhaps two pieces (of believe to be parts of footwear) soles, and two iron tri-lobed arrowheads.13 At the site of Sv. Urh, six Roman bread ovens with average diameters between 1.3–1.7 m were unearthed. hey were built from two parts: the oven dome for baking bread and the vestibule for loading and cleaning. Two ovens with a common manipulative area stand out. Among the rare small inds was a piece of bronze scale armour (lorica squamata), dated to the last quarter of the 1st century BC, found in the vestibule of one of the ovens.14 In 2002, the team of the Faculty of Arts (University of Ljubljana) researched an area of around 30,000 m² at the Sava River terrace called Sredno polje under the village of Čatež na Savi in the vicinity of the Krka and Sava Rivers conluence (ig. 3). he results of archaeological excavation are surprising in scope and character. Along the concentrated Neolithic settlement and later prehistoric settlement remains, the modestly preserved remains of a Roman military camp came to light just under the arable surface. A double V-shaped ditch and a dozen of round bread ovens with a semi-circular dome and vestibule from Augustan period were researched.15 he modest trenches and rare archaeological inds suggest that the military unit was stationed here only for a brief period. If this was so, it is suggested that the camp belonged to a unit that had stopped at the conluence of the ga tabora pripisati enoti, ki se je na svojem pohodu ustavila na sotočju Save s Krko, si odpočila ter na hitro utrdila. Iz vojaškega tabora izvirajo maloštevilne, vendar izpovedne najdbe delov rimske vojaške opreme, kot so bronasta sponka za oklep (sl. 4: 4),16 bronasti zaključek cinguluma ali jermena konjske opreme (sl. 4: 5),17 železna ojačitev za pilum (sl. 4: 8)18, železna sulična ost (sl. 4: 9),19 železna puščična ost (sl. 4: 6)20 in železni šotorski klin (sl. 4: 7). Ohranilo se je nekaj odlomkov rimske keramike, bronasta ibula vrste Almgren 236c (sl. 4: 2; sl. 5: zgoraj);21 zgornji del kamnitih žrmelj (sl. 10: levo), republikanski srebrni denarij (sl. 4: 3)22 in bronasta sponka vrste Langton-Down (sl. 4: 1).23 Za razumevanje tabora so ob skromni utrdbeni arhitekturi in šotorskem klinu (sl. 4: 7) pomembne številne, presenetljivo dobro ohranjene krušne peči s polkrožno kupolo (sl. 10: desno). Vojaške najdbe in ibula tipa Langton-Down ter noriškopanonska razčlenjena ibula tipa Almgren 236c dajejo, v nasprotju z edinim najdenim novcem, srebrnim republikanski denarijem, kovanim med 199–170 pr. n. št.,24 16 17 18 19 20 21 11 12 13 14 15 Murko, Cigler 2012, 24, 33–41. Murko, Cigler 2012, 19–22, 70. Vičič, Predan 2003a. Vičič, Predan 2003b. Guštin 2002a; Guštin 2002b; Guštin 2003; Guštin, Bekić 2002. 22 23 24 Prim. Bishop, Coulston 2006, 99, sl. 56: 13, 16, 16–17; Unz, Deschler-Erb 1997, 30–31, t. 33; Deschler-Erb 1999, 35–37, 140–141, t. 13: 165, 167–168; Thomas 2003, 9, sl. 1: tip Ai; Fort, Plouin 2009, 264, 283, t. 7.4: 48. Prim. Unz, Deschler-Erb 1997, 46–47, t. 63: 1761, 1776, 1787; Deschler-Erb 1999, 177, t. 36: 690, 692. Prim. Bishop, Caulston 2006, 75, sl. 37: 11–12, 14; Unz, Deschler-Erb 1997, 20, t. 15: 220, 234–246. Prim. Bishop, Coulston 2006, 77, sl. 38: 10; Unz, Deschler-Erb 1997, 20–21, t. 16: 251. Unz, Deschler-Erb 1997, 23, t. 20: 380; Deschler-Erb 1999, 22, 134, t. 7: 93. Prim. Garbsch 1965, 29–33, Karta 8; Gugl 1995, 25–26; Sedlmayer 2009, 27. RRC 170/1. Prim. Feugère 1985, 262–267; Schleiermacher, Flügel 1993, 25; Boelicke 2002, 84–85; Müller 2002, 16–17, t. 7: 62–63. Določil Andrej Šemrov, Narodni muzej Slovenije. 225 Figure 4. Čatež near Sredno polje. Roman inds from the camp. Scale = 1 : 2 (drawing J. Tratnik Šumi). Slika 4. Čatež-Sredno polje. Rimskodobno gradivo iz tabora. M = 1 : 2 (risba J. Tratnik Šumi). Figure 5. Čatež near Sredno polje. Roman inds from the camp (photo T. Lauko). Slika 5. Čatež-Sredno polje. Rimskodobno gradivo iz tabora (foto T. Lauko). rivers for a rest and set up a small fortiied camp before continuing the campaign. he military camp yielded few, but convincing inds of Roman military equipment; e.g. a bronze armour itting with hinged buckle (ig. 4: 4),16 a bronze cingulum or horse harness itting (ig. 4: 5),17 an iron collet of a pilum (ig. 4: 8),18 an iron spearhead (ig. 4: 9),19 an iron arrowhead (ig. 4: 6)20 and iron tent peg (ig. 4: 7). Some fragments of Roman pottery were also preserved, as well as a bronze Almgren 236c-type brooch (ig. 4: 2; ig. 5: above),21 the upper part of a hand quern (ig. 10: left), a Republican silver denarius (ig. 4: 3) 22 and a bronze LangtonDawn-type brooch (ig. 4: 1).23 Beside the humble defensive architecture and the tent peg (ig. 4: 7), the surprisingly well-preserved bread ovens with semi-circular domes (ig. 10: right) are salient to the understanding of the character of the camp. he Roman military equipment and brooches of the Langton-Dawn and Almgren 236c types, in contrast to the silver Republican denarius minted between 199–170 BC,24 give a relatively narrow timeframe of the Roman unit’s presence at Čatež. Based on the brooches, we may date the camp to the Augustan period, thus with the association of the Roman conquest of this important passage into southern Pannonia and the western Balkans. Among the most comprehensively researched Roman strongholds along the Sava River is the military camp at Obrežje near Jesenice, located on a terrace between the former riverbed of the Sava River and the Bregana creek. he camp, discovered during constructions of the Dolenjska highway section, is situated in the area below Gorjanci hills that has been the border between Croatian and Slovenian territories for centuries.25 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 226 25 Compare Bishop, Coulston 2006, 99, ig. 56: 13, 16, 16–17; Unz, Deschler-Erb 1997, 30–31, pl. 33; Deschler-Erb 1999, 35–37, 140–141, pl. 13: 165, 167–168; Thomas 2003, 9, ig. 1: type Ai; Fort, Plouin 2009, 264, 283, pl. 7.4: 48. Compare Unz, Deschler-Erb 1997, 46–47, pl. 63: 1761, 1776, 1787; Deschler-Erb 1999, 177, pl. 36: 690, 692. Compare Bishop, Caulston 2006, 75, ig. 37: 11–12, 14; Unz, Deschler-Erb 1997, 20, pl. 15: 220, 234–246. Compare Bishop, Coulston 2006, 77, ig. 38: 10; Unz, Deschler-Erb 1997, 20–21, pl. 16: 251. Unz, Deschler-Erb 1997, 23, pl. 20: 380; Deschler-Erb 1999, 22, 134, pl. 7: 93. Compare Garbsch 1965, 29–33, Karte 8; Gugl 1995, 25–26; Sedlmayer 2009, 27. RRC 170/1. Compare Feugère 1985, 262–267; Schleiermacher, Flügel 1993, 25; Boelicke 2002, 84–85; Müller 2002, 16–17, pl. 7: 62–63. Identiied by Andrej Šemrov, National Museum of Slovenia. Mason 2003; Mason 2006; Mason 2008. sorazmerno ozek časovni okvir bivanju vojaške enote na Čatežu. Na podlagi obeh ibul smemo opredeliti tabor v avgustejsko obdobje, kar pomeni, da je povezan z rimskim osvajanjem tega pomembnega prehoda v južno Panonijo in na zahodni del Balkanskega polotoka. Med najbolj celovito raziskane rimske vojaške postojanke ob Savi sodi tabor na Obrežju pri Jesenicah, postavljen na terasi med nekdanjo strugo Save in potokom Bregana. Tabor, odkrit ob gradnji dolenjskega avtocestnega kraka, leži na mestu, kjer pod Gorjanci že stoletja teče meja med hrvaškimi in slovenskimi deželami.25 Figure 6. Obrežje. Ground plan of the Roman camp (ater Mason 2006, 67). Slika 6. Obrežje. Tloris rimskega tabora (po Mason 2006, 67). Figure 7. Obrežje. Example of one of the ovens (photo Ph. Mason). Slika 7. Obrežje. Ena izmed peči (foto P. Mason). Sistematične arheološke raziskave območja v letih 2001 in 2002 so odkrile vojaško utrdbo na površini 6 ha (približno 290 × 210 m), z dobro ohranjenim dvojnim jarkom na treh stranicah, na četrti pa z enojnim jarkom; na severnem koncu je bila krajša stranica v razdalji 25 m dodatno utrjena še z enim jarkom, ki je povečal obseg na 300 × 215 m (sl. 6). Jasno razpoznavna sta vhoda na sredini krajših stranic, pri jugozahodnem sta bili ohranjeni dve gradbeni fazi vhoda v obliki klavikule. Tabor je bil znotraj dograjen, saj so bili v osrednjem delu ponekod še dobro vidni sledovi lesenih brun pravokotnih barak. V ureditev tabora pa so sodile tudi številne shrambe, odpadne jame in latrine, nekatere vkopane tudi 2 m globoko. Systematic archaeological research of the area in 2001 and 2002 revealed a stronghold spanning 6 ha (roughly 290 × 210 m) with a well-preserved double ditch on three sides and a single ditch on one side; the northern, shorter side, spanning 25 m, was additionally fortiied with another ditch, increasing the overall size to 300 × 215 m (ig. 6). he entrances are clearly recognisable in the middle of the shorter sides; two building phases of the clavicula type entrance were preserved on the south-western side. he camp’s interior was also built, as there were still visible traces of wooden beams from rectangular barracks. he camp arrangements also included numerous storage and refuse pits, as well as latrines, some dug as deep as 2 m into the ground. hree semi-circular domed ovens (ig. 7) were discovered in the camp, many more (all in all 34) were situated in four groups in front of the northern camp trench in what appears to be a provisional production area with bread ovens and iron or blacksmithing kilns. he military equipment and pottery date the Obrežje camp to the Middle and Late Augustan period.26 Accord- V notranjosti tabora so bile odkrite 3 polkrožne kupolaste peči (sl. 7), še mnogo več, skupaj 34, pa jih je bilo postavljenih v štirih skupinah pred severnim okopom tabora, na nekakšnem proizvodnem območju s krušnimi pečmi in pečmi za predelavo železa oz. za kovaške namene. Vojaške najdbe in keramika opredeljujejo umestitev tabora na Obrežju v srednje in pozno avgustejsko obdobje.26 Po mnenju Alenke Miškec pa polovičene novčne najdbe, ob pomanjkanju bronastih novcev kovnice iz Nemavsa in novcev serije Oltar I kovnice iz Lugduna, kažejo predvsem na delovanje vojaškega tabora v obdobju panonsko-dalmatinskega upora med letoma 6 in 9 n. št. 27 Z razvojem analize aerofotograije na Oddelku za arheologijo Univerze v Ljubljani in po zaslugi projekta Antično podeželje ter aeroprospektnih raziskav Darje Grosman je bila v Posavju odkrita vrsta do tedaj neznanih objektov. 28 Tako sta bili na savskih terasah severno od Brežic prepoznani dve potencialni lokaciji s sledovi večjih pravokotnih oblik.29 V Cundrovcu prepoznavni sledovi večjega pravokotnega objekta z zaobljenimi vogali na njivskih površinah (sl. 8: 25 26 27 28 26 Mason 2008, 8–10; Gaspari 2010, 113. 29 Mason 2003; Mason 2006; Mason 2008. Mason 2008, 8–10; Gaspari 2010, 113. Miškec 2009, 291. Grosman 1996. Guštin 2002b. 227 Figure 8. Ground plans of Roman camps. 1 Cundrovec; 2 Sela pri Dobovi (ater Grosman 1996, igs. 11, 14). Slika 8. Tlorisa morebitnih rimskih taborov. 1 Cundrovec; 2 Sela pri Dobovi (po Grosman 1996, sl. 11, 14). 1 2 Figure 9. Brežice. Ground plan of a Roman camp? (ater Guštin 2002a; photo S. Olić). Slika 9. Brežice. Tloris rimskega tabora? (po Guštin 2002a; foto S. Olić). ing to Alenka Miškec, the halved coins and the absence of the coins of the mint of Nemausus and the Altar I series from the mint of Lugdunum date the camp to the period of the Pannonian-Dalmatian rebellion in AD 6–9.27 1) ustrezajo ugotovljenim utrdbenim strukturam vojaškega tabora na Obrežju (sl. 6: 1), kar je v članku o rimskih vojaških aktivnostih v avgustejskem obdobju na Obrežju in v dolini Save poudaril tudi Phil Mason.30 With the development of aerial photography analyses at the Department of Archaeology (University of Ljubljana), the Roman Countryside project and the aerial prospection of Darja Grosman, a series of hitherto unknown structures were discovered in Posavje region.28 hus, two potential locations with traces of larger rectangular structures on the Sava River terraces north of Brežice were discovered.29 Dve stranici večjega pravokotnega objekta z vogalnimi stolpi, vidni na površinah njivskih parcel na bližnji lokaciji Sela pri Dobovi, kažeta na strukture, ki jih zaradi velikosti in značilne oblike morda lahko prepoznamo prav tako kot potencialen vojaški objekt (sl. 8: 2). Tako kot v Cundrovcu tudi tukaj še niso bile izvedene nadaljnje raziskave, ki bi te napovedne podatke potrdile. Podobno velja tudi za sledove večjega pravokotnega objekta pod Brežicami, tj. na spodnji savski terasi v neposredni bližini sejmišča, kjer je bilo odkrito večje srednjelatensko grobišče (sl. 9). 27 28 228 29 Miškec 2009, 291. Grosman 1996. Guštin 2002b. 30 Mason 2008, 196. Figure 10. Čatež near Sredno polje. A hand quern and one of the Roman army camp ovens (photo A. Ogorelec, M. Guštin). Slika 10. Čatež-Sredno polje. Kamnite žrmlje in ena izmed peči rimskega vojaškega tabora (foto A. Ogorelec, M. Guštin). he recognisable traces of a larger rectangular structure in Cundrovec (ig. 8: 1) with its rounded corners are congruent with the ascertained fortiication structures of the military camp at Obrežje (ig. 6: 1), as also emphasised by Phil Mason in his article on Roman army activities in the Augustan period in Obrežje and the Sava valley.30 Two sides of a larger rectangular structure with corner towers was visible on a ield at the nearby location of Sela pri Dobovi, indicating structures that might be recognised as a potential military structure (ig. 8: 2). In Cundrovec, as well as at this site, no further research that could conirm the proposed deinitions has been carried out. he same holds true for the traces of a larger rectangular structure just below Brežice on the lower terrace of the Sava River, in the immediate vicinity of the market, where a larger Middle La Tène cemetery was discovered (ig. 9). he concentration of the researched and potential Roman military camps in Posavje, especially around the Sava and Krka Rivers conluence and further towards the so-called Brežice gates, shows the most signiicant route leading from the hills of Dolenjska into the area of southern Pannonia and the western Balkans (ig. 2). he camps were built along the main route, where later an important Roman road from Italy and Emona, into Siscia was built. his route was strategically signiicant for Roman legions at least from the middle of the 2nd century BC, but especially in 119 BC, when L. Aurelius Cotta and Caecilius Metellus fought to seize Segestica (later Siscia). Its deinitive conquest was won by Octavian in 35/34 BC, who intended to use this town for further advance towards the central Balkans. However, even after the foundation of a Roman military base in Segestica / Siscia, the wider area remained turbulent, as the tribes of Noricum and Pannonia 30 Mason 2008, 196. Gostota raziskanih in potencialnih vojaških taborov v Posavju, še posebej okrog sotočja Krke s Savo in malo naprej pri t. i. Brežiških vratih, kaže na najpomembnejšo prometno točko za vstop iz hribovite Dolenjske na ozemlje južne Panonije in zahodnega dela Balkanskega polotoka (sl. 2). Tabori so bili zgrajeni ob glavni transportni liniji, kjer je pozneje potekala pomembna rimska cesta iz Italije prek Emone v Siscijo. Ta pot je bila strateško aktualna za rimske legije vsaj od srede 2. stoletja pr. n. št., posebej še leta 119 pr. n. št., ko sta bitko za osvojitev Segestike (pozneje Siscija) vodila Lucij Avrelij Kota (L. Aurelius Cotta) in eden od Cecilijev Metelov. Dokončna osvojitev naselja je uspela Oktavijanu leta 35/34 pr. n. št., ki ga je želel uporabiti kot odskočno desko za nadaljnje prodiranje proti srednjemu delu Balkanskega polotoka. A tudi po ustanovitvi rimske vojaške baze v Segestiki / Sisciji je bilo na širšem območju nemirno, saj so noriška in panonska plemena napadla Istro ok. leta 16 pr. n. št., navzočnost rimske vojske pa je postala aktualna po letu 12 pr. n. št. (Tiberijeva panonska vojna) in v letih od 6 do 9 n. št., v času številnih uporov ljudstev v Iliriku, tako v njegovem panonskem kot dalmatinskem delu. Prav zaradi teh uporov je bila navzočnost rimske vojske na omenjenem območju nujna; legija Osma Avgusta (VIII Augusta) je bila npr. nastanjena v Petovioni, Deveta hispanska (IX Hispana) pa verjetno v Sisciji.31 Koncentracijo vojaških taborov v Posavju (sl. 2), predvsem z arheološkimi viri dokumentirane tabore Vihre, Sv. Urh, Sredno polje pod Čatežem in Obrežje, moramo glede na značilno gradivo, povezati predvsem z obdobjem Oktavijanovih pohodov na območje zahodnega dela Balkanskega polotoka med letoma 35–33 in zasedbo Panonije 14–8 pr. n. št., pa tudi z rimskimi vojnami s panonskimi plemeni v času panonsko-dalmatinskega upora med letoma 6 in 9 n. št. 31 Mócsy 1962, 540–542. 229 attacked Istria around 16 BC; the presence of the Roman army became more efective from 12 BC (Tibierius’ Pannonian wars) and in AD 6 to 9, when numerous revolts of the peoples of Illyricum (in its Pannonian and Dalmatian part) took place. hese revolts made the presence of the Roman army in the aforementioned area essential; e.g. the legio VIII Augusta was stationed in Poetovio, the IX Hispana probably in Siscia.31 he concentration of Roman camps in Posavje (ig. 2), and especially the archaeologically documented camps at Vihre, Sv. Urh, Sredno polje near Čatež and Obrežje, must be associated with the period of Octavian’s Wars in Illyricum between 35–33 BC, the conquest of Pannonia between 14–8 BC, as well as with the Roman wars with Pannonian tribes during the Pannonian-Dalmatian rebellion between AD 6–9. However, based on both ibulas, it seems that the camp at Sredno polje near Čatež can be linked to military activities in the Middle Augustan period; in contrast, the coin inds date the Obrežje camp somewhat later, probably to the period of the Pannonian-Dalmatian rebellion in AD 6–9.32 he military fortiications and military equipment inds from Sredno polje near Čatež, Obrežje, Vihre, etc. hold a prominent place due to the numerous bread ovens and parts of hand quern (ig. 10). hese are evidence of the self-suiciency of the Roman army even during rapid movements. he signiicance of the baking of military bread is attested by descriptions in the Historia Augusta, a Late Antique collection of Roman emperor biographies, which also enable us to better imagine the process itself. Occasionally, the emperor himself would prepare the military bread (panis militaris) to strengthen his popularity among the troops. As a rule, the event took place as follows:33 the Emperor, commander-in-chief and absolute ruler of the greatest empire in the world, visits the camp of his soldiers on a special occasion. he troops parade tightly in their polished attire and present their military skills in excited anticipation of his reward or reprimand. he emperor’s escorts come laden with silver tableware, white napkins, richly illed trays and exceptional wine from the inest vineyards of the Empire for a solemn feast. However, the emperor is not interested in the courtly feast. He sits on the grass in front of an army tent and demands a hand quern and bag of wheat. He reaches in the bag with one hand and drops a hand-full on the upper stone of the hand-powered mill; with the other he grabs the wooden handle and starts turning the heavy stone. 31 32 230 33 Mócsy 1962, 540–542. Miškec 2009, 291. Summarised ater Junkelmann 1997, 11–12. Pri tem na podlagi obeh ibul kaže, da je tabor Sredno polje pri Čatežu morda povezan z vojaškimi aktivnostmi srednjeavgustejskega obdobja, med tem ko je na osnovi novčnih najdb tabor na Obrežju nekoliko poznejši, verjetno iz obdobja panonsko-dalmatinskega upora med letoma 6 in 9.32 Poseben čar vojaškim utrdbam in najdbam vojaške opreme s Srednega polja pri Čatežu, Obrežja, Viher in drugod dajejo številne krušne peči in deli žrmelj za mletje žita (sl. 10). So dokaz o samooskrbni sposobnosti rimskega vojaštva tudi v obdobju naglega premikanja enot. O pomenu, ki ga je imela peka vojaškega komisa, pričajo opisi v poznoantični zbirki biograij rimskih vladarjev Historia Augusta, na podlagi katerih si lahko bolje predstavljamo, kako je ta postopek potekal. Občasno si je vladar, da bi si utrdil priljubljenost pri vojakih, tudi lastnoročno pripravil vojaški komis – panis militaris. Dogodek je praviloma potekal takole:33 imperator, vrhovni poveljnik in absolutni vladar največje države na svetu, priložnostno obišče tabor svojih vojakov. V pološčeni opremi ti strumno paradirajo in v napetem pričakovanju njegove nagrade ali ukora predstavljajo svoje vojaške veščine. Spremljevalci vladarja so za svečano gostijo otovorjeni s srebrnim posodjem, belimi prtički, bogato obloženimi pladnji in izbranim vinom iz najboljših vinogradov imperija. Ampak cesarja dvorno pripravljena pojedina ne zanima. Usede se na travo k vojaškemu šotoru in zahteva kamnite žrmlje in vrečko žita. Z eno roko seže vanjo in vsuje prgišče na zgornjo ploščo ročnega mlina, z drugo zagrabi leseni ročaj in začne vrteti težki kamen. Vojaki s strahospoštovanjem spremljajo početje svojega vladarja, potem pa tudi sami pristopijo k svojim mlinom in začnejo mleti. Hrup vrtečih se kamnov preplavi tabor. Ko cesar zmelje svoje žito, zahteva skledo, svežo vodo in ščepec soli. Vse skupaj zamesi v testo, oblikuje ploščat hlebec in ga vrže na opeko, ki so jo medtem v žerjavici segreli njegovi spremljevalci. Na hlebček povezne skledo in jo posuje z žerjavico, ki jo je na ognjišču zajel z železno zajemalko. Kmalu zatem izvleče izpod sklede hrustljav hlebček – panis militaris in zagrize vanj s poudarjenim užitkom. Suh in vroč kruh je treba zaliti, zato si pusti iz vojaške čutare napolniti čašo z mešanico vode in kisa (posca). Bene vobis, nazdravi svojim vojakom, bene tibi, mu vzklikajo nazaj. Navdušenje prevlada nad bornim okusom malice - cesar je ta hip le eden izmed njih, prvi legionar imperija. Zgodba je potekala na vseh koncih rimskega imperija in morda tudi v katerem od rimskih vojaških taborov na Slovenskem. Glede na znane bitke med cesarji in številne pohode rimskih legij čez območje vzhodnega roba Alp je moralo biti taborov veliko. Nekaj jih že poznamo in nam 32 33 Miškec 2009, 291. Povzeto po Junkelmann 1997. he soldiers watch the actions of their ruler with awe and then attend to their own querns and start grinding. he noise of the turning hand querns loods the camp. When the emperor has ground his wheat, he demands a bowl, fresh water and a pinch of salt. He mixes everything into a batter, shapes it into a lat loaf and throws it on a brick that his escorts had heated for him in the ireplace. He places the bowl over the loaf and covers it with embers from the ireplace, using an iron ladle. Soon after he takes from the bowl a crispy loaf (panis militaris) and bites into it with emphasised pleasure. he dry and hot bread must be washed down, so he is illed a cup of water and vinegar mix (posca) from a military canteen. Bene vobis, he salutes his soldiers, bene tibi, they shout back. he elation obscures the unpleasant taste of the meal; at this moment, the emperor is only one of them, the irst legionnaire of the Empire. he story unfolded in all corners of the Roman Empire and perhaps even in one of the Roman army camps in Slovenia. Based on documented battles between emperors and the numerous campaigns of Roman legions through the eastern Alpine fringes between the hinterland of the Trieste gulf and southern Pannonia, many camps must have been erected. Some of these are already known and enable the connection of architectural remains and accompanying inventory with tangible historically events. he short-term camp at Sredno polje near Čatež at the conluence of the Sava and Krka Rivers, as well as the camp at the Brežice gates, i.e. at the conluence of the Sava and Sotla Rivers at Obrežje (ig. 2), show the strategic importance of the area during the decline of local prehistoric tribes and the inal Roman conquest of the western Balkans. From this position, the Roman legions solidiied their control over the Tauriscan tribal union, especially the indigenous Latobici, and the more eastern Colapiani. his was their vantage point for battles against the Segestani, a strong Celtic community in the area of Segestica / Siscia, as well as other tribes of the central Balkans. Whether an emperor visited and baked military bread in one of these camps during his marches remains an open question for historiography. omogočajo povezovanje arhitekturnih ostankov in spremnega gradiva z zgodovinsko izpričanimi dogajanji. Tako kratkotrajni tabor na Srednem polju pri Čatežu ob sotočju Krke s Savo kot veliki vojaški tabor pri Brežiških vratih pri izlivu Sotle v Savo na Obrežju (sl. 2) kažeta na strateški pomen tega območja v obdobju zatona lokalnih prazgodovinskih plemen in zaključne faze rimskega osvajanja zahodnega dela Balkanskega polotoka. S tega položaja so rimski legionarji utrjevali svoj nadzor nad plemensko zvezo Tavriskov, še posebej nad staroselskimi Latobiki in vzhodneje živečimi Kolapiani. Od tod so odhajali proti Segestanom, močni skupnosti na območju sedanjega Siska, ter drugim plemenom osrednjega dela Balkanskega polotoka. Ali je na teh pohodih katerega od taborov obiskal in v njem spekel vojaški komis tudi kateri izmed rimskih cesarjev, ostaja za zgodovinopisje odprto vprašanje. Zahvala Pri redakciji članka se zahvaljujem za pomoč dr. Marjeti Šašel Kos in dr. Boštjanu Laharnarju, za podatke o lokaciji na Mačkovcu in za Trebanjsko Bukovje pa Mihi Murku. Za izdelavo ilustrativnega gradiva velja zahvala Andreju Preložniku in Janji Tratnik Šumi, za fotograije Tomažu Lauku, Alešu Ogorelcu, Philu Masonu in Pokrajinskemu muzeju Ptuj Ormož, za pregled slovenskega besedila Vesni Pintarič Kocuvan, za končni pregled besedila pa Barbari Jerin. Acknowledgment I would like to thank Marjeta Šašel Kos and Boštjan Laharnar for helping to edit this article, as well as Miha Murko for information about the Mačkovec and Trebanjsko Bukovje locations. My gratitude for the preparation of illustrative materials goes to Andrej Preložnik and Janja Tratnik Šumi, for the photographs to Tomaž Lauko, Aleš Ogorelec, Phil Mason and the Regional museum Ptuj Ormož, and for the text editing to Vesna Pintarič Kocuvan and Barbara Jerin. Translation: Vesna Pintarič Kocuvan Language editing: Terry Troy Jackson 231 BIBLIOGRAPHY / LITERATURA BISHOP, M. C., COULSTON, J. C. N. 2006, Roman Military Equipment. From the Punic Wars to the Fall of Rome. – Oxford. GUŠTIN, M. 2002b, Il campo militare romano a Čatež presso Brežice (Slovenia). – Quaderni Friulani di Archeologia 12, 69–75. BOELICKE, U. 2002, Die Fibeln aus dem Areal der Colonia Ulpia Traiana. – Xantener Berichte 10, Mainz. GUŠTIN, M. 2003, Sredno polje pri Čatežu. – In/V: D. Prešeren (ed./ur.), Zemlja pod vašimi nogami, Arheologija na avtocestah Slovenije, Vodnik po najdiščih, Ljubljana, 247–248. BOŽIČ, D. 1999, Tre insediamenti minori del gruppo protostorico di Idrija pri Bači. – In/V: S. Santoro Bianchi (ed./ur.), Studio e conservazione degli insediamenti minori romani in area alpina, Atti dell'incontro di studi, Forgaria del Friuli, 20 settembre 1997, Bologna, 71–79. DESCHLER-ERB, E. 1999, Ad arma! Römisches Militär des 1. Jahrhunderts n. Chr. in Augusta Raurica. – Forschungen in Augst 28, Augst. HORVAT, J. 2002, he Hoard of Roman Republican Weapons from Grad near Šmihel / Zaklad rimskega republikanskega orožja z Gradu pri Šmihelu pod Nanosom. – Arheološki vestnik 53, 117–192. DOBESCH, G. 1980, Die Kelten in Österreich nach den ältesten Berichten der Antike. Das norische Königreich und seine Beziehungen zu Rom im 2. Jahrhundert v. Chr. – Wien, Köln, Graz. ISTENIČ, J. 2005, Evidence for a very late Republican siege at Grad near Reka in Western Slovenia. – “Archäologie der Schlachtfelder – Militaria aus Zerstörungshorizonten”, Carnuntum Jahrbuch 2005, Wien, 77–87 [summary in German / povzetek v nemščini]. FEUGÈRE, M. 1985, Les ibules en Gaule méridionale. De la conquête à la in du Ve s. ap. J.-C. – Revue Archéologique de Narbonnaise, Supplément 12, Paris. JUNKELMANN, M. 1997, Panis Militaris. Die Ernährung des römischen Soldaten oder der Grundstof der Macht. – Kulturgeschichte der antiken Welt 75, Mainz am Rhein. FORT, B., PLOUIN, S. 2009, Le materiel métallique. – In/V: M. Reddé (ed./ur.), Oedenburg. Fouilles françaises, allemandes et suisses a Biesheim et Kunheim, Haut-Rhin, France 1. Les camps militaires julio-claudiens, Römisch-Germanisches Zentralmuseum, Monographien 79/1, Mainz, 255–327. MASON, Ph. 2003, Obrežje. – In/V: D. Prešeren (ed./ur.), Zemlja pod vašimi nogami, Arheologija na avtocestah Slovenije, Vodnik po najdiščih, Ljubljana, 202–203. GARBSCH, J. 1965, Die norisch-pannonische Frauentracht im 1. und 2. Jahrhundert. – Münchner Beiträge zur Vor- und Frühgeschichte 11, München. GASPARI, A. 2008, Posoški bojevniki med samostojnostjo in rimsko vojaško službo. – In/V: K. Kofol (ed./ur.), Vojske, orožje in utrdbeni sistemi v Posočju, Tolmin, 29–48 [summary in English / povzetek v angleščini]. MASON, Ph. 2006, Vojaški tabor in rimska cesta pri Obrežju. – Rast 2, 66–69. MASON, Ph. 2008, he Roman Fort at Obrežje and Augustan Military Activity in the Sava Valley in Slovenia. – In/V: J.-S. Kühlborn et al., Rom auf dem Weg nach Germanien: Geostrategie, Vormarschtrassen und Logistik, Bodenaltertümer Westfalens 45, Mainz, 187–198. GASPARI, A. 2010, “Apud horridas gentis ...”. Začetki rimskega mesta Colonia Iulia Emona / Beginnings of the Roman Town of Colonia Iulia Emona. – Ljubljana. MIŠKEC, A. 2009, he Augustan conquest of southeastern Alpine and western Pannonian areas: coins and hoards / Avgustejska zasedba jugovzhodnoalpskega prostora in zahodne Panonije: posamične in zakladne novčne najdbe. – Arheološki vestnik 60, 283–296. GROSMAN, D. 1996, Antično Posavje. – In/V: M. Guštin et al. (eds./ur.), Rimsko podeželje / Roman countryside, Ljubljana, 43–82 [summary in English / povzetek v angleščini]. MÓCSY, A. 1962, Pannonia. – In/V: A. F. von Pauly, G. Wissowa, Real-Encyclopädie der classischen Altewrtumswissenschaft, Supplementband 9, Stuttgart, 516–776. GUGL, C. 1995, Die römischen Fibeln aus Virunum. – Klagenfurt. MÜLLER, M. 2002, Die römischen Buntmetallfunde von Haltern. – Bodenaltertümer Westfalens 37, Mainz. GUŠTIN, M. 1979, Notranjska. K začetkom železne dobe na severnem Jadranu / Zu den Anfängen der Eisenzeit an der nördlichen Adria. – Katalogi in monograije 17, Ljubljana. GUŠTIN, M. 1991, Posočje in der jüngeren Eisenzeit. – Katalogi in monograije 27, Ljubljana [summary in Slovene / povzetek v slovenščini]. GUŠTIN, M. 2002a, Early Roman marching camps in the Brežice area (Slovenia) [poster]. – Table ronde: Militaria cesarienens en contexte Gaulois, Mont Beuvray 17. 10. 2002. 232 GUŠTIN, M., BEKIĆ, L. 2002, Autocesta Zagreb–Ljubljana, iskustvo na dionici kod Brežica. – Obavijesti 34/3, 60–66. MURKO, M. 2013, Arheološka izkopavanja na najdišču Mačkovec – Novo mesto (območje 1, 2 in 3). – Arheologija v letu 2012, dediščina za javnost, Zbornik povzetkov, Strokovno srečanje Slovenskega arheološkega društva Ljubljana, Mestni muzej Ljubljana MGLM, 22. marec. 2013, Ljubljana, 32–33. MURKO, M., CIGLER, I. 2012, Dolenje Kronovo pri Beli Cerkvi. – Arheologija na avtocestah Slovenije 25, Ljubljana. RRC: M. H. Crawford, Roman Republican coinage. – London 1974 [2001]. SCHLEIERMACHER, M., FLÜGEL, C. 1993, Fibeln und Bronzegefässe von Kempten-Cambodunum. – Materialhefte zur bayerischen Vorgeschichte 63, Kallmünz. SEDLMAYER, H. 2009, Die Fibeln vom Magdalensberg. Funde der Grabungsjahre 1948–2002 und Altfunde des 19. Jahrhunderts. – Kärntner Museumsschriften 79, Archäologische Forschungen zu den Grabungen auf dem Magdalensberg 16, Klagenfurt. SVOLJŠAK, D., ŽBONA TRKMAN, B. 1986, Novi napisi v Posočju. – Arheološki vestnik 37, 385–397 [summary in German / povzetek v nemščini]. ŠAŠEL, J. 1976, Lineamenti dell'espansione romana nelle Alpi Orientali e dei Balcani occidentali. – In/V: Aquileia e l’arco alpino orientale, Antichità Altoadriatiche 9, Udine, 71–90 [= Opera selecta, Situla 30, Ljubljana 1992, 408–431]. ŠAŠEL KOS, M. 1986, Zgodovinska podoba prostora med Akvilejo, Jadranom in Sirmijem pri Kasiju Dionu in Herodijanu / A historical outline of the region between Aquileia, the Adriatic, and Sirmium in Cassius Dio and Herodian. – Ljubljana. ŠAŠEL KOS, M. 2005, Appian and Illyricum. – Situla 43, Ljubljana. In/V: G. Moosbauer, R. Wiegels (eds./ur.), Fines imperii-imperium sine ine?Römische Okkupations- und Grenzpolitik im frühen Principat. Beiträge zum Kongress “Fines imperii-imperium sine ine?” Osnabrück vom 14. bis 18. september 2009, Osnabrücker Forschungen zu Altertum und Antike-Rezeption 14, Rahden, 107–116. THOMAS, M. D. 2003, Lorica segmentata 2. A Catalogue of Finds. – Journal of Roman Military Equipment Studies Monograph 2, Duns. UDOVČ, K. 2011, Trebanjsko Bukovje. – Arheologija na avtocestah Slovenije 19, Ljubljana. UNZ, Ch., DESCHLER-ERB, E. 1997, Katalog der Militaria aus Vindonissa. Militärische Funde, Pferdegeschirr und Jochteile bis 1976. – Veröfentlichungen der Gesellschaft Pro Vindonissa 14, Brugg. VIČIČ, B., PREDAN, P. 2003a, Poročilo o zaščitnem arheološkem izkopavanju na lokaciji Vihre – Polanci na trasi AC Smednik – Krška vas. – Ljubljana. VIČIČ, B., PREDAN, P. 2003b, Poročilo o zaščitnem arheološkem izkopavanju na lokaciji Sveti Urh 2 na trasi AC Smednik – Krška vas. – Ljubljana. ŠAŠEL KOS, M. 2011, he Roman conquest of Dalmatia and Pannonia under Augustus – some of the latest research results. – 233 THE ROLE OF ROMAN REPUBLICAN DENARII OF MARK ANTONY IN THE MONETARY CIRCULATION OF THE LATE REPUBLIC VLOGA RIMSKIH REPUBLIKANSKIH DENARIJEV MARKA ANTONIJA V DENARNEM OBTOKU POZNE REPUBLIKE Alenka Miškec Alenka Miškec Abstract Izvleček he denarii of Mark Antony minted in the years 32–31 BC are among the most common coins from the Late Republican period. hey are most often called legionary coins, which is related to the belief that they were minted for the army. It is even believed that for the rapid payment of soldiers each legion had its own travelling mint. he denarii of Mark Antony contain less silver than other contemporary denarii, and very frequently so-called punch-marks appear on them. he author establishes the role of these coins in the monetary circulation of the Late Republican period, and investigates the claim that they continued to be used to the middle of the 2nd century or even further. Denariji Marka Antonija, kovani v letih 32–31 pr. Kr., so med najpogostejšimi novci iz poznorepublikanskega obdobja. Najpogosteje se uporablja zanje oznaka legijski novci, kar je povezano s prepričanjem, da so jih kovali za vojsko. Domneva se celo, da je za hitro zagotovitev plačila vojakom vsaka legija imela svojo kovnico, ki je potovala z njo. Denariji Marka Antonija vsebujejo manj srebra od drugih sočasnih denarijev in na njih se zelo pogosto pojavljajo t. i. vtiski. Avtorica ugotavlja, kakšno vlogo so imeli ti novci v denarnem obtoku pozne republike in preverja trditev, da so se uporabljali še do sredine 2. st. ali celo dlje. Keywords: numismatics, Roman Republican period, monetary circulation, denarii, Mark Antony, punch-marks Ključne besede: numizmatika, rimska republikanska doba, denarni obtok, denarij, Mark Antonij, vtiski Uvod Introduction he legionary denarii (denarius) of Mark Antony are easily recognizable, as on the obverse they bear an image of a warship (trireme) with the legend ANT•AVG III VIR•R•P•C, and on the reverse an eagle bewteen two military standards as the symbol of the legion with the legend (Aquila) and the legionary number (“LEG” NNN), as can be seen on ig. 1. he names of the legions and their insignia appeared for the irst time on these coins.2 It should be noted that poorly preserved denarii can also be mistaken, for example, for the denarii of Marcus Aurelius, minted in the period of his joint rule with Lucius Verus in honor of the activities of the 6th legion.3 hese coins are very rare in comparison to the denarii of Mark Antony. 1 he denarii of Mark Antony are usually dated to 32–31 BC,4 although some authors place the minting of these 1 2 3 4 The denarius was a Roman silver coin that began to be minted in Rome in 211 BC and remained in use until the 3rd century. Stevenson 1982, 509. Mattingly, Sydenham 1930, 248; Sear 1998, 229–230. Crawford 1974, 102, 539–541, pl. LXIV: 14; Sear 1998, 229–236. Legijski denariji (denarius)1 Marka Antonija so zlahka prepoznavni, saj imajo na sprednji strani upodobitev vojaške ladje (trireme) z napisom ANT•AVG III VIR•R•P•C, na zadnji pa med dvema vojaškima znamenjema orla kot znak legije (Aquila) ter njeno številko (»LEG« NNN), kar je razvidno s sl. 1. Imena legij in njihova znamenja se pojavijo prvič prav na teh novcih.2 V zvezi s tem je treba opozoriti, da lahko slabo ohranjene denarije zamenjamo npr. z denariji Marka Avrelija, skovanimi v času skupne vlade z Lucijem Verom v počastitev delovanja legije VI.3 Ti denariji pa so v primerjavi z denariji Marka Antonija zelo redki. Večinoma se je za denarije Marka Antonija uveljavila datacija 32–31 pr. Kr.,4 čeprav nekateri avtorji kovanje teh novcev postavljajo prej, celo v leto 39 pr. Kr.,5 kar pa za naše preučevanje niti ni pomembno. V literaturi se zanje 1 2 3 4 5 Denarij je bil rimski srebrnik, ki ga je kovnica v Rimu začela kovati leta 211 pr. Kr., v uporabi je bil do 3. st. Stevenson 1982, 509. Mattingly, Sydenham 1930, 248; Sear 1998, 229–230. Crawford 1974, 102, 539–541, t. LXIV: 14; Sear 1998, 229–236. Chitescu 1974, 151. 235 Figure 1. The obverse and reverse of a denarius of Mark Antony from the collecton of the Numismatic Cabinet of the National Museum of Slovenia (further NKNMS), inv. no. LJ 587 (photo I. Dolinar). Slika 1. Sprednja in zadnja stran denarija M. Antonija iz zbirke NKNMS, inv. št. LJ 587 (foto I. Dolinar). coins before that, even to the year 39 BC,5 which in any case is irrelevant for this study. In the literature, they are most often known as legionary coins,6 as they were widely believed to have been coined for the army. It was even considered that each legion had its own mint for the rapid payment of the soldiers, which travelled with it – the socalled mobile mint.7 his claim could be conirmed by the 2005 discovery of minting tools in the settlement of Nièvre (30 km northwest of Nevers)8 in the French province of Burgundy. his was a die for producing the reverse of a denarius of Mark Antony with the legend leg VIII. he possibility cannot be excluded that that this was in fact a contemporary counterfeit, as great quantities of silverplated coins are known, even among the denarii of Mark Antony, which could indicate falsiication. Two theories exist for the silver-plated coins; Crawford considered them counterfeits,9 while Chaintraine allowed the possibility that they were minted in the main mint while the cost of silver was reduced by plating.10 In general the legionary coins of Mark Antony exhibit several characteristics that can be summarized in three points: 1. hey have been preserved in enormous quantities and so far are the most frequently discovered coins from the Republican period; 2. hey contain less silver than other contemporary denarii; 3. hey very frequently bear punch-marks. The presence of the denarii of Mark Antony in monetary circulation he legionary denarii of Mark Antony are the last large coin series before his defeat in the Battle of Actium11 and are among the most common coins of the Late Republican period. Among all individual inds of Republican coinage in Slovenia, 18.5% are denarii of Mark Antony (ig. 2). heir appearance in hoards concluding with the coins of Augustus (and not later) varies between 4 and 19%,12 as can be seen on table 1. Similar proportions can be seen for the monetary circulation in northern Dalmatia; out of 360 individual Republican coins, 35 were examples of the legionary denarii of Mark Antony, or slightly less than 10%.13 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 236 13 Chitescu 1974, 151. Crawford 1985, 255. Howgego 1995, 26–30. The bronze die measured 37 mm in height and was 33 mm wide in the broadest part (http://www.detectionpassion. fr/10-Un-coin-monetaire-romain-sur-Detection-passionN-64.aspx, visited 10 October 2011). Crawford 1974, 560–566. Chaintraine 1982, 40–42. Counterfeit denarii of Mark Antony are frequent; it is interesting that all legionary denarii of Mark Antony with legion numbers above XXII are counterfeit (Hurter 1984). Sear 1998, 229. FMRSl I–VI. Šeparović 2008, 272. najpogosteje uporablja oznaka legijski novci,6 saj prevladuje prepričanje, da so bili kovani za vojsko. Domneva se celo, da je za hitro zagotovitev plačila vojakom vsaka legija imela svojo kovnico, ki je potovala z njo; to je bila t. i. potujoča kovnica.7 To trditev bi lahko potrjevalo leta 2005 odkrito kovno orodje v naselju Nièvre (30 km severozahodno od Neversa)8 v francoski regiji Burgundija. Gre za pečat za izdelavo zadnje strani denarija Marka Antonija, z legendo leg VIII. Ne moremo sicer izključiti možnosti, da gre za sočasni ponaredek, saj poznamo ogromno posrebrenih novcev tudi med denariji Marka Antonija, ki bi lahko kazali na ponarejanje. Glede posrebrenih novcev obstajata sicer dve teoriji; Crawford meni, da gre za ponaredke,9 6 7 8 9 Crawford 1985, 255. Howgego 1995, 26–30. Bronasti pečat meri 37 mm v višino ter je na najširšem delu širok 33 mm. (http://www.detectionpassion.fr/10-Uncoin-monetaire-romain-sur-Detection-passion-N-64.aspx, obiskano 10. 10. 2011). Crawford 1974, 560–566. Chaintraine pa dopušča možnost, da so jih kovali v glavni kovnici in s srebrenjem zmanjšali stroške srebra.10 Comparisons with hoards in Britannia shows that the proportion of denarii of Mark Antony in hoards concluding in the period from Tiberius to Hadrian ranges from 0.29 to 35.1%,14 while in those ending in the period from Antonius Pius to Commodus, the proportion decreases and measures at most 11%,15 while in hoards whose deposition can be placed in the second half of the 2nd century and the irst half of the 3rd century the share of these coins was reduced to at most a poor 7%.16 Most often the denarii of Mark Antony appear in hoards buried in the period of Marcus Aurelius, which is not surprising, as very many hoards come from this period.17 he hoards from Britain show that the denarii of Mark Antony could have been in use even until the middle of the 3rd century. he famous hoard of Reka Devnia in Bulgaria18 with somewhat more than 81000 coins contained coins of Mark 15 16 17 18 19 20 Navzočnost denarijev Marka Antonija v denarnem obtoku Legijski denariji Marka Antonija so zadnja velika novčna serija pred njegovim padcem v bitki pri Akciju11 in sodijo med najpogostejše novce poznorepublikanskega obdobja. Med vsemi posamičnimi najdbami republikanskih denarijev z območja Slovenije je kar 18,5 % denarijev Marka Antonija (sl. 2). Njihovo pojavljanje v zakladnih najdbah, ki se zaključujejo z denariji Avgusta (in ne poznejšimi), niha med 4 in 19 %,12 kot je razvidno iz preglednice 1. Podobno razmerje kažejo podatki o denarnem obtoku v severni Dalmaciji; med 360 posamičnimi republikanskimi novci je 35 primerkov legijskih denarijev Marka Antonija, kar znese nekoliko manj kot 10 %.13 Dolenja vas % Ljubljana (Šumi) % Celje % Ptuj % Republican denarii / republikanski denariji 51 81 24 86 24 96 24 75 denarii of Mark Antony / denariji M. Antonija 6 9,5 3 11 1 4 6 19 Augustus / Avgust 6 9,5 1 3 2 6 Antony, as the earliest in the hoard, which was otherwise deposited in the period of Herrenius Etruscus (AD 251). he coins of Mark Antony also appear in 16 hoards from Austria.19 hey were most frequently found in hoards buried during the reign of Marcus Aurelius, which was also the period when the number of hoards increased due to the dangers associated with the Marcomannic Wars.20 he share of denarii of Mark Antony in those inds is varied and ranges from less than 1% to 50%. 14 Na splošno za legijske denarije Marka Antonija velja nekaj značilnosti, ki jih lahko strnemo v tri točke: 1. Ohranili so se v ogromnih količinah in so zdaj najpogosteje najdeni novec iz republikanskega obdobja. 2. Vsebujejo manj srebra od drugih sočasnih denarijev. 3. Na njih so zelo pogosto t. i. vtiski (punce). Robertson 2000, 2–32. Robertson 2000, 33–73. Robertson 2000, 75–100. Robertson 2000, xxxi. Mouchmov 1934. Bannert, Piccottini 1972, 54–56; Dembski 1977, 19–27; FMRÖ I/2; FMRÖ II/3; FMRÖ III/1; Göbl 1967. This is particularly true for the area of Carnuntum, where numerous hoards are undoubtedly connected to the critical situation in the border region (Kos 1987, 7). Figure 2. The share of legionary denarii of Mark Antony in comparison to the share of Republican denarii among individual coin inds in Slovenia (FMRSl I–VI). Slika 2. Delež legijskih denarijev M. Antonija v primerjavi z deležem republikanskih denarijev med posamičnimi novčnimi najdbami z območja Slovenije (FMRSl I–VI). Primerjava z zakladnimi najdbami iz Britanije kaže, da znaša delež denarijev Marka Antonija v zakladnih najdbah, ki se zaključujejo v času od Tiberija do Hadrijana, od 0,29 do 35,1 %,14 v tistih, ki se zaključujejo v času od Antonija Pija do Komoda, se delež zmanjša in znaša največ 11 %,15 v zakladnih najdbah, katerih zakop lahko postavimo v drugo polovico 2. stoletja in v prvo polovico 3. stoletja, pa se delež teh novcev zmanjša na največ slabih 7 %.16 Največkrat se denariji Marka Antonija pojavljajo v zakladnih najdbah z zakopom v času Marka Avrelija, kar niti ni presenetljivo, saj je prav iz tega obdobja zelo veliko zakladnih najdb.17 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Chaintraine 1982, 40–42. Ponaredki denarijev M. Antonija so pogosti; zanimivo je da so vsi legijski denariji M. Antonija s številkami legij, višjimi od XXIII, ponarejeni (Hurter 1984). Sear 1998, 229. FMRSl I–VI. Šeparović 2008, 272. Robertson 2000, 2–32. Robertson 2000, 33–73. Robertson 2000, 75–100. Robertson 2000, xxxi. Table 1. The representation of denarii of Mark Antony in hoards concluding with the denarii of Augustus (Tržišče pri Dolenji vasi: FMRSl V 27; Ljubljana (Šumi): unpublished; Celje: FMRSl II 340/4; Ptuj: FMRSlII 434/22). Preglednica 1. Zastopanost denarijev M. Antonija v zakladnih najdbah, ki se zaključujejo z denariji Avgusta (Tržišče pri Dolenji vasi: FMRSl V 27; Ljubljana (Šumi): neobjavljeno; Celje: FMRSl II 340/4; Ptuj: FMRSl II 434/22). 237 Zakladne najdbe iz Britanije dokazujejo, da so bili denariji Marka Antonija lahko v uporabi celo do sredine 3. stoletja. Tudi znamenita zakladna najdba Reka Devnia iz Bolgarije18 z nekaj več kot 81000 novci vsebuje novce Marka Antonija, ki so najzgodnejši v najdbi, sicer pa je bila zakopana v času Herenija Etruska (leta 251). V 16 zakladnih najdbah iz Avstrije19 se pojavljajo tudi novci Marka Antonija. Najpogostejši so bili v zakladnih najdbah, zakopanih v času Marka Avrelija; to je tudi čas, ko se je zaradi nevarnosti, povezanih z markomanskimi vojnami, povečalo število zakladnih najdb.20 Delež denarijev Marka Antonija v teh najdbah je različen in se giblje od manj kot pol odstotka do 50 %. Figure 3. A comparison of the inds of Republican coins from the sites of Augst (Peter 2001, 40), Vindonissa (Kraay 1962, 15), Neuss (Chantraine 1982), Pompeii I and II (Peter 2001, 40), and Hunerberg/Nijmegen (Kemmers 2006, 33–36). Slika 3. Primerjava novčnih republikanskih najdb z najdišč Augst (Peter 2001, 40), Vindonissa (Kraay 1962, 15), Neuss (Chantraine 1982), Pompeji I in II (Peter 2001, 40) in Hunerberg/Nijmegen (Kemmers 2006, 33–36). Nonetheless, a large quantity of the denarii of Mark Antony must be carefully interpreted. It is not necessarily true that a large quantity means a large quantity minted in comparison with other coinage. Given the very fact that they were in use so long, an answer must be sought as to why they were preserved in such a large number. he analysis of the coin inds from the selected sites (ig. 3) indicates that at sites inhabited throughout long periods it is possible to distinguish three peaks of intensity in monetary circulation in the Republican period. In the comparisons of the sites of Augst,21 Vindonissa,22 Neuss,23 Pompeii,24 and Hunerberg25 the irst peak is evident in the irst decades of the 1st century BC, the second is in the Caesarian period, while the third is a result of the major representation of denarii of Mark Antony. On the contrary, in the Augustan layers of the site of Hunerberg26 and at the sites of Dangstetten27 and Oberaden,28 settled for a shorter time, only in the Augustan period, the share of the denarii of Mark Antony was signiicantly less or nonexistent (ig. 4). his indicates that the denarii of Mark Antony entered into circulation mostly after the Augustan period. Similar data also come from the site of Hunerberg; in considering the coins from all contexts of the site, the share of the denarii of Mark Antony was 21% among the Republican coins, while if only coins from Augustan contexts are considered, there were no denarii of Mark Antony at all among the Republican coins. Hence it is assumed that the denarii of Mark Antony in the northwestern part of the Roman state peaked in circulation in the middle of the 1st century AD. Seveda moramo veliko količino denarijev Marka Antonija interpretirati pazljivo. Ni nujno, da večje število pomeni večjo količino skovanih v primerjavi z drugimi novci. Prav v dejstvu, da so bili v uporabi tako dolgo, moramo iskati odgovor na vprašanje, zakaj so se ohranili v tako velikem številu. Analiza novčnih najdb z izbranih najdišč (sl. 3) kaže, da je na najdiščih, poseljenih dlje časa, možno zaznati tri vrhunce intenzivnosti denarnega obtoka v republikanskem obdobju. Tako se pri primerjavi najdišč Augst,21 Vindonissa,22 Neuss,23 Pompeji24 in Hunerberg25 kaže prvi vrhunec v prvih desetletjih 1. st. pr. Kr., drugi se kaže v cezarijanskem obdobju, tretji pa je posledica velike zastopanosti denarijev Marka Antonija. Nasprotno je v avgustejskih plasteh najdišča Hunerberg26 ter na najdiščih Dangstetten,27 Oberaden,28 poseljenih krajši čas, le v avgustejski dobi, delež denarijev Marka Antonija veliko manjši ali pa jih sploh ni (sl. 4). To kaže, da so denariji Marka Antonija prišli večinoma v obtok šele po avgustejskem obdobju. Podobno sliko daje tudi najdišče Hunerberg; pri upoštevanju novcev iz vseh kontekstov najdišča je delež denarijev Marka Antonija 21 % med republikanskimi novci, če pa upoštevamo le novce iz avgustejskih kontekstov, denarijev Marka Antonija med republikanskimi novci sploh ni. Domnevamo torej, da so denariji Marka Antonija v severozahodnem delu rimske države dosegli vrhunec v obtoku šele v sredini 1. stoletja po Kr. Podobno kaže analiza novčnih najdb s Štalenske gore, predvsem tistih novcev, ki jih lahko umestimo v dobro (s 18 19 A similar situation is shown by analysis of the coin inds from Magdalensberg, particularly those coins that can be 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 238 28 Peter 2001, 40. Kraay 1962, 15. Chantraine 1982. Peter 2001, 40. Kemmers 2006, 33–36. Kemmers 2006, 33. Fingerlin 1986; Fingerlin 1998. Ilisch 1992. 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Mouchmov 1934. Bannert, Piccottini 1972, 54–56; Dembski 1977, 19–27; FMRÖ I/2; FMRÖ II/3; FMRÖ III/1; Göbl 1967. Zlasti velja to za območje Karnunta, kjer lahko številne zakladne najdbe nedvomno povežemo s kritično situacijo na obmejnem območju (Kos 1987, 7). Peter 2001, 40. Kraay 1962, 15. Chantraine 1982. Peter 2001, 40. Kemmers 2006, 33–36. Kemmers 2006, 33. Fingerlin 1986; Fingerlin 1998. Ilisch 1992. placed in strata well dated by pottery inds. Of the eight denarii of Mark Antony, one was found in an Augustan layer, two in a Tiberian layer, and one in a Claudian layer; the other four were discovered in undated strata.29 Coins of Mark Antony and also other Republican coins were no longer found in hoards buried after the year 250. At that time, antoninianii began to predominate in the monetary circulation.30 The silver content in the denarii of Mark Antony he answer to the question of why the denarii of Mark Antony were in use for so long and why they are not entirely reliable for dating lies in the fact that they were deliberately devalued, as they contained only 90% silver.31 Analyses of the contents of the Roman Republican coinage have uncovered a deliberate devaluation of coinage in the period of the Second Punic War (218–202 BC), the period of the conlict between Marius and Sulla (84–82 BC), and in the period of the minting of the denarii (particularly legionary) of Mark Antony.32 pomočjo keramičnih najdb) datirane plasti. Izmed osmih denarijev Marka Antonija se en pojavlja v avgustejski, dva v tiberijski plasti in en v klavdijski plasti; štirje so bili najdeni v nedatiranih plasteh.29 Zagotovo pa novcev Marka Antonija in tudi drugih republikanskih novcev ni več v zakladnih najdbah, zakopanih domnevno po letu 250. V tistem času so začeli namreč antoninijani prevladovati v denarnem obtoku.30 Vsebnost srebra v denarijih Marka Antonija It is not entirely clear when coins ceased being used in terms of their actual value in terms of metal or when they began to be used according to their face value, although it must have occurred to the end of the Republican period. In the year 64, Nero decreased the weight of the denarius33 (but not its nominal value), so that at the latest denarii began to be used according to face value at that time. At that point the mints removed most of the earlier silver coins from circulation; this is shown by several hoards from Britannia, buried in the Severan period; they contain denarii of Mark Antony, while all other coins are denarii minted after AD 64.34 heoretically, it would thus make more sense for the mints to melt down the Republican and Augustan coins, which were heavier, to coin them anew as lighter versions. However, they irst had to be removed from circulation, which was possible only through tax collection. People nonetheless preferred to retain coins that were of a better quality and paid taxes with the newer, lighter coins. Certainly they would have had earlier (heavier) and later (lighter) coins with the identical nominal value. Undoubtedly the coins of Mark Antony, minted from poor quality metal and with a reduced weight because of their lengthy use, would have been a much less attractive raw material for the mints than other Republican silver coins.35 his 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 Krmnicek 2010, 366–368. Harl 1996, 131. Livy (xxxii, 2, 1–2) noted that the mint knew to test the purity of coins, as has been conirmed by contemporary analyses (Walker 1980, 68–72). Crawford 1974, 569; Howgego 1995, 118. Walker 1976; Butcher, Ponting 2011, 559–561. Abdy, Minnitt 2002, 172–173. Sear 1998, 229. Odgovor na vprašanje, zakaj so bili denariji Marka Antonija v uporabi tako dolgo in zakaj niso popolnoma zanesljivi za datacijo, se skriva v dejstvu, da so bili namenoma razvrednoteni, saj so vsebovali le 90 % srebra.31 Analize materiala rimskih republikanskih novcev so namreč razkrile namerno razvrednotenje denarja v času druge punske vojne (218–202 pr. Kr.), v času bojev med Marijem in Sulo (84–82 pr. Kr.) ter v času kovanja denarijev (zlasti legijskih) Marka Antonija.32 Figure 4. The comparison of Republican coin inds from the sites of Hunerberg (Kemmers 2006, 33), Dangstetten (Fingerlin 1986; Fingerlin 1998), Oberaden (Ilisch 1992), Haltern (FMRD VI/4), Kalkriese (Berger 1996). Slika 4. Primerjava novčnih republikanskih najdb z najdišč Hunerberg (Kemmers 2006, 33), Dangstetten (Fingerlin 1986; Fingerlin 1998), Oberaden (Ilisch 1992), Haltern (FMRD VI/4) in Kalkriese (Berger 1996). Ni popolnoma jasno, kdaj so nehali uporabljati denarije glede na njihovo dejansko vrednost v kovini oziroma kdaj so jih začeli uporabljati po njihovi nominalni vrednosti, vendar pa se je to moralo zgoditi do konca republikanskega obdobja. Neron je leta 6433 zmanjšal težo denarija (ne pa tudi njegove vrednosti), tako da so najpozneje v tem času denarije začeli uporabljati po nominalni vrednosti. V tem času je kovnica pobrala iz obtoka večino starejših srebrnikov; to dokazujejo nekatere zakladne najdbe iz Britanije, zakopane v severskem obdobju; te vsebujejo denarije Marka Antonija, vsi drugi novci so denariji, narejeni po letu 64.34 Teoretično bi bilo torej bolj smiselno, da bi kovnice pretopile republikanske in avgustejske novce, ki 29 30 31 32 33 34 Krmnicek 2010, 366–368. Harl 1996, 131. Livij (xxxii, 2, 1–2) poroča, kako je kovnica znala narediti test čistosti kovancev, kar so potrdile tudi sodobne analize (Walker 1980, 68–72). Crawford 1974, 569; Howgego 1995, 118. Walker 1976; Butcher, Ponting 2011, 559–561. Abdy, Minnitt 2002, 172–173. 239 should deinitely be considered the actual reason that these denarii remained in circulation for so long.36 The appearance of punch-marks on the denarii of Mark Antony he denarii of Mark Antony can have on the obverse, reverse, or on both sides punch-marks; these are small geometric shapes or letters stamped onto the surface of the coins. A similarity with countermarks does exist,37 although each impression is negative. It is generally accepted that such marks, also called banker’s or assay marks, were stamped by nummularii (money changers), who in this manner veriied the quality of the metal from which the coins had been minted, or whether they had been merely silver plated, hence counterfeited.38 Problems arise with such an interpretation when one coin bears an identical mark twice or even more, as with the assumption that a given stamp was the mark of an individual nummularius, this would mean that one and the same coin had been checked several times by the same coin tester. In any case, given the assumption that the marks on the coins were the work of individuals, and not some intervention on the part of the state, it can be concluded that they were created after the coin had been minted. he more punch-marks on the coin, the longer it had been in circulation before it was deposited in the earth. he proportion of denarii of Mark Antony with punchmarks is high, as these coins are often falsiied. Among the coins of Mark Antony found in Slovenia, 15% have a punch-mark, which does not represent the true picture, as 26% of them were documented merely on the basis of earlier publications, where data about marks were most often not noted. Seven coins had the punch-marks on both sides. he punch-marks could be quite varied; as an example we cite the sketch of punch-marks on the denarii of Mark Antony from the Membury hoard in Great Britain.39 On the denarius in ig. 5 the obverse bears a quite visible mark in the shape of a crescent, while there were two marks on the back in the shape of the letter V. his practice began to decline at the end of the 1st century BC, as the inds indicate that punch-marks on Augustan coins appeared rarely, and not at all on coins of Tiberius.40 36 37 38 39 240 40 Abdy, Minnitt 2002, 172–173. Countermarks are later stamped symbols, letters, or numbers impressed into the surface of previously minted coins; in the Roman period they were used particularly in the irst half of the 1st century. Their purpose was varied, as they could be used to extend the validity of a coin, expand the region of circulation, etc. (Kos 1997, 178–180). Boon 1988, 103–107. Howgego, King 1992, 19. Howgego, King 1992, 13. so bili težji, in jih skovale na novo kot lažje. Vendar so jih morale najprej dobiti iz obtoka, kar pa je bilo mogoče le s pobiranjem davkov. Ljudje so se seveda raje obdržali novce, ki so bili boljši, in so plačevali davke z novejšimi, torej lažjimi. Seveda so imeli starejši (težji) in novejši (lažji) novci še vedno enako nominalno vrednost. Nedvomno pa so bili novci Marka Antonija, skovani iz kovine slabše kvalitete in z zmanjšano težo zaradi dolgotrajne uporabe, veliko manj privlačna surovina za kovnico kot drugi republikanski srebrniki.35 Vsekakor moramo v tem iskati razlog za to, da so prav ti denariji ostali v obtoku tako dolgo.36 Pojav vtiskov na denarijih Marka Antonija Denariji Marka Antonija imajo lahko na sprednji, zadnji ali na obeh straneh vtiske (v literaturi tudi izraz punca); gre za majhne geometrijske like ali črke, vtisnjene v površino novca. Sicer obstaja podobnost s kontramarkami,37 vendar je vsek pri vtiskih negativen. Na splošno velja, da so takšne vtiske, imenujemo jih tudi bankirski ali preizkusni znaki (znamenja), vtiskovali nummularii (menjalci) in na ta način preverjali, iz kako kvalitetne kovine so bili skovani novci, oziroma ali so bili zgolj posrebreni, torej ponarejeni.38 Problem pri tej interpretaciji nastane, če na enem novcu nastopi enak vtisk dvakrat ali celo večkrat, saj bi ob domnevi, da je določen znak podpis posameznega numularija, to pomenilo, da je en in isti novec numularij preverjal večkrat. Vsekakor lahko ob domnevi, da so vtiski na novcih delo posameznikov, in ne intervencija države, sklepamo, da so nastali potem, ko je bil novec skovan. Čim več je vtiskov na novcu, tem dlje je bil v obtoku, preden je prišel v zemljo. Delež denarijev Marka Antonija z vtiski je visok, saj so te novce pogosto ponarejali. Med novci Marka Antonija, najdenimi v Sloveniji, jih ima vtiske 15 %, kar pa ni popolna slika, saj je med njimi 26 % dokumentiranih zgolj na podlagi starejše literature, v kateri podatki o vtiskih največkrat niso navedeni. Na sedmih novcih so vtiski na obeh straneh novca. Vtiski so lahko različni; kot primer navajamo skico vtiskov na denarijih Marka Antonija iz zakladne najdbe Membury iz Velike Britanije.39 Na denariju na sl. 5 je na sprednji strani lepo viden vtisk v obliki polmeseca, na zadnji strani pa sta dva vtiska v obliki črke V. 35 36 37 38 39 Sear 1998, 229. Abdy, Minnitt 2002, 172–173. Kontramarke so pozneje udarjeni simbol, črka ali številka v površino že prej skovanega novca; v rimski dobi so jih uporabljali zlasti v prvi polovici 1. stoletja, njihov namen je bil različen, lahko so z njimi podaljšali veljavnost novca, razširili območje obtoka idr. (Kos 1997, 178–180). Boon 1988, 103–107. Howgego, King 1992, 19. Figure 5. The obverse and reverse of a denarius of Mark Antony from the NKNMS collection, inv. no. LJ 36596 (photo I. Dolinar). Slika 5. Sprednja in zadnja stran denarija M. Antonija z vtiski iz zbirke NKNMS, inv. št. LJ 36596 (foto I. Dolinar). Conclusion 1. he use of the legionary denarii of Mark Antony cannot be dated speciically without a detailed analysis of the archaeological context, as the individual inds from reliably dated archaeological contexts at the sites of Magdalensberg and Hunerberg, and a detailed review of the hoards from Great Britain and Austria, show that they were in use up to the middle of the 3rd century. In the northwestern parts of the Roman state they achieved a peak in the monetary circulation only in the middle of the 1st century. 2. he legionary denarii of Mark Antony were made from a lesser quality silver than the other contemporary denarii, as in this manner the state economized in minting the very large quantities of coins that were needed to pay for the army. It was in fact because of their poorer quality that they remained in monetary circulation longer than other contemporary silver coins, as people saved the better coins, while they got rid of the others as soon as possible. 3. he legionary denarii of Mark Antony that bear punchmarks were certainly utilized long after they were minted; the marking occurred only with use. Translation: Barbara Smith Demo Ta praksa je začela pojemati konec 1. st. pr. Kr., saj najdbe kažejo, da se vtiski na avgustejskih novcih pojavljajo redko, na novcih Tiberija pa sploh ne več.40 Sklepi 1. Uporabe legijskih denarijev Marka Antonija brez natančne analize arheološkega konteksta ne moremo podrobneje datirati, saj posamične najdbe iz zanesljivo datiranih arheoloških kontekstov z najdišč Štalenska gora in Hunerberg ter temeljit pregled zakladnih najdb iz Velike Britanije in Avstrije kažejo, da so bili v uporabi lahko do sredine 3. stoletja. V severozahodnem delu rimske države so dosegli vrhunec v denarnem obtoku šele v sredini 1. stoletja. 2. Legijski denariji Marka Antonija so bili narejeni iz manj kakovostnega srebra kot drugi sočasni denariji, saj je na ta način država varčevala pri kovanju zelo velike količine novcev, ki jih je potrebovala za plačevanje vojske. Prav zaradi slabše kakovosti so ostajali v denarnem obtoku dlje kot drugi sočasni srebrniki, ljudje so namreč boljši denar varčevali, slabšega pa so se čim hitreje znebili. 3. Legijski denariji Marka Antonija, ki nosijo vtiske, so se zagotovo uporabljali še dolgo po tem, ko so bili skovani; do vtiskovanja je prihajalo šele med rabo. BIBLIOGRAPHY / LITERATURA ABDY, R., MINNITT, S. 2002, Shapwick villa, Somerset. – Coin Hoards from Roman Britain 11, London, 169–233. BERGER, F. 1996, Kalkriese 1. Die römischen Fundmünzen. – Römisch-Germanische Forschungen 55, Mainz am Rhein. BANNERT, H., PICCOTTINI, G. 1972, Die Fundmünzen vom Magdalensberg. – Kärntner Museumsschriften 52, Archäologische Forschungen zu den Grabungen auf dem Magdalensberg 2, Die Fundmünzen der römischen Zeit in Österreich. Kärnten 1, Klagenfurt. BOON, C. G. 1988, Counterfeit Coins in Roman Britain. – In/V: J. Casey, R. Reece (eds./ur.), Coins and the Archaeologist, London, 102–188. 40 Howgego, King 1992, 13. 241 BUTCHER, K., PONTING, M. 2011, he denarius in the irst century. – In/V: N. Holmes (ed./ur.), Proceedings of the XIV International Numismatic Congress, Glasgow 2009, Glasgow, 557–568. CHANTRAINE, H. 1982, Die antiken Fundmünzen von Neuss. Gesamtkatalog der Ausgrabungen 1955–1978. – Novaesium 8, Limesforschungen 20, Berlin. CHITESCU, M. 1974, Á propos des monnaies frappées par Marc-Antoine pour ses légions. – Dacia 18, 147–153. CRAWFORD, M. H. 1974, Roman Republican Coinage. – London. CRAWFORD, M. H. 1985, Coinage and Money under the Roman Republic. Italy and the Mediterranean Economy. – London. HURTER, S. 1984, Some counterfeit legionary issues of Marc Antony. – Bulletin on Counterfeits 9/1, 11. ILISCH, P. 1992, Die Münzen aus den Ausgrabungen im Römerlager Oberaden. – In/V: J.-S. Kühlborn, Das Römerlager in Oberaden III, Die Ausgrabungen im nordwestlichen Lagerbereich und weitere Baustellenuntersuchungen der Jahre 1962–1988, Bodenaltertümer Westfalens 27, Münster, 175–201. DEMBSKI, G. 1977, Die antiken Münzschatzfunde aus Österreich. – Numismatische Zeitschrift 91, 3–64. KEMMERS, F. 2006, Coins for a legion. An anlysis of the coin inds from the Augustan legionary fortress and Flavian canabae legionis at Nijmegen. – Studien zu Fundmünzen der Antike 21, Mainz am Rhein. FINGERLIN, G. 1986, Dangstetten I. Katalog der Funde (Fundstellen 1 bis 603). – Forschungen und Berichte zur Vor- und Frühgeschichte in Baden-Württemberg 22, Stuttgart. KOS, P. 1987, Markomanske vojne – numizmatika in zgodovina. – In/V: P. Kos et al. (ed./ur.), Zgodovina denarstva in bančništva na Slovenskem, Zbirka Zgodovinskega časopisa 3, Ljubljana, 5–8. FINGERLIN, G. 1998, Dangstetten II. Katalog der Funde (Fundstellen 604–1358). – Forschungen und Berichte zur Vor- und Frühgeschichte in Baden-Württemberg 69, Stuttgart. KOS, P. 1997, Leksikon antične numizmatike. S poudarkom na prostoru jugovzhodnih Alp in Balkana. – Ljubljana. FMRD VI/4: B. Korzus, Die Fundmünzen der römischen Zeit in Deutschland VI. Nordrhein-Westfalen, 4: Münster. – Berlin 1971. FMRSl I–II: P. Kos, Die Fundmünzen der römischen Zeit in Slowenien I, II. – Berlin 1988. FMRSl III: P. Kos, A. Šemrov, Die Fundmünzen der römischen Zeit in Slowenien III. – Berlin 1995. FMRSl IV: A. Šemrov, Die Fundmünzen der römischen Zeit in Slowenien IV. – Berlin 1998. FMRSl V: A. Šemrov, Die Fundmünzen der römischen Zeit in Slowenien V. – Mainz am Rhein 2004. FMRSl VI: A. Šemrov, Die Fundmünzen der römischen Zeit in Slowenien VI. – Collection Moneta 110, Wetteren, Ljubljana 2010. FMRÖ I/2: F. Dick, Die Fundmünzen der römischen Zeit in Österreich I/2. Burgenland. – Veröfentlichungen der numismatischen Kommission 15, Wien 1984. FMRÖ II/3: F. Schmidt-Dick, Die Fundmünzen der römischen Zeit in Österreich II/3. Kärnten. – Veröfentlichungen der numismatischen Kommission 19, Wien 1989. FMRÖ III/1: W. Hahn, Die Fundmünzen der römischen Zeit in Österreich III. Niederösterreich, 1: Carnuntum. – Veröfentlichungen der numismatischen Kommission 6, Wien 1976. GÖBL, R. 1967, Zwei römische Münzhorte aus dem Burgenland: Illmitz (1960) un Apetlon II (1961). – Wissenschaftliche Arbeiten aus dem Burgenland 37, Kulturwissenschaften 13, Eisenstadt. HARL, K. W. 1996, Coinage in the Roman Economy, 300 B.C. to A.D. 700. – Baltimore, London. 242 HOWGEGO, C. J., KING, C. E. 1992, Membury, Wiltshire: 249 denarii to AD 37. – In/V: R. Bland (ed./ur.), he Chalfont hoard and other Roman coin hoards, Coin Hoards from Roman Britain 9, London, 11–19. HOWGEGO, C. 1995, Ancient History from Coins. – London, New York. KRAAY, C. M. 1962, Die Münzfunde von Vindonissa (bis Trajan). – Veröfentlichungen der Gesellscahft pro Vindonissa 5, Basel. KRMNICEK, S. 2010, Münze und Geld im frührömischen Ostalpenraum. Studien zum Münzumlauf und zur Funktion von Münzgeld anhand der Funde und Befunde vom Magdalensberg. – Archäologische Forschungen zu den Grabungen auf dem Magdalensberg 17, Klagenfurt. MATTINGLY, H., SYDENHAM, E. A. 1930, he Roman Imperial Coinage. Vol. III, Antoninus Pius to Commodus. – London. MOUCHMOV, N. A. 1934, Le Tresor Numismatique De RekaDevnia (Marcianopolis). – Soia. PETER, M. 2001. Untersuchungen zu den Fundmünzen aus Augst und Kaiseraugst. – Studien zu Fundmünzen der Antike 17, Berlin. ROBERTSON, A. S. 2000, An inventory of Romano-British coin hoards. – Special publication of Royal Numismatic Society 20, London. SEAR, D. R. 1998, he History and Coinage of the Roman Imperators 49–27 BC. – London. STEVENSON, S. W. 1982, A dictionary of Roman coins, Republican and Imperial. – London. ŠEPAROVIĆ, T. 2008, Osvrt na legijske denare Marka Antonija s posebnim naglaskom na nalaze toga novca u Sjevernoj Dalmaciji. – Archaeologia Adriatica 11, 269–274. WALKER, D. R. 1976, he Metrology of the Roman Silver Coinage. Part 1, from Augustus to Domitian. – British Archaeological Reports, supplementary series 5, Oxford. WALKER, D. R. 1980, he Silver Contents of the Roman Republican Coinage. – In/V: D. M. Metcalf, W. A. Oddy (eds./ ur.), Metallurgy in Numismatics 1, Special publication of Royal Numismatic Society 13, London, 55–72. GRADIČ ABOVE KOBARID – A LATE REPUBLICAN FORTIFIED EMPORIUM? GRADIČ NAD KOBARIDOM, POZNOREPUBLIKANSKI UTRJENI EMPORIJ? Boštjan Laharnar, Benjamin Štular, Miha Mlinar Boštjan Laharnar, Benjamin Štular, Miha Mlinar Abstract In recent decades, the site of Gradič above Kobarid has been known mostly for the inds from a sanctuary or cult place and for a coin hoard from the second half of the 2nd century BC. In 2010, we generated a site plan by analysing lidar data. he analysis of the links between the location of the coin hoard and the settlement has enabled a more deinite interpretation of the circumstances of its burial. he interpretation of the inds (together with sporadic inds associated with the Roman army between Kobarid and Most na Soči) has shed signiicant new light on the role of Gradič in the Late Republican period. Keywords: archaeology, lidar data, Posočje, Gradič above Kobarid, coin hoard, Roman army, second half of the 2nd century and 1st century BC 1 Introduction In 2010, through a new analysis of the lidar data from 2007, micro-topography of the archaeological site of Gradič above Kobarid was established. In combination with a ield survey, a site plan was made. Such plans are a mere palimpsest of all past human activities, and can only be dated through archaeological excavations. his article evaluates the site plan in light of archaeological evidence, thus setting out the points that support the assumption about the existence of a fortiied Late Republican1 emporium. he later would indicate an early Roman merchant and military presence in the upper Soča valley in mid-2nd century BC. 2 History of research he location of the prehistoric settlement at Gradič is undisputed, while its dating in the Iron Age is indirect, based on the dating of the adjacent cemetery. A hillfort at Gradič was 1 It is largely accepted that the Late Republican period in Roman history began with the tribuneship of Tiberius Gracchus (133 BC) and ended at the beginning of the Augustan period (27 BC); e.g. Bratož 2007, 106–172. Izvleček Najdišče Gradič nad Kobaridom je v zadnjih desetletjih znano predvsem po najdbah z območja svetišča ali kultnega mesta in po novčni zakladni najdbi iz druge polovice 2. st. pr. n. št. V letu 2010 smo z analizo lidarskih podatkov izdelali načrt najdišča. Analiza odnosa med mestom zakopa novčne zakladne najdbe in naselbino je omogočila določnejšo interpretacijo okoliščin zakopa. Interpretacija najdišča – skupaj z redkimi najdbami med Kobaridom in Mostom na Soči, povezanimi z rimsko vojsko – prinaša pomembna nova spoznanja o vlogi Gradiča v poznorepublikanskem obdobju. Ključne besede: arheologija, lidarski podatki, Posočje, Gradič nad Kobaridom, novčna zakladna najdba, rimska vojska, druga polovica 2. in 1. st. pr. n. št. Figure 1. Gradič above Kobarid. The location of the site (source: DMV 12, © GURS). Slika 1. Gradič nad Kobaridom. Lega najdišča (vir: DMV 12, © GURS). 243 Figure 2. Gradič above Kobarid. Digital surface model presented in combination of Uniform Sky Model (B. Štular). Slika 2. Gradič nad Kobaridom. Prikaz digitalnega modela reliefa z uporabo uniformnega modela neba (ang. Uniform Sky Model) v kombinaciji z barvno lestvico (izdelal B. Štular). irst mentioned by Simon Rutar.2 Shortly thereafter, Carlo Marchesetti carried out extensive excavations of the cemetery; he briely mentioned the settlement in his report.3 Of particular interest is an entry about the discovery of a large bronze vessel on the edges of Gradič (probably outside the cemetery, directly below the settlement), or, in Marchesetti’s words, “alle falde del castelliere di S. Antonio”. he bronze vessel contained eight spears, four socketed axes, a winged axe, an iron axe, an iron bracelet, an iron itting and a whetstone.4 It is most likely an Early Iron Age hoard ind.5 he sanctuary or the cult place on the western slope outside the settlement area (ig. 3: 9) existed from the 2nd cen2 3 4 244 5 Rutar 1882, 12; Rutar 1890, 129. Marchesetti 1887, VII. Marchesetti 1890, XIV. Gabrovec 1976, 50. 1 Uvod V letu 2010 smo s ponovno analizo lidarskih podatkov iz leta 2007 naredili mikrotopograijo arheološkega najdišča Gradič nad Kobaridom. Na podlagi tega in preverb na terenu smo izdelali načrt najdišča. Takšni načrti so seveda zgolj palimpsest vseh človekovih dejavnosti v preteklosti, ki jih lahko datiramo le s pomočjo arheoloških izkopavanj. V tem članku smo se osredotočili na ovrednotenje načrta najdišča v kontekstu že znanih arheoloških podatkov in opozorili na pokazatelje, ki dopuščajo domnevo o obstoju utrjenega poznorepublikanskega1 emporija ter nakazujejo zgodnjo rimsko trgovsko in vojaško navzočnost v zgornjem Posočju. 1 Obdobje pozne republike je v rimski zgodovini večinoma zamejeno z letnico nastopa Tiberija Grakha (133 pr. n. št.) in začetkom avgustejske dobe (27 pr. n. št.); npr. Bratož 2007, 106–172. Figure 3. Gradič above Kobarid. The interpretation of the site. Field survey: A “stacks of amphorae” destroyed in 1938 and surface inds of Roman bricks, tegulae and pottery; B “rich settlement layer full of amphorae and pottery” (Osmuk 1982); C Roman pottery; D tegulae; E prehistoric pottery. Lidar data analysis: 1 ramparts (top); 2 ramparts (bottom); 3 terraces; 4 wall; 5 path; 6 modern destruction; 7 corrupted data; 8 bedrock; 9 archaeological excavations; 10 internal rampart (B. Štular). Slika 3. Gradič nad Kobaridom. Načrt interpretacije najdišča. Terenski ogled: A »skladovnice amfor«, uničene l. 1938, in površinske najdbe rimskega gradbenega materiala in keramike; B »bogata naselbinska plast z amforami in domačo keramiko« (Osmuk 1982); C rimskodobna lončenina; D tegule; E prazgodovinska lončenina. Analiza lidarskih podatkov: 1 nasip; 2 dno nasipa; 3 terasiranje; 4 zid; 5 pot; 6 sodobno uničenje; 7 podatkovni šum; 8 skalna osnova; 9 arheološka izkopavanja; 10 notranji nasip (izdelava B. Štular). tury BC 6 (judging by the objects originating from Central and Southern Italy) or even before, from the end of the Early Iron Age.7 Most numerous are the inds spanning from mid-1st century BC to mid-1st century AD; they then diminish in the 2nd and 3rd centuries and pick up again in the 4th and early 5th century, when coins and glass cups prevail among the oferings.8 Reports about the discovery of wall remains and a settlement layer containing fragments of amphorae and pottery (ig. 3: B) indicate that the settlement was inhabited in Roman period.9 Particularly revealing are references to “stacks of amphorae” (ig. 3: A), found by the builders of the ossu6 7 8 9 Osmuk 1984, 232; Osmuk 1997; Osmuk 1998; Mlinar 2011, 22–23. Mlinar, Gerbec 2011, 18. Osmuk 1997, 15. Osmuk 1982; Osmuk 1997, 11. 2 Zgodovina raziskav Lega prazgodovinske naselbine na Gradiču ni sporna, vendar je njeno datiranje v železno dobo predvsem posredno, glede na raziskano grobišče ob vznožju. O obstoju gradišča oziroma »terdnjavice« na Gradiču je prvi poročal Simon Rutar.2 Kmalu za njim je naselbino na Gradiču omenil Carlo Marchesetti, ki je za tem opravil obsežna izkopavanja pripadajočega grobišča.3 Zanimiva je omemba odkritja velike bronaste posode na obronkih Gradiča (verjetno zunaj grobišča, neposredno pod naselbino) oziroma, kot se je izrazil Marchesetti, »alle falde del castelliere di S. Antonio«. V bronasti posodi je bilo spravljenih 8 sulic, 4 tulaste sekire, plavutasta sekira, železna sekira, železna zapestnica, že- 2 3 Rutar 1882, 12; Rutar 1890, 129. Marchesetti 1887, VII. 245 ary (kostnica) for deceased Italian soldiers.10 Surface inds of Roman pottery, bricks and tegulae fragments in the central area of the settlement are common (ig. 3: A)11 and were also documented during our survey of the site (ig. 3: C, D). 3 Lidar data methodology Airborne lidar (Laser Imaging Detection And Ranging) is a remote sensing technique using airborne laser-scanning systems. It consists of an active laser beam transmitted in pulses from an aircraft and measurement of the returned relection. Currently, this is the most precise method for producing digital elevation models (DEMs). Minute surface anomalies recorded on these high-resolution DEMs can reveal buried items of archaeological interest. Lidar-derived data has been successfully applied in loodplains,12 in mountainous forested areas13 and even in the tropical jungle.14 he experiences in Slovenia are that the best results are obtained researching remote areas with limited human impact in recent decades. hese locations are most often heavily forested and are, as such, not favourable for archaeological topography and impossible to study with any other remote sensing technique. herefore, it is not surprising that the use of lidar-derived data is becoming increasingly common in Slovenia.15 he data used in this research stems from the project recording the Kobarid region in the upper Soča valley in western Slovenia (ig. 1). All analyses used in this article have been performed on lidar-derived DEM (Digital Elevation Model) with a 0.5 metre grid.16 he laser scanning of the 57 km2 area was commissioned and processed with a clear focus on archaeology in early March 2007, when the vegetation was still dormant, the fallen leaves were compacted, and the ground was without snow cover. he conditions revealed the bare ground topography to the maximum degree. Filtering of the lidar point cloud was performed with REIN (REpetitive INterpolation) algorithm. Algorithm settings were optimized to remove only the vegetation cover. he ilter, therefore, preserved buildings, walls, dikes and trenches17 as well as retaining some spruce trees where the laser beam did not reach the ground (ig. 3: 7). he correct iltering of data is essential for archaeological analysis. Unfortunately, archaeologists often operate with already processed data, il- lezni okov in brusni kamen.4 Najverjetneje gre za depojsko najdbo iz starejše železne dobe.5 Svetišče ali kultni prostor, ki leži na zahodnem pobočju zunaj območja naselbine (sl. 3: 9), je obstajalo v 2. st. pr. n. št., kot kažejo iz srednje in južne Italije prineseni predmeti,6 ali celo od konca starejše železne dobe.7 Največ najdb je iz obdobja od sredine 1. st. pr. n. št. do sredine 1. st. n. št., manj iz 2. in 3. st. in spet več iz 4. in z začetka 5. st., ko med darovanimi predmeti prevladujejo novci in steklene čaše.8 Poselitev naselbine v rimski dobi nakazujejo notice o odkritju ostalin zidov in bogate naselbinske plasti z odlomki amfor in keramiko (sl. 3: B).9 Pomenljive so navedbe o »velikih skladovnicah amfor« (sl. 3: A), ki so jih našli graditelji kostnice padlih italijanskih vojakov.10 Pogoste so površinske najdbe odlomkov rimske keramike, opek in tegul v osrednjem delu naselbine (sl. 3: A),11 ki smo jih dokumentirali tudi med ogledom najdišča (sl. 3: C, D). 3 Metodologija analize lidarskih podatkov Lidarsko snemanje zemeljskega površja je trenutno najnatančnejša tehnika za izdelavo digitalnih modelov površja. Izraz lidar je okrajšava za Laser Imaging Detection and Ranging oziroma lasersko snemanje, zaznavanje in merjenje razdalj. V arheologiji na podlagi lidarskih podatkov opazujemo predvsem drobne spremembe površja, ki v določenih okoliščinah razkrivajo pokopan arheološki zapis. Ti podatki so bili uspešno uporabljeni na ravninskem in močvirnem terenu,12 pa tudi v goratih, gozdnatih področjih13 ter celo v tropski džungli.14 Izkušnje v Sloveniji kažejo, da prinašajo lidarski podatki najboljše rezultate pri preučevanju odmaknjenih lokacij, na katerih so bili človekovi posegi v času po opustitvi najdišč minimalni. Takšne lokacije so večinoma gozdnata območja, ki jih je s klasično arheološko topograijo težko natančno raziskati, za vse druge tehnike daljinskega zaznavanja pa so popolnoma nedostopne. V arheologiji se ta tehnika uveljavlja šele v zadnjih letih.15 4 5 6 7 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 246 17 Nada Osmuk for the Delo newspaper, 17 Nov. 1994, p. 12; N. Osmuk, Tolminski muzej, permanent exhibition Naplavine obsoške zgodovine, room Kobariška kultna krajina. Personal communication from Zdravko Likar (born 1951) from 9th March 2012 (the record is kept in Tolmin Museum). E.g. Challis et al. 2008 and cited references; Crutchley 2009; Buteux, Chapman 2009; Corns, Shaw 2009. Sittler 2004; Devereux et al. 2005; Doneus et al. 2008; Štular 2011a; Štular 2011b. Chase et al. 2011. Kokalj, Oštir, Zakšek 2008; Mlekuž 2009; Budja, Mlekuž 2010; Kokalj, Zakšek, Oštir 2011; Štular et al. 2012; an overview in Štular 2011a. Kokalj, Oštir, Zakšek 2008, 322–323. Kobler et al. 2007. th 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Marchesetti 1890, XIV. Gabrovec 1976, 50. Osmuk 1984, 232; Osmuk 1997; Osmuk 1998; Mlinar 2011, 22–23. Mlinar, Gerbec 2011, 18. Osmuk 1997, 15. Osmuk 1982; Osmuk 1997, 11. Nada Osmuk za časopis Delo, 17. 11. 1994, str. 12; N. Osmuk, Tolminski muzej, stalna razstava »Naplavine obsoške zgodovine«, prostor »Kobariška kultna krajina«. Ustna informacija Zdravka Likarja (roj. 1951) z dne 9. marca 2012 (zapisnik hrani Tolminski muzej). Npr. Challis et al. 2008 in tam navedena literatura; Crutchley 2009; Buteux, Chapman 2009; Corns, Shaw 2009. Sittler 2004; Devereux et al. 2005; Doneus et al. 2008; Štular 2011a; Štular 2011b. Chase et al. 2011. Kokalj, Oštir, Zakšek 2008; Mlekuž 2009; Budja, Mlekuž 2010; Kokalj, Zakšek, Oštir 2011; Štular et al. 2012; pregled v Štular 2011a. Figure 4. Gradič above Kobarid. Viewshed from the top of the ramparts and Skrinjca, the coin hoard ind. The viewshed has been calculated from 30 observation points distributed in equal intervals on the northern part of the preserved ramparts. Poor visibility denotes area visible from 10 observation points or less, medium visibility from 11 to 20 and superior visibility from 21 to 30 observation points. Simulation predicts the height of the rampart at 4 m and the height of the observer at 1.65 m. Calculations have been executed in the ESRI ArcGIS 10.0 sotware package (B. Štular). Slika 4. Gradič nad Kobaridom. Vidnost z vrha nasipa obzidja in Skrinjca, lokacija novčne najdbe. Analizirali smo vidnost iz 30-tih točk oziroma opazovališč, ki smo jih enakomerno razporedili po ohranjenem delu nasipa na severni polovici najdišča. Kot slabo vidno smo označili območje, vidno iz od 1 do 10 opazovališč, srednje vidno iz od 11 do 20 in dobro vidno iz od 21 do 30 opazovališč. Simulacija predvideva 4 metre visok nasip in višino opazovalca 1,65 metra. Izvedena je bila v programskem paketu ESRI ArcGIS 10.0 (B. Štular). tered in such a way that the result is a “nice” DEM. In this case, all vegetation is removed, but, often, so is the “archaeology”, i.e. the potential anthropogenic anomalies. 4 Interpretation of lidar data Using the above-described DEM, we have produced 13 data layers including a uniform sky model (ig. 2), thus following the methodological recommendation to use multiple visualisation techniques rather than a single one.18 he features have been interpreted based on visual analysis of all the data layers. he most recently built area has (as often noted) destroyed a portion of the prehistoric enclosure (25751 m2). he WWI monument and road building destroyed 32 % of the enclosure area, and the building of a house and its levelled V raziskavi smo uporabili visoko ločljivi digitalni model reliefa (DMR) z osnovno celico velikosti pol metra,16 ki je bil pridobljen s snemanjem leta 2007. Snemanje je zajelo 57 km2 na Kobariškem, natančneje zgornji tok reke Nadiže, celotni tok Idrije in ozek pas zahodnega pobočja Krna v zgodnjem marcu, ko je sneg, ki je stisnil odpadlo listje, že skopnel, vegetacija pa je bila še v stanju mirovanja. To so optimalne razmere za lidarsko snemanje, kadar je primarni cilj snemanja čim boljši digitalni model reliefa. Tako zajeti podatki so bili iltrirani z algoritmom ponavljajoče interpolacije REIN (ang. REpetitive INterpolation algorithm). Nastavitve algoritma so optimizirane tako, da odstranjuje podatkovne šume samo do te mere, da zagotovo ne odstranijo zaznav potencialnih antropogenih anomalij, na primer zidov, jarkov, gomil.17 Posledica tega iltriranja je podatkov16 18 Challis et al. 2011; Štular et al. 2012. 17 Kokalj, Oštir, Zakšek 2008, 322–323. Kobler et al. 2007. 247 ni šum, predvsem na mestih mladega smrečja, kjer laserski žarki niso prodrli do tal (sl. 3: 7). Pravilno iltriranje podatkov je bistveno za arheološko analizo. Pogosto imamo namreč opravka z že obdelanimi podatki, ki pa so bili iltrirani tako, da je rezultat »lep« digitalni model reliefa. V tem primeru je sicer odstranjena vsa vegetacija, a pogosto tudi »arheologija«, torej potencialne antropogene anomalije. Figure 5. Gradič above Kobarid. Above the extract from the Napoleonic cadastral map (1813) and bellow the same extract from the Franciscan cadastral map (1828). Both historical maps clearly show the platform surrounding the Sv. Anton church. The red arrow is pointing on the location of the internal rampart seen on lidar data (ig. 3: 10). Slika 5. Gradič nad Kobaridom. Zgoraj izsek iz Napoleonskega (1813) in spodaj iz Franciscejskega katastra (1828). Na obeh historičnih zemljevidih je jasno prikazana ploščad okoli poznosrednjeveške cerkve Sv. Antona. Rdeča puščica kaže na ostanke notranjega nasipa, prepoznane na lidarskih podatkih (sl. 3: 10). 4 Interpretacija lidarskih podatkov Iz podatkov, iltriranih z algoritmom REIN, smo za območje Gradiča nad Kobaridom izdelali 13 različnih podatkovnih slojev, vključno z modelom enotnega neba (sl. 2). Pri tem smo upoštevali sodobne metodološke napotke, da je za arheološko interpretacijo lidarskih podatkov nujno uporabljati več različnih vizualizacij, saj nobena znana metoda ne zagotavlja popolne vidnosti vseh potencialnih arheoloških sledov.18 V nadaljevanju smo izvedli vizualno analizo in arheološko interpretacijo. yard has damaged an additional 5 %. he remaining 63 % of the enclosure remained intact only to be plundered by illegal metal detecting.19 Fifty-eight features have been recorded on this site complex, and groundtruthing has been performed (ig. 3). We were able to date modern thirty-two farming features and relicts from WWI. Dating the remaining twenty-six to individual archaeological periods is impossible without excavations. Several paths have been documented ranging from modern hiking and tourist paths to paths leading towards now abandoned ields. he existence of a “Roman path” has been known for a century, and the same path has been recorded in medieval written sources (ig. 3: 5).20 Analysing the lidar-derived data, we were able to detect the exact paths contemporary to the nearby late antiquity period site of Tonovcov grad. here is a general consensus that this path was contemporaneous to the Gradič site as well, as conirmed by the route of the path with regard to the hill fort: the path enables optimal access from Kobariško polje to Gradič and past Tonovcov grad across the Alps to Carinthia, Austria.21 Careful recording of the enclosure exposed an elaborate rampart system including a double rampart (ig. 3: 1, 2). he four sections of the outer western rampart’s recorded length (north to south) are 31.5 m, 32.5 m, 74.4 m and 62.6 19 20 248 21 Cf. Osmuk 1977. Štular 2011b. Štular 2011b. Načrt razkriva obseg modernih poškodb gradišča znotraj nasipa. Od skupno 25751 m2 je bilo 32 odstotkov uničenih z gradnjo kostnice in ceste, nadaljnjih 5 odstotkov pa s postavitvijo hiše s pripadajočo teraso; 63 odstotkov najdišča je nedotaknjenih pričakalo več kot 30 let nelegalnih posegov z detektorji kovin.19 Skupaj smo na najdišču dokumentirali 58 antropogenih anomalij (sl. 3). Vse smo preverili na kraju samem in na podlagi topografskih izkušenj smo lahko opredelili ostanke, ki jih povezujemo z novoveškim kmetovanjem ali z ostanki 1. svetovne vojne (32 anomalij). Razlikovanje drugih 26 anomalij s posameznimi arheološkimi obdobij ni možno brez izkopavanj. Dokumentirali smo večje število poti. Prevladujejo moderne sprehajalne poti ter poti, ki so vodile do zdaj opuščenih njiv in travnikov. Poleg tega smo prepoznali potek »rimske ceste«, katere obstoj je bil zabeležen že pred več kot stoletjem in jo omenjajo srednjeveški pisni viri (sl. 3: 5).20 S prostorsko analizo smo pokazali, da je pot sočasna bližnjemu poznoantičnemu najdišču Tonovcov grad in verjetno tudi najdišču Gradič nad Kobaridom. Slednje potrjuje lega poti v odnosu do gradišča: pot omogoča optimalni dostop s kobariškega polja do Gradiča in mimo najdišča Tonovcov grad prek Alp na avstrijsko Koroško.21 Analiza lidarskih podatkov je pokazala podrobnosti razvejenega sistema dvojnega nasipa, ki obkroža gradišče (sl. 3: 1, 2). Zunanji nasip smo dokumentirali le na zahodni, izpostavljeni strani gradišča, v štirih odsekih dolžine (od juga proti severu) 31,5 m, 32,5 m, 74,4 m in 62,6 m. Notra18 19 20 21 Challis et al. 2011; Štular et al. 2012. Prim. Osmuk 1977. Štular 2011b. Štular 2011b. m. he inner western rampart has been recorded in all but the south side of the enclosure in ive sections (west to east) of 30.1 m, 23.3 m, 143.9 m, 71 m and 44.4 m in length. he ramparts are preserved up to 5 m high and up to 10 wide. he remnants of the internal divisions, dividing the settlement into at least three parts, in the east of the site needs mentioning. he feature has been recorded in the length of 16.5 m; a monumental entrance carved into the bedrock is preserved nearby (ig. 3: 10, ig. 6). he former has been all but obliterated by the WWI monument, and we were only able to recognize it as such based on the Napoleonic and Franciscan cadastral maps from the early 19th century (ig. 5). he most noteworthy result seems to be 27 pre-modern terraces recorded for the irst time; 14 of these are situated within the fortiied settlement and 13 on the southern and south-western slopes (ig. 3: 3). hese terraces can be clearly distinguished from post-medieval agricultural terraces by difering in dimensions and in states of preservation (compare ig. 2 and ig. 3: 3 and 6). Indirect dating of these terraces into Roman period is allowed via the surface inds of Roman pottery, bricks and tegulae (ig. 3: A, B, C, D). 5 Discussion he following are the arguments supporting the hypothesis of the existence of a Late Republican fortiied emporium at Gradič above Kobarid. No systematic archaeological excavations have been carried out at the site, so only fragmented information is available. However, the lidar data analysis may have provided us with additional relevant arguments. 5.1 Coin hoard from Skrinjca In 2004, in the fallow of Skrinjca near Gradič (igs. 3–4), a hoard of 36 bronze and silver coins was discovered; 34 of them were Roman Republican coins (8 victoriati, a triens and 25 asses), and the other two were small Celtic silver coins (an undeined small silver coin and a small silver coin of the Kugelreiter type). hese coins relect the monetary circulation in the area during the second half of the 2nd century BC. Because the hoard was relatively small, it has been suggested that the coins had perhaps been left behind by a wealthy traveller.22 When we compare the contents of the hoard against the social backdrop from the time of the deposition, the person who buried the coins comes into somewhat sharper focus. During the Republican period and in Roman times in general, monetary circulation was not as developed as it is today. Various anecdotes from ancient written sources reveal that a wealthy Roman citizen travelled with substantial amounts of money.23 Money in large quantities was also an indispen22 23 Kos, Žbona Trkman 2009. Hollander 2008, 112. nji nasip smo dokumentirali povsod, razen na južnem delu najdišča, in sicer v petih odsekih (od zahoda proti vzhodu) dolžine 30,1 m, 23,3 m, 143,9 m, 71 m in 44,4 m. Ti nasipi so ohranjeni do 5 m visoko in široki do 10 m. Posebej velja omeniti skromne ostanke dveh notranjih pregrad na vzhodnem delu najdišča, ki sta delili gradišče na najmanj tri dele. Gre za 16,5 m dolg nasip in za skalnat greben z izklesanim ozkim prehodom (sl. 3: 10, sl. 6). Obstoj enega od notranjih nasipov kljub močnemu uničenju ob gradnji italjanske kostnice potrjuje analiza Napoleonskega in Franciscejskega katastra (sl. 5). Figure 6. Gradič above Kobarid. A monumental passage from the lower to the upper part of the hillfort (ig. 3: 10), cut into bedrock (photo B. Laharnar). Slika 6. Gradič nad Kobaridom. Monumentalni prehod iz spodnjega v zgornji del gradišča (sl. 3: 10), ki je bil vsekan v živo skalo (foto B. Laharnar). Najpomembnejši rezultat analize lidarskih podatkov je odkritje 27 teras, od tega 14 teras na območju gradišča in 13 na južnem in jugozahodnem pobočju Gradiča (sl. 3: 3). Te terase se jasno ločijo od novoveških teras obdelovalnih površin, saj so mnogo slabše ohranjene in drugačnih dimenzij (prim. sl. 2 in sl. 3: 3 in 6). Posredno o dataciji teras v rimsko obdobje pričajo površinske najdbe rimske keramike, opek in tegul (sl. 3: A, B, C, D). 5 Razprava V nadaljevanju bomo nanizali argumente v prid hipotezi o poznorepublikanskem utrjenem emporiju na Gradiču nad Kobaridom. Na najdišču ni bilo sistematičnih arheoloških raziskav, zato so na voljo le drobci informacij. Zdi se, da smo z analizo lidarskih podatkov dobili pomembne dodatne argumente. 249 sable tool in politics.24 Of course, money was used in trading, but it was less common than exchange of goods. Merchants, therefore, would use money only occasionally, e.g. in times of shortage of a particular commodity, and in small quantities. Farmers hardly ever used money, not even for emergencies, since they preferred stockpiling crops for exchange. In rural areas, certain crops had the same exchange value as coins. For that reason, the circulation of money in the rural area was considerably lower than in the cities.25 he value of the Skrinjca hoard is diicult to assess. We estimate it was worth nine or perhaps slightly less than 10 denarii,26 the equivalent of 27 days of a legionary’s wages.27 In estimating the value, inlation must be taken into account, as well as purchasing power, which was increasing with the distance from Rome.28 Again, Polybius ofers a reliable geographical and temporal comparison when reporting about the prices of grain in the Po Valley, where a Sicilian medimnos (43.75 or 52.50 litres)29 of wheat cost 4 obols30 or two thirds of a denarius. In the Po Valley, therefore, the purchasing power of the Skrinjca hoard would buy about 596 or 716 litres of wheat, enough to feed a family for 4 to 6 months.31 On one hand, the value of the coin depot was, therefore, a monthly pay of a legionary and, on the other hand, would buy enough wheat to feed a family for months. his is still much less than a wealthy Roman would carry with him, yet much more than a rural inhabitant would save.32 he amount seems most appropriate for a merchant, who, judging by the types of coins in the hoard was trading with Romans and Celts. 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 250 32 Hollander 2008, 132–133. Hollander 2008, 112–114, 127–129. Before 100 BC, a victoriatus was probably worth three quarters of a denarius (Crawford 1985, 22–23; Miškec 2003, 377); eight victoriati would be equivalent to approximately six denarii; 25 asses were the equivalent of 2.5 denarii (the Skrinjca asses were minted between 211–156 BC or before 146 BC – Kos, Žbona Trkman 2009, 278, when a denarius was worth 10 asses – Kos 1997, 82). The value of the triens and the two small Celtic silver coins was disregarded. Polibios 6.39.12. Polybius (c. 200–120 BC) writes that a footsoldier’s (legionary’s) pay was 2 obols per day. An obol was worth a sixth of a drachma, which, upon the Roman conquest of Greece, was equated with a denarius, worth 10 asses (Kos 1997, 82, 100, 254). According to Polybius, a Roman foot-soldier was therefore paid 3.33 asses a day, which comes to 100 asses or 10 denarii a month. Kessler, Temin 2008. A Sicilian medimnos (Σιχελιχός μέδιμνος) Polybius writes about was most likely equivalent to 5–6 Roman modii, 43.75 or 52.50 litres. The modius was a basic unit of measure for dry weight and equalled about 8.75 litres (Hultsch 1971, 121–122, 126; for a Sicilian modius cf. Hultsch 1971, 655–659). Polibios 2.15.1. For this calculation, an estimate was used that a daily consumption of a family (with “three grown men – a father and two sons; two women – a mother and a daughter; and two small children”) whose diet was based on wheat would be 4.4 kg (Pleterski 2008, 85). Hollander 2008. 5.1 Novčna zakladna najdba s Skrinjce Leta 2004 so na ledini Skrinjca blizu Gradiča (sl. 3–4) na kupu našli 36 bronastih in srebrnih novcev. Najdbo sestavlja 34 rimskih republikanskih novcev (8 viktorijatov, triens, 25 asov) in dva mala keltska srebrnika (mali srebrnik neznanega tipa in mali srebrnik tipa »jezdec s trirogeljno čelado«). Najdba predstavlja denar, ki je bil na tem območju v obtoku v drugi polovici 2. stoletja pr. n. št. Zaradi razmeroma majhnega števila najdenih novcev je bila predlagana interpretacija, da je v zemlji ob poti ostal denar, ki ga je nosil s seboj bogatejši popotnik.22 Ko vsebino zakladne najdbe primerjamo s socialnimi okoliščinami v času zakopa, si lahko nekoliko izostrimo podobo osebe, ki je novce zakopala. V republikanskem in sploh v rimskem obdobju novčni obtok ni bil razvit v današnjem pomenu besede. Iz anekdotičnih pripovedi v antičnih pisnih virih izvemo, da je premožen rimski državljan na pot vzel veliko denarja.23 Denar v velikih količinah je bil tudi nepogrešljivo orodje v politiki.24 Seveda so denar uporabljali pri trgovanju, vendar je bila menjava večinoma še blagovna. Tako so trgovci denar uporabljali le občasno, na primer v obdobjih pomanjkanja določenega blaga, in to v razmeroma majhnih količinah. Kmetje denarja skorajda niso uporabljali, niti kot nujne zaloge, temveč so za menjavo kopičili pridelke. V ruralnih okoljih so imeli tako nekateri pridelki enako menjalno vrednost kot novci. Zato je bil obtok denarja na podeželju znatno manjši od obtoka v mestih.25 Vrednost novčnega depoja s Skrinjce je težko opredeliti. Ocenili smo jo na 9 ali nekaj manj kot 10 denarijev,26 kar je v Polibijevem času znašalo 27 dnevno plačo legionarja.27 Pri oceni vrednosti moramo računati z inlacijo in upoštevati kupno moč denarja, ki je naraščala z oddaljenostjo od Rima.28 Zanesljivo geografsko in časovno primerjavo spet ponuja Polibij, ki sporoča ceno žita v dolini reke Pad, kjer je bilo v njegovem času za siciliski medimnos (43,75 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Kos, Žbona Trkman 2009. Hollander 2008, 112. Hollander 2008, 132–133. Hollander 2008, 112–114, 127–129. Viktoriat je bil v času pred letom 100 pr. n. št. vreden verjetno 3/4 denarija (Crawford 1985, 22–23; Miškec 2003, 377); 8 viktoriatov je torej približno ustrezalo vrednosti 6 denarijev; 25 asov je ustrezalo vrednosti 2,5 denarijev (asi s Skrinjce so bili kovani med 211–156 pr. n. št. oziroma pred 146 pr. n. št. – Kos, Žbona Trkman 2009, 278, torej v obdobju, ko je bila vrednost denarija 10 asov – Kos 1997, 82). Vrednost triensa in obeh malih keltskih srebrnikov smo zanemarili. Polibios 6.39.12. Polibij (ok. 200 do 120 pr. n. št.) navaja, da je plača vojaka pešaka (legionarja) v njegovem času znašala dva obola. Vrednost obola je bila šestinko drahme, ki je bila z rimsko osvojitvijo Grčije izenačena z denarijem, vrednim 10 asov (Kos 1997, 82, 100, 254). Po Polibiju je torej plača rimskega vojaka pešaka znašala 3,33 asa dnevno, kar je 100 asov ali 10 denarijev mesečno. Kessler, Temin 2008. Besides its contents, the location of the deposition of the hoard is equally revealing. he coins were buried very close to the settlement and directly by the path leading towards the northern mountain passes. Visual analysis has shown that the location of the hoard could not be seen from the settlement. Moreover, it is the irst location on that path, which is entirely invisible from the settlement (ig. 4). To deduce further, a concept of cognitive mapping is useful. he concept, introduced to behaviourist biology in 1930 by Edward Toman, relates to the ability of animals to remember or “map” places and routes.33 he concept has also been applied to the way people orientate themselves in the landscape.34 One of the results was the observation that people mostly move along familiar routes and only look for new routes as an exception.35 Judging by the location of the hoard (right by the path and very close to the settlement, but not visible from it), the money was buried by someone who was very familiar with the settlement and the path, but not with the surrounding area, where excellent hiding places abound. he money, therefore, was not hidden by a local, but rather by a traveller that was familiar with both the path and the settlement, but not with the surroundings, perhaps a merchant who traded along the route between NE Italy, Gradič and Noricum. 5.2 The fortiied settlement he stone ramparts (ig. 3: 1–2) are most likely a collapsed fortiication wall, which cannot be dated without excavations. he fact is that the existence of the fortiication walls from the Iron Age has never been established in the upper Soča valley. At the hillfort on the hill of Ravelnik (Rabeljk) in the Bovška kotlina (Bovec basin) man-made fortiications can still be seen,36 yet the small inds only point to a Roman settlement.37 Most na Soči, the central Iron Age settlement in the upper Soča valley, was probably not fortiied.38 he Italic brooches found at Most na Soči would suggest the earliest Roman houses were built there in the irst quarter of the 1st century BC.39 All of the above leads us to the assumption that the ramparts (the collapsed fortiication wall?), terraces and possibly some of the linear anomalies identiied on the lidarderived image were built by Romans (ig. 3: 1–4). Speciically, there are similarities with better researched sites in Carnia and along the southern foothills of the Eastern Alps in particular. On the sites of Castelraimondo, Verzegnis – Colle Mazéit, Raveo – Monte Sorantri, Moggio – 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 Mai, Young Owl, Kersting 2005, 109. E.g. Downs, Stea 1973. Whitley 2004, 11. Marchesetti 1903, 88–89; Svoljšak 2002, 270–271; Klavora 2003, 17. Osmuk 2006a; Mlinar 2009. Svoljšak 1986. Mlinar et al. 2012. ali 52,50 litrov)29 žita potrebno odšteti 4 obole,30 kar je 2/3 denarija. Kupna moč zakladne najdbe s Skrinjce je torej v Padski nižini zadostovala za približno 596 ali 716 litrov žita, kar nahrani družino za od 4 do 6 mesecev.31 Vrednost novčnega depoja je bila torej po eni strani mesečna plača legionarja, po drugi pa je zadostovala za žito, ki je nahranilo družino za več mesecev. Torej mnogo manj, kot bi imel pri sebi rimski premožnež, in mnogo več, kot je hranil prebivalec podeželja.32 Znesek je še najprimernejši za trgovca, ki je glede na novčno sestavo najdbe trgoval med Rimljani in Kelti. Poleg vsebine zakladne najdbe je pomenljiva njena lega. Novci so bili zakopani v neposredni bližini naselbine in tik ob poti, ki vodi pod njo. Analiza vidnosti proti severu je pokazala, da je bilo mesto zakopa vendarle skrito pred pogledom iz naselbine. Ne samo to, opraviti imamo s prvo lokacijo ob najverjetnejši komunikaciji iz naselbine, ki je popolnoma zakrita pred pogledom iz naselbine (sl. 4). Za nadaljnje sklepanje si lahko pomagamo s konceptom kognitivnega kartiranja prostora. Ta koncept, ki ga je leta 1930 uvedel Edward Tolman v behavioristično biologijo, se nanaša na sposobnost živali, da si zapomnijo oziroma »kartirajo« kraje in poti.33 Koncept je bil apliciran tudi na preučevanje gibanja ljudi v prostoru34 in eden izmed rezultatov je opažanje, da se ljudje najpogosteje gibamo v prostoru po znanih poteh in le izjemoma iščemo nove poti.35 Glede na lego zakopa (tik ob poti v neposredni bližini naselbine, a skrito pred pogledom iz nje) sklepamo, da je denar zakopal nekdo, ki je dobro poznal naselbino in pot, ne pa tudi bližnje okolice, kjer je veliko skritih kotičkov. Denarja torej ni skril domačin, ampak popotnik, morda trgovec, ki je trgoval ob poti med severovzhodno Italijo, Gradičem in Norikom. 5.2 Utrjena naselbina Kamniti nasipi (sl. 3: 1–2) najverjetnje predstavljajo ruševine obzidja, ki pa brez izkopavanj ostaja časovno neopredeljeno. Dejstvo je, da v zgornjem Posočju še ni dokazano obzidje iz železne dobe. Na gradišču na hribu Ravelnik (Rabeljk) v Bovški kotlini so ponekod še vidne umetne utrditve,36 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 Sicilijski medimnos (Σιχελιχός μέδιμνος), ki ga navaja Polibij, je najverjetneje znašal 5–6 rimskih modijev (modius), kar je 43,75 ali 52,50 litrov. Modij je bil namreč osnovna rimska mera za suhe snovi in je znašal 8,75 litrov (Hultsch 1971, 121–122, 126; za siciljski modij Hultsch 1971, 655–659). Polibios 2.15.1. Za izračun smo uporabili oceno, da dnevna poraba zrnja v družini (ki ima »tri odrasle moške – očeta in dva sinova, dve ženski – mater in hčer ter dva majhna otroka«), v kateri prehrana temelji na žitu, znaša 4,4 kg (Pleterski 2008, 85). Hollander 2008. Mai, Young Owl, Kersting 2005, 109. Npr. Downs, Stea 1973. Whitley 2004, 11. Marchesetti 1903, 88–89; Svoljšak 2002, 270–271; Klavora 2003, 17. 251 vendar drobne najdbe kažejo le na rimskodobno poselitev.37 Most na Soči, osrednja železnodobna naselbina v Posočju, verjetno ni bil utrjen.38 Kot najzgodnejše obdobje gradnje rimskih hiš na Mostu na Soči se z najdbami značilnih italskih ibul nakazuje prva četrtina 1. st. pr. n. št.39 Figure 7. 1 Dolgi Laz, 2 Kobarid, Za gradom, 3 Kamno (east of the village). 1–2 iron; 3 lead. Scale = 1 : 2 (drawing N. Grum, T. Gerbec). Slika 7. 1 Dolgi Laz, 2 Za gradom, Kobarid, 3 Kamno (vzhodno od vasi). 1–2 železo; 3 svinec. M = 1 : 2 (risba N. Grum, T. Gerbec). Vse to nas napeljuje k domnevi, da so nasipi (ruševine obzidja ?) in morda tudi nekatere linijske anomalije (ostanki predmodernih zidov ?) ter terase, ki smo jih prepoznali na lidarskem posnetku, rimska gradnja (sl. 3: 1–4). Podobnosti se namreč nakazujejo zlasti z bolje raziskanimi najdišči v Karniji in ob južnem vznožju vzhodnih Alp. Na najdiščih Castelraimondo, Verzegnis – Cole Mazéit, Raveo – Monte Sorantri, Moggio – Colle di S. Spirito in Špeter – Barda-Roba, ki ležijo na pomembnih strateških legah ob poteh iz osrčja Alp v ravnino severne Italije, so v obdobju od sredine 2. st. pr. n. št. do avgustejske dobe zgradili obzidja in stolpe iz kamna ter malte. Tehnika njihove gradnje spominja na obrambno arhitekturo rimskih mest v Italiji, zato jih povezujejo z rimskimi investicijami v starih lokalnih središčih s pomembno strateško lego.40 Colle di S. Spirito and S. Pietro al Natisone – BardaRoba, located at prominent strategic positions along the routes leading from the Alps to the plains of Northern Italy, stone and mortar walls and towers were being built from mid-2nd century BC until the Augustan period. he building technique resembles the defensive architecture of Roman cities in Italy, which suggests Roman investments in old local centres with important strategic positions.40 here are few traces of Roman army in and around Kobarid from that period. he excavations of the cemetery (V Logu), adjacent to the Gradič settlement, unearthed mostly Early Iron Age graves. his is where Carlo Marchesetti also excavated a burial of a horse with harness from LT D1 period (120/110–70/60 BC), which contained a spur typical of Late Republican Roman cavalry.41 A catapult-bolt (ig. 7: 2) was found at Kobarid42 and a lead slingshot (ig. 7: 3) near the village of Kamno.43 he two objects are diicult to date to a narrow time-span; however, they have reliable parallels in the assemblages of Roman weapons associated with the pre-Augustan incursions of the Roman army to the east and north of Aquileia. he spindle-like lead slingshot has the geographically nearest parallels in the slingshots from the site of Barda-Roba in the neighbouring Friuli,44 where they are associated with the Roman military incursions from the turn of the 1st century BC,45 and among the examples from the assemblages of Roman military inds from Šentviška planota Sledov rimske vojske iz tega časa na Kobariškem ni veliko. Na grobišču V logu ob južnem vznožju naselbine, kjer so pokopavali umrle prebivalci Gradiča, so bili odkriti pretežno grobovi iz starejše železne dobe. Tam je Carlo Marchesetti med drugim raziskal pokop konja z opremo iz obdobja LT D1 (120/110–70/60 pr. n. št.), ki je poleg drugih predmetov vsebovala za poznorepublikansko rimsko konjenico značilno ostrogo.41 Pri Kobaridu so našli ost katapultnega izstrelka (sl. 7: 2),42 pri vasi Kamno pa svinčen izstrelek za pračo (sl. 7: 3).43 Predmeta je težko ožje datirati, vendar zanju najdemo zanesljive primerjave v sklopih rimskega orožja, povezanih s predavgustejskimi posegi rimske vojske vzhodno in severno od Akvileje. Svinčeni izstrelek za pračo vretenaste oblike ima geografsko najbližje primerjave v izstrelkih z najdišča Barda-Roba v sosednji Furlaniji,44 kjer jih povezujejo z rimskim vojaškim posegom ob koncu 2. in v začetku 1. st. pr. n. št.45 ter med primerki iz sklopov rimskih vojaških najdb od Šentviške planote do Cerknega,46 povezanih z vojaškimi akcijami 4. desetletja pr. n. št.47 V omenjenih sklopih so med drugim zastopane konice katapultnih izstrelkov, podobne kobariškemu.48 Poleg njih ima katapultni izstrelek iz Kobarida glede na velikost in obliko primerjave med izstrelki iz sklopa (zaklada) rimskega 37 38 39 40 41 42 40 41 42 43 44 252 45 Horvat 2010, 151–152. Božič 1999a, 165; Luik 2002, 93, n. 378, ig. 55; Božič 2004. Mlinar 2006. Laharnar 2011, 361. Tagliaferri 1986, 132, pl. 27. Chiabà 2007, 54. 43 44 45 46 47 48 Osmuk 2006a; Mlinar 2009. Svoljšak 1986. Mlinar et al. 2012. Horvat 2010, 151–152. Božič 1999a, 165; Luik 2002, 93, op. 378, sl. 55; Božič 2004. Mlinar 2006. Laharnar 2011, 361. Tagliaferri 1986, 132, t. 27. Chiabà 2007, 54. Božič 1999b, 76–77, sl. 4: 8–1, sl. 5: 5–8. Istenič 2005; Istenič, v tem zborniku. Istenič 2005, 82, sl. 4: 1–5. to Cerkno,46 associated with military campaigns from the period 40/30 BC.47 hese assemblages also included catapultbolts similar to the ind from Kobarid.48 In terms of its size and shape, it also has parallels among the catapult-bolts from the assemblage (hoard) of Roman weapons found at Grad near Šmihel pod Nanosom,49 which is probably associated with a Roman military incursion in the decades after the founding of Aquileia.50 Another object worth mentioning is a Roman javelin-head, found near Dolgi Laz (ig. 7: 1)51 south of Most na Soči, which also has clear parallels in the javelinheads from Šmihel.52 he javelin is one of the inds that point to the existence of prehistoric routes between the hillfort at Sv. Katarina above Nova Gorica and Most na Soči,53 which were probably also used by Romans in their early trading and campaigns towards the upper Soča valley. he grave monument from Most na Soči54 to a soldier of the XV legion from the Late Republican or Early Augustan period55 would suggest that in the second half or last third of the 1st century BC a former Iron Age centre was already under Roman rule. 6 Conclusion Several indications have been presented that from the mid-2nd century BC Gradič above Kobarid might have been a fortiied merchant post (an emporium) along the route between NE Italy and Noricum. he composition and location of the coin hoard from Skrinjca imply that the money was buried in the second half of the 2nd century BC, most probably by a merchant who travelled frequently along this route and knew the settlement at Gradič well. he ramparts (a collapsed fortiied wall?), terraces and linear anomalies (remains of pre-modern walls?) at the top and the SW slopes of Gradič are possibly of Roman construction. Because there are no identiied Iron Age settlements fortiied with walls in the upper Soča valley, an assumption can be made that the fortiication was a Roman undertaking. Comparisons to better researched sites nearby suggest that Romans fortiied local centres along the routes between Northern Italy and the Alps from mid-2nd century BC to the Augustan period. As-of-yet scarce individual inds of Roman Late Republican military equipment from the area between Kobarid and Most na Soči imply that Roman army played a signiicant role in setting up control of the merchant routes towards Noricum. orožja z Gradu pri Šmihelu pod Nanosom,49 ki je verjetno povezan z rimskim vojaškim posegom v prvih desetletjih po ustanovitvi Akvileje.50 Pri tem velja opozoriti na najdbo osti rimskega kopja iz Dolgega Laza na Banjšicah (sl. 7: 1),51 južno od Mosta na Soči, ki ima prav tako dobro primerjavo v šmihelskih osteh.52 To kopje sodi med najdbe, ki zarisujejo potek prazgodovinskih poti med gradiščem na Sv. Katarini nad Novo Gorico in Mostom na Soči53 in so jih verjetno pri svojih prvih trgovskih (in vojaških) odpravah proti zgornjemu Posočju uporabljali tudi Rimljani. Nagrobnik vojaka XV. legije z Mosta na Soči54 iz poznorepublikanske ali zgodnjeavgustejske dobe55 nakazuje, da je bilo v drugi polovici ali zadnji tretjini 1. st. pr. n. št. nekdanje železnodobno središče že pod rimsko oblastjo. 6 Zaključek V razpravi smo navedli več pokazateljev, da je bil morda Gradič nad Kobaridom od sredine 2. st. pr. n. št. naprej utrjena trgovska postojanka (emporij) ob poti med severovzhodno Italijo in Norikom. Sestava in lega novčne zakladne najdbe s Skrinjce nakazujeta, da je denar v drugi polovici 2. st. pr. n. št. najverjetneje zakopal trgovec, ki je večkrat potoval po omenjeni poti in je naselbino na Gradiču dobro poznal. Nasipi (ruševine obzidja ?), terase in linijske anomalije (ostanki predmodernih zidov?) z vrha ter jugozahodnega pobočja Gradiča so morda rimske gradnje. Nedokazani obstoj z obzidji utrjenih železnodobnih naselij v Posočju namreč dopušča domnevo o povezavi gradnje utrditve z rimsko investicijo. Primerjava z bolje raziskanimi najdišči v soseščini kaže, da so Rimljani utrjevali lokalna središča ob poteh med severno Italijo in Alpami od sredine 2. st. pr. n. št. do avgustejske dobe. Zaenkrat redke posamezne najdbe rimskega poznorepublikanskega orožja in vojaške opreme z območja med Kobaridom in Mostom na Soči pa nakazujejo, da je pri vzpostavitvi nadzora nad tamkajšnjimi trgovskimi potmi proti Noriku pomembno vlogo igrala rimska vojska. Translation: Katarina Jerin Language editing: Terry Troy Jackson 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 Božič 1999b, 76–77, ig. 4: 8–1, ig. 5: 5–8 Istenič 2005; Istenič, in this book. Istenič 2005, 82, ig. 4: 1–5. Horvat 2002, pl. 14: 12–21. Horvat, Bavdek 2009, 135; Laharnar 2011, 369. Mlinar, Žbona Trkman 2008, 14, 20, pl. 2: 8. Horvat 2002, pl. 13: 4–5, 10. Mlinar, Žbona Trkman 2008, 17. Svoljšak, Žbona Trkman 1986, 390, no. 6, pl. 3. Šašel Kos 2000, 282–283; Zaccaria 2007, 138; Horvat 2009, 366. 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 Horvat 2002, t. 14: 12–21. Horvat, Bavdek 2009, 135; Laharnar 2011, 369. Mlinar, Žbona Trkman 2008, 14, 20, t. 2: 8. Horvat 2002, t. 13: 4–5, 10. Mlinar, Žbona Trkman 2008, 17. Svoljšak, Žbona Trkman 1986, 390, št. 6, t. 3. Šašel Kos 2000, 282–283; Zaccaria 2007, 138; Horvat 2009, 366. 253 BIBLIOGRAPHY / LITERATURA BOŽIČ, D. 1999a, Prebivališča mrtvih v mlajši železni dobi. – In/V: D. Božič et al., Zakladi tisočletij, Zgodovina Slovenije od neandertalcev do Slovanov, Ljubljana, 165–167. BOŽIČ, D. 1999b, Tre insediamenti minori del gruppo protostorico di Idrija pri Bači. – In/V: S. Santoro Bianchi (ed./ur.), Studio e conservazione degli insediamenti minori romani in area alpina, Atti dell’incontro di studi, Forgaria del Friuli, 20 settembre 1997, Bologna, 71–79. BOŽIČ, D. 2004, he function of the bronze D-shaped ring from the Late Republican horse burial in Kobarid, Soča Valley. – Instrumentum 20, 6–8. BRATOŽ, R. 2007, Rimska zgodovina 1. Od začetkov do nastopa cesarja Dioklecijana. – Zbirka Zgodovinskega časopisa 33, Ljubljana. BUDJA, M., MLEKUŽ, D. 2010, Lake or loodplain? Mid-Holocene settlement patterns and the landscape dynamic of the Ižica loodplain (Ljubljana Marshes, Slovenia). – Holocene 208, 1269–1275. BUTEUX, S., CHAPMAN, H. 2009, Where Rivers Meet. he Archaeology of Catholme and the Trent-Tame Conluence. – CBA research report 161, York. CHALLIS, K., FORLIN, P., KINCEY, M. 2011, A Generic Toolkit for the Visualization of Archaeological Features on Airborne LiDAR Elevation Data. – Archaeological Prospection 18/4, 279–289. CHALLIS, K., KOKALJ, Ž., KINCEY, M., MOSCROP, D., HOWARD, A. J. 2008, Airborne lidar and historic environment records. – Antiquity 82/318, 1055–1064. CHASE, A. F., CHASE, D. Z., WEISHAMPEL, J. F., DRAKE, J. B., SHRESTHA, R. L., SLATTON, K. C., AWE, J. J., CARTER, W. E. 2011, Airborne LiDAR, archaeology, and the ancient Maya landscape at Caracol, Belize. – Journal of Archaeological Science 38/2, 387–398. DOWNS, R., STEA, D. (eds./ur.) 1973, Image and Environment. Cognitive Mapping and Spatial Behavior. – Chicago. GABROVEC, S. 1976, Železnodobna nekropola v Kobaridu. – Goriški letnik 3, 44–63 [summary in Italian and German / povzetek v italijanščini in nemščini]. GUŠTIN, M. 1979, Notranjska. K začetkom železne dobe na severnem Jadranu / Zu den Anfängen der Eisenzeit an der nördlichen Adria. – Katalogi in monograije 17, Ljubljana. HOLLANDER, D. B. 2008, he Demand for Money in the Late Roman Republic – In/V: W. V. Harris (ed./ur.), he Monetary Systems of the Greeks and Romans, Oxford, 112–136. HORVAT, J. 2002, he Hoard of Roman Republican Weapons from Grad near Šmihel / Zaklad rimskega republikanskega orožja z Gradu pri Šmihelu pod Nanosom. – Arheološki vestnik 53, 117–192. HORVAT, J. 2009, Selected Aspects of Romanisation in Western and Central Slovenia. – In/V: G. Cuscito (ed./ur.), Aspetti e problemi della romanizzazione, Venetia, Histria e Arco Alpino orientale, Antichità Altoadriatiche 68, Trieste, 355–381. HORVAT, J. 2010, First century BC Roman fortiications in the Eastern Alps. – In/V: P. Herz, P. Scmid, O. Stoll (eds./ur.), Zwischen Region und Reich, Das Gebiet der oberen Donau im Imperium Romanum, Region im Umbruch 3, Berlin, 135–158. HORVAT, J., BAVDEK, A. 2009, Okra. Vrata med Sredozemljem in Srednjo Evropo / Ocra. he gateway between the Mediterranean and Central Europe. – Opera Instituti Archaeologici Sloveniae 17, Ljubljana. CHIABÀ, M. 2007, La romanizzazione tra Natisone e Isonzo: problemi e spunti per una rilessione. – In/V: M. Chiabà, P. Maggi, C. Magrini (eds./ur.), Le valli del Natisone e dell’ Isonzo tra Centroeuropa e Adriatico, Atti del convegno internazionale di studi, San Pietro al Natisone (UD) 15–16 settembre 2006, Studi e ricerche sulla Gallia Cisalpina 20, Trieste, 53–58. HULTSCH, F. 1971, Griechische und römische Metrologie. – Graz. CORNS, A., SHAW, R. 2009, High resolution 3-dimensional documentation of archaeological monuments & landscapes using airborne LiDAR. – Journal of Cultural Heritage 10/1, 72–77. KESSLER, D., TEMIN, P. 2008, Money and Prices in the Early Roman Empire – In/V: W. V. Harris (ed./ur.), he Monetary Systems of the Greeks and Romans, Oxford, 137–159. CRAWFORD, M. H. 1985, Coinage and money under the Roman Republic. Italy and the Mediterranean economy. – London. KLAVORA, F. 2003, Ampletium, Vliz, Plez, Flitsch, Belc. Kdo dal podobo je Bovškemu. O zgodovini, življenju, cesti in naseljih na Bovškem. – Tolmin. CRUTCHLEY, S. 2009, Ancient and modern: Combining different remote sensing techniques to interpret historic landscapes. – Journal of Cultural Heritage 10/1, 65–71. 254 DONEUS, M., BRIESE, C., FERA, M., JANNER, M. 2008, Archaeological prospection of forested areas using full-waveform airborne laser scanning. – Journal of Archaeological Science 35/4, 882–893. DEVEREUX, B. J., AMABLE, G. S., CROW, P., CLIFF, A. D. 2005, he potential of airborne lidar for detection of archaeological features under woodland canopies. – Antiquity 79/305, 648–660. ISTENIČ, J. 2005, Evidence for a very late Republican siege at Grad near Reka in Western Slovenia. – “Archäologie der Schlachtfelder – Militaria aus Zerstörungshorizonten”, Carnuntum Jahrbuch 2005, Wien, 77–87 [summary in German / povzetek v nemščini]. KOBLER, A., PFEIFER, N., OGRINC, P., TODOROVSKI, L., OŠTIR, K., DŽEROSKI, S. 2007, Repetitive interpolation: A robust algorithm for DTM generation from Aerial Laser Scanner Data in forested terrain. – Remote Sensing of Environment 108/1, 9–23. KOKALJ, Ž., OŠTIR, K., ZAKŠEK, K. 2008, Uporaba laserskega skeniranja za opazovanje preteklih pokrajin – primer okolice Kobarida / he application of laser scanning in the study of past cultural landscapes – Kobarid case study. – In/V: M. Čeh et al. (eds./ur.), Geografski informacijski sistemi v Sloveniji 2007–2008, Ljubljana, 321–329. KOKALJ, Ž., ZAKŠEK, K., OŠTIR, K. 2011, Application of sky-view factor for the visualization of historic landscape features in lidar-derived relief models. – Antiquity 85/326, 263–273. MLINAR, M., SVOLJŠAK, D., VIDRIH PERKO, V., ŽBONA TRKMAN, B. 2012, Kopalnico ima: arheološke raziskave in prezentacija rimske hiše z Mosta na Soči. – In/V: I. Lazar, B. Županek (eds./ur.), Emona: med Akvilejo in Panonijo / Emona: between Aquileia and Pannonia, Koper, 257–271. MLINAR, M., ŽBONA TRKMAN, B. 2008, Banjška planota in Trnovski gozd v luči novejših arheoloških najdb. – Goriški letnik 32/2008, 9–22. OSMUK, N. 1977, Kobarid. – Varstvo spomenikov 21, 229–230. KOS, P. 1997, Leksikon antične numizmatike. – Ljubljana. OSMUK, N. 1982, Kobarid. – Varstvo spomenikov 24, 172. KOS, P., ŽBONA TRKMAN, B. 2009, A hoard of Roman Republican and Norican coins from the vicinity of Kobarid / Zakladna najdba rimskih republikanskih in noriških novcev iz okolice Kobarida. – Arheološki vestnik 60, 271–281. LAHARNAR, B. 2011, Roman lead slingshots (glandes plumbae) in Slovenia / Rimski svinčeni izstrelki za pračo (glandes plumbae) iz Slovenije. – Arheološki vestnik 62, 339–374. LUIK, M. 2002, Die Funde aus den römischen Lagern um Numantia im Römisch-Germanischen Zentralmuseum. – Kataloge vor- und frühgeschichtlicher Altertümer 31, Mainz. MAI, L. R., YOUNG OWL, M., KERSTING, P. M. 2005, he Cambridge Dictionary of Human Biology and Evolution. – Cambridge. MARCHESETTI, C. 1887, Notizie interne. – Bollettino della Società Adriatica di Scienze Naturali in Trieste 10, Trieste, [Marchesetti’s report / Marchesettijevo poročilo], IV–VIII. MARCHESETTI, C. 1890, Notizie interne. – Bollettino della Società Adriatica di Scienze Naturali in Trieste 12, Trieste, [Marchesetti’s report / Marchesettijevo poročilo], XIII–XVII. MARCHESETTI, C. 1903, I castellieri preistorici di Trieste e della regione Giulia. – Atti del Museo civico di storia naturale 10/4, Trieste. MIŠKEC, A. 2003, he Early Romanization of the Southeastern Alpine Region in the Light of Numismatic Finds / Zgodnja romanizacija jugovzhodnoalpskega prostora v luči numizmatičnih najdb. – Arheološki vestnik 54, 369–379. MLEKUŽ, D. 2009, Poplavne ravnice v novi luči: LiDAR in tafonomija aluvialnih krajin. – Arheo 26, 7–22 [summary in English / povzetek v angleščini]. MLINAR, M. 2006, Kobarid – Za gradom (v bližini Šance). – Varstvo spomenikov, Poročila 39–41/00–04, 72. MLINAR, M. 2009, Bovec. – Varstvo spomenikov, Poročila 45/08, 23. MLINAR, M. 2011, Arheološka zbirka. – In/V: D. Fortunat Černilogar (ed./ur.), Naplavine obsoške zgodovine, Vodnik po stalni razstavi Tolminskega muzeja, Tolmin, 12–33. MLINAR, M., GERBEC, T. 2011, Keltskih konj topot. Najdišče Bizjakova hiša v Kobaridu. Katalog razstave / Hear the horses of the Celts. he Bizjakova hiša site in Kobarid. Exhibition catalogue. – Tolmin. OSMUK, N. 1984, Kobarid. – Varstvo spomenikov 26, 231–232. OSMUK, N. 1997, Kobarid od prazgodovine do antike. Kratek zgodovinski pregled obdobij in pripadajočih najdišč. – In/V: Z. Likar, A. Raspet, Ž. Cimprič (eds./ur.), Kobarid, Kobarid, 9–16. OSMUK, N. 1998, Le sanctuaire protohistorique de Kobarid (Slovénie). – Instrumentum 7, 13. OSMUK, N. 2006a, Bovec. – Varstvo spomenikov, Poročila 42/05, 12–14. OSMUK, N. 2006b, Podbela. – Varstvo spomenikov, Poročila 39–41/00–04, 144. PLETERSKI, A. 2008, Kuhinjska kultura v zgodnjem srednjem veku / Küchenkultur im Frühen Mittelalter. – Ljubljana. RUTAR, S. 1882, Zgodovina Tolminskega, to je: zgodovinski dogodki sodnijskih okrajev Tolmin, Bolec in Cerkno ž njih prirodoznanskim in statističnim opisom. – Gorica. RUTAR, S. 1890, Prazgodovinska in rimska razkopavanja po Slovenskem l. 1889. – In/V: A. Bartel (ed./ur.), Letopis Matice slovenske za leto 1890, Ljubljana, 117–130. SITTLER, B. 2004, Revealing Historical Landscapes by Using Airborne Laser-Scanning. A 3D-Modell of Ridge and Furrow in Forests near Rastatt (Germany). – International Archives of the Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Sciences 36/8, 258–261. SVOLJŠAK, D. 1986, Most na Soči in njegovi obrambni sistemi. – In/V: P. Medović (ed./ur.), Odbrambeni sistemi u praistoriji i antici na tlu Jugoslavije, Referati XII Kongresa arheologa Jugoslavije, Novi Sad, 1984, Materiali 22, Novi Sad, 50–54. SVOLJŠAK, D. 2002, Arheološka podoba Bovškega. – In/V: J. Kunaver (ed./ur.), Soški razgovori 1, Zbornik za domoznanstvo Zgodovinske sekcije KD Golobar, Bovec, 261–277. SVOLJŠAK, D., ŽBONA TRKMAN, B. 1986, Novi napisi v Posočju. – Arheološki vestnik 37, 385–397 [summary in German / povzetek v nemščini]. ŠAŠEL KOS, M. 1997, he End of the Norican Kingdom and the Formation of the Provinces of Noricum and Pannonia. – In/V: B. Djurić, I. Lazar (eds./ur.), Akten des IV. Internationalen Kolloquiums über Probleme des provinzialrömischen Kunstschafens / Akti IV. mednarodnega kolokvija o problemih rimske provincialne umetnosti, Celje, 8.–12. Mai, maj 1995, Situla 36, Ljubljana, 21–42. 255 ŠAŠEL KOS, M. 2000, Caesar, Illyricum, and the hinterland of Aquileia. – In/V: G. Urso (ed./ur.) L’ultimo Cesare, Scritti, riforme, progetti, poteri, congiure, Atti del convegno internazionale, Cividale del Friuli, 16–18 settembre 1999, Centro ricerche e documentazione sull’antichità classica, Monograie 20, Roma, 277–304. ŠTULAR, B. 2011a, he use of lidar-derived relief models in archaeological topography. he Kobarid region (Slovenia) case study. – Arheološki vestnik 62, 393–432 [summary in Slovene / povzetek v slovenščini]. ŠTULAR, B. 2011b, Mreža poti / Path Network. – In/V: S. Ciglenečki, Z. Modrijan, T. Milavec, Poznoantična utrjena naselbina Tonovcov grad pri Kobaridu, Naselbinski ostanki in interpretacija / Late Antique fortiied settlement Tonovcov grad near Kobarid, Settlement remains and interpretation, Opera Instituti Archaeologici Sloveniae 23, Ljubljana, 53–64. 256 ŠTULAR, B., KOKALJ, Ž., OŠTIR, K., NUNINGER, L. 2012, Visualization of lidar-derived relief models for detection of archaeological features. – Journal of Archaeological Science 39/11, 3354–3360. TAGLIAFERRI, A. 1986, Coloni e legionari Romani nel Friuli celtico. Una ricerca archeologica per la storia. – Pordenone. WHITLEY, T. G. 2004, Causality and Cross-Purposes in Archaeological Predictive Modeling. – In/V: K. Fischer Ausserer, W. Börner, M. Goriany, L. Karlhuber-Vöckl (eds./ur.), Enter the past, he e-way into the four dimensions of cultural heritage, Proceedings of the 30th conference, BAR International series 1227, Oxford, 236–239. ZACCARIA, C. 2007, Aspetti amministrativi in età romana. – In/V: M. Chiabà, P. Maggi, C. Magrini, (eds./ur.), Le valli del Natisone e dell’Isonzo tra Centroeuropa e Adriatico, Atti del convegno internazionale di studi San Pietro al Natisone (UD) 15-16 settembre 2006, Studi e ricerche sulla Gallia Cisalpina 20, Trieste, 129–144. ROMAN MILITARY EQUIPMENT FROM THE TOWN CENTRE OF POETOVIO RIMSKA VOJAŠKA OPREMA IZ SREDIŠČA PETOVIONE Maja Janežič, Evgen Lazar Maja Janežič, Evgen Lazar Abstract Izvleček his article presents a saddle horn, parts of equine equipment, armour scales and other items of Roman military equipment, found in 2010 and 2011 during archaeological rescue excavations at the site of Vičava in Ptuj, in the immediate vicinity of the presumed town centre of Poetovio. V članku so predstavljeni rog konjskega sedla, deli konjske opreme, luske oklepa ter drugi predmeti rimske vojaške opreme, ki so bili v letih 2010 in 2011 najdeni med zaščitnimi arheološkimi raziskavami na Vičavi na Ptuju, v neposredni bližini domnevnega foruma Petovione. Keywords: Poetovio, Vičava, Roman military equipment, Roman equine equipment, saddle horn Ključne besede: Petoviona, Vičava, rimska vojaška oprema, rimska konjska oprema, rog sedla History of research at the site of the former barracks (ig. 1) Zgodovina raziskav območja nekdanje vojašnice (sl. 1) While digging a construction pit for barracks’ foundations in 1905, the poorly preserved remains of Roman buildings and a multitude of Roman small inds were discovered.1 he irst extensive research in this area was conducted by Balduin Saria, who led the excavations in the barracks’ courtyard in 1912.2 he remains of a paved street with colonnade foundations and a drainage channel were found, as well as exceptionally well-built structures with foundations built from river cobble and mortar downstream of the River Drava. he buildings were richly decorated, supporting the assumption that this area had been the central part of Poetovio.3 In 1975, the Institute for the Protection of Cultural Heritage of Slovenia (Institute for Monument Protection, at the time) researched the river cobble-built foundations of a building and the remains of a drainage channel west of the barracks; the small inds were attributed to the second half of the 1st century and the 3rd century.4 In 1992, the institute conducted archaeological research at several locations in the immediate vicinity of the barracks. hese unearthed Roman building foundations and road remains.5 Med izkopom gradbene jame za temelje vojašnice leta 1905 so odkrili slabo ohranjene ostanke rimskodobnih objektov in veliko rimskih drobnih najdb.1 Prve večje raziskave na tem območju je opravil Balduin Saria, ki je leta 1912 vodil izkopavanja na dvorišču vojašnice.2 Odkrili so ostanke tlakovane ulice s temelji stebrišč in odtočnim kanalom ter v smeri toka reke Drave zelo kakovostno zgrajene objekte s temelji iz rečnih oblic in malte. Objekti so bili bogato okrašeni, kar se ujema z domnevo, da je bilo to območje osrednji del Petovione.3 Leta 1975 je Zavod za varstvo kulturne dediščine Slovenije (takrat Zavod za spomeniško varstvo) zahodno od vojašnice raziskal iz rečnih oblic zgrajene temelje stavbe ter ostanke odtočnega kanala; drobne najdbe sodijo v drugo polovico 1. in v 3. stoletje.4 Leta 1992 je zavod izvedel arheološke raziskave na več mestih v neposredni bližini vojašnice. Odkrili so rimske temelje stavb in ostanke ceste.5 1 2 3 4 5 Klemenc, Saria 1936, 33. Saria 1922, 204. Horvat et al. 2003, 161–163, ig. 8. Tušek 1977; Mikl-Curk, Tušek 1985, 295–313, pls. 1–7. Tušek 1995, 134. Raziskave v letih 2010 in 2011 (sl. 2) Zavod za varstvo kulturne dediščine Slovenije, Center za preventivno arheologijo, je med 12. 10. 2010 in 30. 8. 2011 izvedel zaščitne arheološke raziskave v notranjosti nekda1 2 3 4 5 Klemenc, Saria 1936, 33. Saria 1922, 204. Horvat et al. 2003, 161–163, sl. 8. Tušek 1977; Mikl-Curk, Tušek 1985, 295–313, t. 1–7. Tušek 1995, 134. 257 Archeological researches in years: Arheološke raziskave v letih: 1912 structure / struktura excavation area / rob izkopanega polja 1975 structure / struktura excavation area / rob izkopanega polja 1992 structure / struktura excavation area / rob izkopanega polja 2010/11 structure / struktura excavation area / rob izkopanega polja Reconstruction of Roman Roads Rekonstrukcija odsekov rimskih cest Figure 1. Ptuj, Vičava, area of the former barracks. Archaeological research from 1912 (amended ater Klemenc, Saria 1936, 34), 1975, 1992 (amended ater Lubšina Tušek 2012, appendix 1) and 2010/11; and reconstruction of the road course (E. Lazar; based on 2010 cadastre). All depicted structures are from the Roman period. Slika 1. Ptuj, Vičava, območje nekdanje vojašnice. Arheološke raziskave iz leta 1912 (dopolnjeno po Klemenc, Saria 1936, 34), 1975, 1992 (dopolnjeno po Lubšina Tušek 2012, priloga 1) in 2010/11 ter rekonstrukcija poteka ceste (izdelava E. Lazar; podlaga kataster iz l. 2010). Vse prikazane strukture so iz rimske dobe. 258 Research in 2010 and 2011 (ig. 2) he Institute for the Protection of Cultural Heritage of Slovenia, Centre for Preventive Archaeology, conducted rescue archaeological research in the interior of the former barracks and directly alongside it between 12th October 2010 and 30th August 2011. Due to concerns about the stability of the building, excavations were limited to the depth necessary for renovation works. Archaeological research inside and outside the building encompassed ca. 750 m². he interior excavations were conducted within the framework of the existing layout (nine rooms of various sizes). Only the foundations of the Roman walls and columns were preserved. hey were built from river cobble and mortar. In Room 1, the remains of a Roman road were unearthed. It was lanked on both sides by buildings with colonnades. he road ran south-west to north-east (ig. 3); it was 6 m wide and lay perpendicular to the street discovered in 1912.6 here were several construction phases and 6 Saria 1922, 204. nje vojašnice in tik ob njej. Zaradi statike so bile raziskave omejene na izkop do globine, ki je bila nujna za izvedbo obnove stavbe. Arheološke raziskave znotraj in zunaj stavbe so zajele približno 750 m2 veliko površino. Izkopavanja znotraj stavbe so potekala v okvirih notranje prostorske ureditve (devet prostorov različnih velikosti). Ohranili so se le temelji rimskih zidov in stebrov. Grajeni so bili iz rečnih prodnikov in malte. V prostoru 1 smo izkopali ostanke rimske ceste. Na obeh straneh so jo omejevale stavbe s stebriščem. Cesta je potekala v smeri jugozahod‒ severovzhod (sl. 3), bila je široka 6 m in je ležala pravokotno na ulico, odkrito med raziskavami leta 1912.6 Cesta in stavbe ob njej so imele več faz pozidave in uporabe. Znotraj stebrišč nismo odkrili tlakovanih hodnih površin, ampak le zbita glinena tla. Pod cestiščem je najverjetneje potekala kamnita kloaka oz. kanalizacija, ki so jo v celoti uničili ob ponovni uporabi njenih gradbenih delov (kamnov) v srednjem veku. 6 Saria 1922, 204. stages of use discernible on the road and the buildings. No paved walking surfaces were found inside the colonnades, just a compact clay loor. A stone cloaca, i.e. sewer, probably once ran under the road surface; it had likely been entirely destroyed when the road’s building parts (stone slabs) were reused during the Middle Ages. Two narrower (ca. 1.5 and 2 m wide) roads (ig. 4) were discovered along the north-western face of the barracks, which were not detected inside the building; it is assumed these converge perpendicularly to the larger road discovered in Room 1 of the barracks. he streets were situated between walls and were paved with cobbles, similarly to the larger road to which they adjoin. According to small inds, especially the pottery, the abovementioned architectural elements were from later than the end of the 1st or the beginning of the 2nd century. In areas where the entire archaeological record could be researched, postholes and imprints of wooden beams were found, probably the remains of wooden buildings under the 2nd century structures and layers. Traces of such constructions appeared at both outermost edges of the excavated area (north-east and south-west); we therefore assume that these extend over the entire area of the building. Wooden construction remains with the highest expressive value were discovered in the north-eastern part of the barracks, where distinct beam impressions, running perpendicularly to each other were visible (ig. 5); these belonged to buildings with undetermined functions. Similar, but far less distinct and expressive wooden construction remains were also discovered outside the barracks. Small inds indicate the wooden structures belong to the irst half of the 1st century. Roman military equipment inds Copper alloy armour scales (ig. 6: 1; ig. 8) were tied together at the sides with a thin wire having an oval crosssection. he individual scales are 2.6 cm long, 1.3 cm wide and 0.1 cm thick, rectangular in shape, with a rounded bottom side. hey have two holes each on the remaining three straight sides and were found in a layer (SU 623) with Roman inds from the second half of the 1st century. he bronze sword handguard plate is of an oval shape (ig. 6: 2; thickness 0.1 cm, length 4.2 cm, width 7.3 cm, weight 7 g) and was tinned on the upper and lower surface.7 It was found in a layer (SU 328) containing Roman pottery, which cannot be more precisely dated. he handguard 7 The composition of the metals or alloys was determined using the PIXE method on a tandem accelerator of the Jožef Stefan Institute by Žiga Šmit. The composition research was conducted in the framework of the Portable archaeological heritage – archaeological and archaeometric research project led by Janka Istenič. 1-9 research area / območje raziskav building foundations / temelji vojašnice spatial arrangement / prostori znotraj vojašnice Ob severozahodnem licu vojašnice smo odkrili dve ožji (približno 1,5 m in 2 m široki) cesti (sl. 4), ki ju znotraj zgradbe nismo zasledili; sklepamo, da sta se pravokotno stikali z večjo ulico, ki smo jo odkrili v prostoru 1 v vojašnici. Ulici sta se nahajali med zidovoma in sta bili tlakovani s prodom na enak način kot večja cesta, s katero sta se stikali. Glede na drobne najdbe, predvsem keramiko, so navedeni arhitekturni elementi mlajši od konca 1. oz. od začetka 2. stoletja. Na območjih, kjer smo smeli raziskati celoten arheološki zapis, smo pod strukturami in plastmi iz 2. stoletja odkrili stojke in odtise lesenih tramov, verjetno ostanke lesenih stavb. Sledovi take gradnje so se pokazali na obeh skrajnih koncih izkopnega polja (SV in JZ del), zato domnevamo, da se razprostira na celotnem območju stavbe. Ostaline lesenih stavb z največjo pričevalno vrednostjo smo izkopali v severovzhodnem delu vojašnice, kjer so bili vidni izraziti odtisi tramov (sl. 5), ki so potekali pravokotno drug na drugega in so pripadali objektom, katerih funkcije ni bilo mogoče določiti. Podobne, vendar veliko manj jasne in povedne ostanke lesene gradnje smo odkrili tudi zunaj vojašnice. Drobne najdbe kažejo na datacijo lesenih objektov v prvo polovico 1. stoletja. Figure 2. Ptuj, Vičava. Area of archaeological research in the interior of the former barracks and alongside it in 2010 and 2011 (S. Pukšič; based on 2010 cadastre). Slika 2. Ptuj, Vičava. Območje arheoloških raziskav v notranjosti nekdanje vojašnice in ob njej v letih 2010 in 2011 (izdelava S. Pukšič; podlaga kataster iz l. 2010). Najdbe rimske vojaške opreme Luske oklepa iz bakrove zlitine (sl. 6: 1; sl. 8) so ob straneh med sabo povezane s tenko žico ovalnega preseka. Posamezna luska je 2,6 cm dolga, 1,3 cm široka in 0,1 cm debela, pravokotne oblike in z zaobljeno spodnjo stranico. Na treh ravnih straneh ima po dve luknjici. Najdene so bile v plasti (SE 623) z rimskodobnimi najdbami iz druge polovice 1. stoletja. 259 cloaca / robova kloake porticus / obrisi temeljev stebrišča street / robova ulice 3 4 street / robova ulice 260 remainings of the wooden structures / linije robov ostankov lesenih objektov plate belonged to a Mainz type sword (this type was in use from the Augustan era to the mid-1st century).8 A circular phalera (ig. 6: 3; diameter 4.8 cm) from a copper, zinc, tin, and lead alloy has silvering9 remains on its front, as well as barely visible, but conirmed traces of vegetable motif decoration. he shallow grooves were probably illed with niello at irst. In the centre of the phalera is a round hole, with two hinge axes on the back, as well as three ca. 2.2 cm long fastening rings. It was found in a layer (SU 1378) dated to the second half of the 1st century and the irst half of the 2nd century, according to imported pottery. A similar phalera with vegetative decoration was found in Augusta Raurica, where it was dated to the post-Tiberian era according to context.10 A round pendant (ig. 6: 4; ig. 9) from a copper alloy was made from two parts of hammered sheet metal. hey were joined by a central rivet with a large semi-circular head and smaller rivets at the sides: 15 in total, of which ive were preserved. here is a fastening halter at the top. he middle part of the pendant front has a low relief decoration: a rosette and hammered dots. he length of the pendant is 8.9 cm, width 8.2 cm, sheet metal thickness 0.1 cm, and 8 9 10 Istenič 2009, 268–269. See fn. 7. Deschler-Erb 1999, 59, pl. 33: 645. Bronasti branik ročaja meča ovalne oblike (sl. 6: 2; debelina 0,1 cm, dolžina 4,2 cm, širina 7,3 cm, teža 7 g) je bil na zgornji in spodnji površini pokositren.7 Najden je bil v plasti z rimskodobno lončenino (SE 328), ki ne omogoča natančnejše datacije. Branik je pripadal meču tipa Mainz (tip je bil v uporabi od avgustejske dobe do sredine 1. stoletja).8 Okrogla falera (sl. 6: 3; premer 4,8 cm) iz zlitine bakra, cinka kositra in svinca ima na licu ostanke posrebritve9 in slabo vidne a nedvomne sledove okrasa z rastlinskim motivom. Plitvi žlebovi so bili prvotno verjetno zapolnjeni z niellom. Na sredini falere je okrogla luknjica, na hrbtni strani pa sta zobca tečaja ter tri pribl. 2,2 cm dolge zanke za jermene. Najdena je bila v plasti (SE 1378), ki je po uvoženi lončenini datirana v drugo polovico 1. stoletja in v prvo polovico 2. stoletja. Podobna falera z rastlinskim okrasom je bila najdena v Augusti Raurici, kjer je glede na kontekst datirana v potiberijsko obdobje.10 7 8 9 10 Sestavo kovin oziroma zlitin je z metodo PIXE na tandemskem pospeševalniku Inštituta Jožef Stefan določil Žiga Šmit. Raziskave kovin oz. zlitin so potekale v okviru raziskovalnega programa Premična kulturna dediščina – arheološke in arheometrične raziskave, ki ga vodi Janka Istenič. Istenič 2009, 268–269. Glej op. 7. Deschler-Erb 1999, 59, t. 33: 645. Figure 3. Ptuj, Vičava, area of the former barracks. Road course with colonnades in Room 1 (photo D. Kovačič). Slika 3. Ptuj, Vičava, območje nekdanje vojašnice. Potek ceste s stebriščem v prostoru 1 (foto D. Kovačič). Figure 4. Ptuj, Vičava, area of the former barracks. Streets of 2 m and 1.5 m width along the north-western face of the former barracks (photo D. Kovačič). Slika 4. Ptuj, Vičava, območje nekdanje vojašnice. Ulici širine približno 2 m in 1,5 m ob severozahodnem licu nekdanje vojašnice (foto D. Kovačič). Figure 5. Ptuj, Vičava, area of the former barracks. Remains of wooden structures in Room 8 (photo D. Kovačič). Slika 5. Ptuj, Vičava, območje nekdanje vojašnice. Ostanki lesenih objektov v prostoru 8 (foto D. Kovačič). 261 Figure 6. Ptuj, Vičava, area of the former barracks. 1 armour scales; 2 sword handguard plate; 3 phalera; 4 pendant; 5 pendant; 6 saddle horn. All copper alloy or copper. Scale = 1 : 2 (drawing 1–2, 4–6 M. Janežič; 3 I. Murgelj). Slika 6. Ptuj, Vičava, območje nekdanje vojašnice. 1 luske oklepa; 2 branik meča; 3 falera; 4 obesek; 5 obesek; 6 rog sedla. Vse bakrove zlitine ali baker. M = 1 : 2 (risba 1–2, 4–6 M. Janežič; 3 I. Murgelj). weight 66 g. It was found in a layer (SU 261) containing only fragments of Roman pottery, which could not be more precisely dated. A similar item, partly tinned and dated to the 1st and 2nd centuries, was found in Newstead in Scotland.11 It has a similar basic shape to the Poetovio pendant, a large central rivet and numerous prongs with rivets at the sides. 262 11 Bishop 1988, igs. 40–42; Junkelmann 1992, 82, ig. 93. Okrogel obesek (sl. 6: 4; sl. 9) iz bakrove zlitine je narejen iz dveh delov tolčene pločevine. Med seboj sta spojena z zakovico v sredini, ki ima veliko polkrožno glavico, in z manjšimi zakovicami ob straneh, od katerih jih je ohranjenih pet, vseh skupaj pa jih je bilo pa petnajst. Na vrhu ima zanko za obešanje. Osrednji del lica obeska ima nizek reliefni okras: rozeto in iztolčene bunčice. Dolžina obeska je 8,9 cm, širina 8,2 cm, debelina pločevine je 0,1 cm in tehta 66 g. Najden he Scottish pendant has 28 prongs, although it does not have a loop halter at the top, but strap fasteners on the back. Such pendants were probably attached to the chest or thigh straps of a horse. A brass12 oval shaped pendant with a palmette-shaped ending (ig. 6: 5; length 10.2 cm, width 5.2 cm, thickness 0.2 cm, weight 36 g) is also part of equine equipment. It was hung on a brass13 strap itting with a hole, indicating that it was fastened to the strap by a rivet. It stems from a layer (SU 1492), which also yielded sigillata and thin-walled pottery ware from the 1st century. Figure 7. Ptuj, Vičava, area of the former barracks. 1 button fastener with trapezoidal loop, bone; 2–4 projectile heads of square crosssection and tang, iron. Scale = 1 : 2 (drawing M. Janežič). Slika 7. Ptuj, Vičava, območje nekdanje vojašnice. 1 gumb s trapezoidnim zaključkom, kost; 2–4 izstrelki konic kvadratnega preseka in s trnom, železo. Merilo = 1 : 2 (risba M. Janežič). Five pendants of this type were found in Augusta Raurica, one of them in an Augustan-Tiberian context.14 A particularly intriguing ind is a hammered copper or copper alloy sheet metal representing the rear right saddle horn (ig. 6: 6; ig. 10). It has a series of holes with a diameter of 0.4 cm at the sides, distributed 1.2 cm apart. here were 0.3 cm wide ribs running along the entire preserved surface along the holes; these ran ca. 0.5 cm apart and ca. 1 cm away from the holes. he height of the preserved sheet metal is 20 cm, the width 15.5 cm (not straightened out), and thickness 0.1 cm; its weight is 191 g. It was discovered in the illing of a modern interment (SU 1153), together with three unrecognisable bronze objects and a fragment of Roman pottery. Figure 8. Ptuj, Vičava, area of the former barracks. Armour scales (photo D. Kovačič). Slika 8. Ptuj, Vičava, območje nekdanje vojašnice. Luske oklepa (foto D. Kovačič). Saddle horns were used by the Celts as early as the 2nd and 1st centuries BC; the Romans used them at least until the beginning of the 4th century, some believe even until the 6th century, when saddles with stirrups started appearing.15 Several depictions of saddle horns are known from stone monuments and archaeological inds (leather fragments and horn sheet metal).16 hese show that horned saddles had prongs at the sides reminiscent of horns. he front two horns enabled a better hold of the saddle with the thighs and were crucial in mounting and dismounting the horse; the rear two prevented the rider from falling back, ensuring excellent stability in the saddle. je bil v plasti (SE 261); vsebovala je le odlomke rimskodobne lončenine, ki ne omogočajo ožje datacije plasti. Podoben predmet, deloma pokositren in datiran v 1. in 2. stoletje, je bil najden v Newsteadu na Škotskem.11 S ptujskim obeskom imata podobno osnovno obliko, osrednjo veliko zakovico in številne izrastke z zakovicami ob straneh. Obesek s Škotskega jih ima 28. Ta obesek nima zanke na vrhu, temveč na hrbtni strani zanke za jermen. Takšni obeski so bili verjetno pritrjeni na prsno ali stegensko jermenje konja. In Newstead, Scotland, metal parts of two Roman fourhorned saddles (types A and B) were found. Each saddle had four horn plates. In the type B saddle (ig. 12) the plates of the front horns are shaped like shoe soles, while the rear plates have an L-shape. here were visible remains of leather on the plate’s exterior, as well as remains of stitching on one of the plates.17 H konjski opremi sodi tudi medeninast12 obesek ovalne oblike z zaključkom v obliki palmete (sl. 6: 5; dolžina 10,2 cm, širina 5,2 cm, debelina 0,2 cm, teža 36 g). Obešen je na medeninast13 jermenski okov z luknjico, ki kaže, da je bil z zakovico pritrjen na jermen. Izvira iz plasti (SE 1492), v kateri smo našli sigilatno posodje in keramiko tankih sten iz 1. stoletja. 12 13 14 15 16 17 See fn. 7. See fn. 7. Deschler-Erb 1999, 52, pl. 25: 501–504. Connolly, van Driel-Murray 1991, 35. Junkelmann 1992, 35–36. Connolly, van Driel-Murray 1991, ig. 7. Figure 9. Ptuj, Vičava, area of the former barracks. Pendant front (photo D. Kovačič). Slika 9. Ptuj, Vičava, območje nekdanje vojašnice. Lice obeska (foto D. Kovačič). Pet obeskov tega tipa so našli v Augusti Raurici, enega izmed njih v avgustejsko-tiberijskem kontekstu.14 11 12 13 14 Bishop 1988, sl. 40–42; Junkelmann 1992, 82, sl. 93. Glej op. 7. Glej op. 7. Deschler-Erb 1999, 52, t. 25: 501–504. 263 Figure 10. Ptuj, Vičava, area of the former barracks. Saddle horn from front and rear (photo D. Kovačič). Slika 10. Ptuj, Vičava, območje nekdanje vojašnice. Rog sedla s sprednje in zadnje strani (foto D. Kovačič). Figure 11. Ptuj, Vičava, area of the former barracks. Stone ball (photo D. Kovačič). Slika 11. Ptuj, Vičava, območje nekdanje vojašnice. Kamnita krogla (foto D. Kovačič). Zelo zanimiva najdba je tolčena pločevina iz bakra ali bakrove zlitine, ki predstavlja zadnji desni rog sedla (sl. 6: 6; sl. 10). Ob straneh ima niz luknjic premera 0,4 cm, ki so med seboj oddaljene 1,2 cm. Vzdolž luknjic po celotni ohranjeni površini potekata 0,3 cm široki rebri, ki sta med seboj oddaljeni približno 0,5 cm, od luknjic pa približno 1 cm. Višina ohranjene pločevine je 20 cm, širina 15,5 cm (neraztegnjena) in debelina 0,1 cm, njena teža pa 191 g. Odkrita je bila v polnilu novoveškega vkopa (SE 1153), skupaj s tremi nerazpoznavnimi bronastimi predmeti in odlomkom rimske lončenine. Some examples have carved signs on the inner side, which probably helped the craftsman in making the saddle.18 Fragments of Roman four-horned saddles are known from Newstead, Scotland, and three sites in Germany (Rottweil – ig. 13, Mainz-Weisenau and Moers-Asberg), as well as from numerous other sites. Geographically closest to the Poetovio example is a saddle horn from Vinkovci in Croatia.19 At none of the sites were saddle horns found together with nails, showing that the discussed metal plates were not ittings. he holes were most likely used for stitching the plates to a leather cloth.20 Sedla z rogovi so uporabljali Kelti že v 2. in 1. stoletju pr. Kr. Rimljani so jih uporabljali najmanj do začetka 4. stoletja, nekateri menijo, da še do 6. stoletja, ko so se začela pojavljati sedla z stremeni.15 Znanih je več upodobitev sedel z rogovi na kamnitih spomenikih in arheoloških najdb (deli usnja in pločevine rogov).16 Te kažejo, da so imela sedla z rogovi na vogalih nastavke, ki spominjajo na rogove. Sprednja rogova sta bila namenjena boljšemu oprijemu stegen s sedlom in sta bila ključna pri zajahanju in razjahanju konja, zadnja dva sta preprečevala padec nazaj in s tem zagotavljala dobro stabilnost v sedlu. V Newsteadu (Škotska) so našli kovinske dele dveh sedel z rogovi (tip A in B). Vsako sedlo ima štiri kose pločevine. Pri sedlu tipa B (sl. 12) sta pločevini sprednjih rogov po obliki podobni podplatu čevlja, pločevini zadnjih pa imata obliko črke L. Na zunanji strani pločevine so vidni ostanki usnja in na eni izmed pločevin tudi ostanki šivov.17 In the 1980s, the issue of Roman four-horned saddles was extensively studied by Peter Connolly, who made several 18 19 264 20 Junkelmann 1992, 41. Hoiler 1912, 21. Junkelmann 1992, 44. 15 16 17 Connolly, van Driel-Murray 1991, 35. Junkelmann 1992, 35–36. Connolly, van Driel-Murray 1991, sl. 7. 14 12 15 Figure 12. Newstead. Metal saddle parts with leather remains (ater Connolly, van DrielMurray 1991, ig. 7). Slika 12. Newstead. Kovinski deli sedla z ostanki usnja (po Connolly, van Driel-Murray 1991, sl. 7). Figure 13. Rottweil. Full saddle horn set, 1st century (ater Junkelmann 1992, ig. 43). Slika 13. Rottweil. Popolna garnitura rogov, 1. stoletje (po Junkelmann 1992, sl. 43). Figure 14. Connolly’s wooden saddle horn reconstruction (ater Junkelmann 1992, ig. 45). Slika 14. Conollyjeva lesena rekonstrukcija sedla z rogovi (po Junkelmann 1992, sl. 45). 13 Na nekaterih primerkih so na notranji strani vrezani znaki, ki so bili verjetno v pomoč mojstru pri izdelavi sedla.18 Deli sedel z rogovi so znani iz Newsteada (Škotska) in treh najdišč v Nemčiji (Rottweil – sl. 13, Mainz-Weisenau in Moers-Asberg), poleg tega pa tudi s številnih drugih najdišč. Geografsko najbližje ptujskemu primerku je rog sedla iz Vinkovcev na Hrvaškem.19 Figure 15. Simkins’ reconstruction of movable horns on a saddle (ater Junkelmann 1992, ig. 71). Slika 15. Simkinsova rekonstrukcija sedla s premičnimi rogovi (po Junkelmann 1992, sl. 71). Hkrati z rogovi sedel niti v enem primeru niso bili najdeni žebljički, kar jasno kaže, da obravnavani kovinski deli niso bili okovi. Najverjetneje je bilo nanje skozi luknjice našito usnje.20 diferent examples of this saddle type and tested them. His saddles had a wooden construction and often cracked during riding (ig. 14). Fixed wooden horns were efective in mounting a horse, but restricted the mobility of the rider while riding.21 Assisted by two experienced saddle-makers, Michael Simkins made a saddle reconstruction with movable horns.22 Metal plates were sewn tightly to a well-padded saddle illed with felt, and a leather cover was sewn over the sheet metal (ig. 15). In this way, the horns remained movable, which proved to be a considerable advantage in riding, as V 80. letih prejšnjega stoletja se je s problematiko rimskih sedel z rogovi ukvarjal Peter Connolly, ki je izdelal več različnih primerkov tega tipa sedla in jih preizkušal. Njegova sedla so imela leseno konstrukcijo in so pri jahanju večkrat počila (sl. 14). Nepremikajoči se leseni rogovi so sicer bili učinkoviti pri vzpenjanju na konja, a so ovirali mobilnost jezdeca pri ježi.21 Michael Simkins je s pomočjo dveh izkušenih sedlarjev naredil rekonstrukcijo sedla s premičnimi rogovi.22 Na dobro oblazinjeno sedlo so s tesnimi šivi pritrdili rogove iz pločevine, napolnjene s klobučevino, ter čez pločevino prišili usnje (sl. 15). Tako so rogovi ostali premakljivi, kar je po18 19 20 21 22 Junkelmann 1992, 47, ig. 18. Junkelmann 1992, 62. 21 22 Junkelmann 1992, 41. Hoiler 1912, 21. Junkelmann 1992, 44. Junkelmann 1992, 47, sl. 18. Junkelmann 1992, 62. 265 menilo veliko prednost pri ježi. Jezdec se je na takem sedlu lažje gibal, kar je bilo dobrodošlo pri ježi ter pri zajahanju oziroma razjahanju konja.23 Figure 16. Ptuj, Vičava, area of the former barracks. Tegula fragment with stamp of legio XIII Gemina (photo D. Kovačič). Slika 16. Ptuj, Vičava, območje nekdanje vojašnice. Odlomek tegule z žigom legije XIII Gemine (foto D. Kovačič). K vojaški opremi morda spada tudi koščen gumb s trapezoidno zanko (sl. 7: 1), dolg 2,4 cm, širok 1,7 cm in težek 2 g. Izvira iz plasti (SE 1485), ki je vsebovala veliko sigilatnega posodja iz sredine 1. stoletja. Gre za večnamensko uporaben predmet, pogost v vojaških in civilnih okoljih. Pri vojaški noši je služil za spenjanje ogrinjala in obešanje meča na pas. Z bolj grobimi primerki so zapenjali tovore, šotore in večje transportne vreče. V Augusti Raurici, so podobni gumbi datirani v 1. stoletje.24 Tri železne predmete (sl. 7: 2–4) smo uvrstili med izstrelke. Morda gre za konice pilumov. Izstrelka sl. 7: 2 (dolžina 6,6 cm, širina 1,2 cm, teža 13 g) in sl. 7: 3 (dolžina 6,2 cm, širina 1 cm, teža 7 g) sta bila najdena v plasti (SE 632) z rimskimi najdbami, s konca 1. stoletja, izstrelek sl. 7: 4 (dolžina 7,1 cm, širina 1,2 cm, teža 36 g) pa je iz plasti (SE 1099), v kateri ni bilo drugih najdb; ležal je neposredno pod plastjo (SE 1095), ki je vsebovala rimske, a časovno ožje neopredeljive predmete. the rider could move more easily during riding, as well as in mounting and dismounting a horse.23 he military equipment perhaps also includes a bone button-and-loop fastener with a trapezoidal loop (ig. 7: 1); 2.4 cm long, 1.7 cm wide, and weighing 2 g. It was found in a layer (SU 1485) containing a large amount of sigillata from the mid-1st century. his is a versatile item frequent in military and civilian environments. It was used in military garb to fasten the cloak and the sword to the belt. More coarse examples were used to fasten loads, tents and larger transport bags. In Augusta Raurica, similar fasteners were dated to the 1st century.24 hree iron items (ig. 7: 2–4) were interpreted as projectiles, perhaps pilum heads. he projectiles ig. 7: 2 (length 6.6 cm, width 1.2 cm, weight 13 g) and ig. 7: 3 (length 6.2 cm, width 1 cm, weight 7 g) were found in a layer (SU 632) with Roman inds from the end of the 1st century, while projectile ig. 7: 4 (length 7.1 cm, width 1.2 cm, weight 36 g) was from a layer (SU 1099), which contained Roman, but not more precisely datable objects. A limestone ball (ig. 11; diameter 12.4 cm, weight 1,658 g) was found in the illing of a modern interment (SU 1450) Kamnita apnenčasta krogla (sl. 11; premer 12,4 cm, teža 1658 g) izvira iz polnila novoveškega vkopa (SE 1450), ki vsebuje le rimske, vendar časovno ožje neopredeljene najdbe. Odlomek vojaške diplome (sl. 18) iz bakrove zlitine smo našli v rimskem temelju zidu (SE 1259), zgrajenem iz prodnikov in malte. V plasti nad njim je bila galska sigilata s konca 2. in začetka 3. stoletja, pod njim pa italska sigilata iz druge polovice 1. in prve polovice 2. stoletja. Stratigrafska lega zidu torej kaže, da je bil zgrajen v sredini ali drugi polovici 2. stoletja. Odlomek tegule z žigom legije XIII Gemine (sl. 17; dolžina 22 cm, širina 20,4 cm, debelina 4 cm, teža 1600 g) izvira iz plasti (SE 889) z odlomki rimske lončenine lokalne proizvodnje, ki ne omogočajo ožje datacije. 13. legija je bila nameščena v Petoviono leta 45 ali v začetku 46, v letih 102/106 pa so jo premestili v Vindobono.25 Napisi na oltarjih v 3. mitreju kažejo, da so oddelki te legije bili v Petovioni spet v drugi polovici 3. stoletja.26 Zaključek Z izkopavanj v letih 2010 in 2011 na območju središča Petovione poleg odlomka vojaške diplome izvira 12 z rimsko vojsko povezanih predmetov. Pripadajo orožju (okov branika meča, trije deli izstrelkov, luske oklepa, kamnita 23 24 23 266 24 Junkelmann 1992, 62. Deschler-Erb 1999, 68. 25 26 Junkelmann 1992, 62. Deschler-Erb 1999, 68. Horvat et al. 2003, 156. Horvat et al. 2003, 157. containing only Roman, but not more narrowly determinable inds. A military diploma fragment (ig. 18) from a copper alloy was found in Roman wall foundations (SU 1259) built from cobble and mortar. In the layer above was samian ware from the end of the 2nd century and beginning of the 3rd century, while under it was Italian sigillata from the second half of the 1st and the irst half of the 2nd century. A tegula fragment with the stamp of legio XIII Gemina (ig. 17; length 22 cm, width 20.4 cm, thickness 4 cm, weight 1,600 g) is from a layer (SU 889) with locally produced Roman pottery fragments, which cannot be more precisely dated. he legio XIII was stationed in Poetovio in AD 45 or at the beginning of 46 and was transferred to Vindobona in 102/106.25 Altar inscriptions in the 3rd mithraeum show that units of this legion again appear in Poetovio in the second half of the 3rd century.26 research area / območje raziskav building foundations / temelji vojašnice location of the ind (with corresponding number) / mesto najdbe predmeta (št. predmeta na sliki) Conclusion he 2010 and 2011 excavations in the town centre of Poetovio yielded 12 items, which could be attributed to Roman military equipment, apart from a military diploma fragment. hese included weapons (a sword handguard plate, three projectile fragments, armour scales, a stone ball), equine equipment (phalera, two pendants and a saddle horn), and building elements (tegula fragment). Five of these items could be dated based on excavation contexts (a gilded bronze pendant, two iron projectiles, armour scales, and a bone fastener). All were found in 1st century layers, determined chronologically based on imported pottery. he sword handguard plate and bronze equine equipment pendant (ig. 6: 4), which are probably also from the 1st century, and the tegula fragment with the stamp of the legio XIII Gemina (45–102, second half of the 3rd century) could only be dated by analogies. he remaining items (saddle horn plates, iron projectile, stone ball) could not be dated to a narrower timeframe. Small inds thus show that military activities took place on the strategically most exposed part of Poetovio along the Drava bridge in the 1st century; perhaps this was even the site of a military encampment. he town forum was probably later built in the same area. Translation: Vesna Pintarič Kocuvan Language editing: Terry Troy Jackson 25 26 Horvat et al. 2003, 156. Horvat et al. 2003, 157. Figure 17. Ptuj, Vičava, area of the former barracks. Locations of the discussed inds in the excavated area (S. Pukšič; based on 2010 cadastre). Slika 17. Ptuj, Vičava, območje nekdanje vojašnice. Lega obravnavanih najdb v izkopnem polju (izdelava S. Pukšič; podlaga kataster iz l. 2010). krogla), konjski opremi (falera, dva obeska in rog sedla) in gradbenim elementom (odlomek tegule). Pet od teh predmetov smo lahko datirali glede na najdiščne okoliščine (pozlačen bronasti obesek, dva železna izstrelka, luske oklepa in koščeni gumb). Vsi so bili najdeni v plasteh 1. stoletja, ki smo jih časovno opredelili na podlagi uvožene keramike. Zgolj po analogijah smo datirali branik ročaja meča in bronasti obesek konjske opreme sl. 6: 4, ki sta verjetno prav tako iz 1. stoletja ter odlomek tegule z žigom XIII Gemine (45–102, druga polovica 3. stoletja). Pri drugih predmetih (rog sedla, železni izstrelek, kamnita krogla) nismo mogli določiti ožjega časovnega okvira. Drobne najdbe torej kažejo, da so na strateško najbolj izpostavljenem delu Petovione, ob mostišču čez Dravo, v 1. stoletju potekale vojaške aktivnosti ali pa je tam celo obstajala vojaška postojanka. Pozneje pa je bil verjetno na istem območju zgrajen forum mesta. Figure 18. Ptuj, Vičava, area of the former barracks. A military diploma fragment (photo T. Lauko). Slika 18. Ptuj, Vičava, območje nekdanje vojašnice. Odlomek vojaške diplome (foto T. Lauko). 267 BIBLIOGRAPHY / LITERATURA BISHOP, M. C. 1988, Cavalry Equipment of the Roman Army in the First Century A.D. – In/V: J. C. Coulston (ed./ ur.), Military Equipment and the Identity of Roman Soldiers, Proceedings of the Fourth Roman Military Equipment Conference, BAR International Series 394, Oxford, 67–195. CONNOLLY, P., van DRIEL-MURRAY, C. 1991, he Roman cavalry saddle. – Britannia 22, 33–50. DESCHLER-ERB, E. 1999, Ad arma! Römisches Militär des 1. Jahrhunderts n. Chr. in Augusta Raurica. – Forschungen in Augst 28, Augst. HOFFILLER, V. 1912, Oprema rimskog vojnika u prvo dobo carstva. – Vjesnik Hrvatskog arheološkog društva 12, 16–123. HORVAT, J., LOVENJAK, M., DOLENC VIČIČ, A., LUBŠINA-TUŠEK, M., TOMANIČ-JEVREMOV, M., ŠUBIC, Z. 2003, Poetovio. Development and Topography. – In/V: M. Šašel Kos, P. Scherrer (eds./ur.), he autonomous towns of Noricum and Pannonia, Pannonia I / Die autonomen Städte in Noricum und Pannonien, Pannonia I, Situla 41, Ljubljana, 153–189. ISTENIČ, J. 2009, Rimsko obdobje. – In/V: P. Turk et al. (eds./ ur.), Ljubljanica – kulturna dediščina reke, Ljubljana, 241–293 [= J. Istenič, Roman period. – In/V: P. Turk et al. (eds./ur.), Ljubljanica – a River and its Past, Ljubljana 2009, 265–317]. 268 JUNKELMANN, M. 1992, Die Reiter Roms III. Zubehör, Reitweise, Bewafnung. – Kulturgeschichte der antiken Welt 53, Mainz am Rhein. KLEMENC, J., SARIA, B. 1936, Archäologische Karte von Jugoslawien. Blatt Ptuj. – Beograd, Zagreb. LUBŠINA TUŠEK, M. 2012, Elaborat predloga za razglasitev arheološkega najdišča Panorama na Ptuju za kulturni spomenik državnega pomena EŠD 9277. – Ptuj [unpublished / neobjavljeno]. MIKL-CURK, I., TUŠEK, I. 1985, O središču Poetovione. – Arheološki vestnik 36, 285–314 [summary in German / povzetek v nemščini]. SARIA, B. 1922, Arheološka istraživanja u oblasti starog Poetovio. – Starinar 1/3, 191–208. TUŠEK, I. 1977, Ptuj, Vičava. – Varstvo spomenikov 21, 251–252. TUŠEK, I. 1995, Ptuj, kasarna Dušana Kvedra. – Varstvo spomenikov 35, 133–134. ROMAN TILE WORKSHOP AT VRANSKO – ARCHAEOLOGY, AGER OF CELEIA AND ROMAN HISTORY RIMSKA OPEKARNA NA VRANSKEM – ARHEOLOGIJA, CELEJSKI AGER IN RIMSKA ZGODOVINA Irena Lazar Irena Lazar Abstract Izvleček In 1995, a Roman military tile workshop was researched at Ilovica at Vransko. he archaeological complex included tile kilns, a warehouse or drying-shed, and other architectural remains. he inds indicate that the second half of the 2nd century was the period of greatest production at the factory at Vransko. Between 168 and 172, the legio II Italica, recruited during the time of Marcus Aurelius, was stationed at the legionary fortress in Ločica ob Savinji. he legion’s stamps on the tile factory’s products are in many cases identical to those discovered at the Ločica ob Savinji fortress, 10 km from Vransko. he archaeological site can thus be connected to the political events and history of the Roman state during the Marcomannic Wars. Leta 1995 je bila na Ilovici pri Vranskem raziskana rimska vojaška opekarna. Arheološki kompleks so sestavljale peči za opeko, skladišče s sušilnico in ostanki arhitekture. Odkrito gradivo potrjuje, da je bila druga polovica 2. stoletja obdobje največje proizvodnje opekarne na Ilovici. V tem času je bila 168–172 v taboru v Ločici ob Savinji nastanjena 2. italska legija, rekrutirana v času Marka Avrelija. Žigi z oznako legije na izdelkih opekarne so v številnih primerih enaki žigom, odkritim v legijskem taboru v Ločici ob Savinji, 10 km od Vranskega. Arheološko najdišče lahko tako povežemo s političnim dogajanjem in zgodovino rimske države v času markomanskih vojn. Keywords: Noricum, Celeia, Vransko, tile factory, Ločica ob Savinji, legio II Italica, Marcus Aurelius, Marcomannic Wars, Titus Varius Clemens Ključne besede: Noricum, Celeia, Vransko, opekarna, Ločica ob Savinji, legio II Italica, Mark Avrelij, markomanske vojne, Titus Varius Clemens Figure 1. The geographic position of Ilovica at Vransko and several other sites in its vicinity (A. Preložnik). Slika 1. Karta Slovenije z vrisanim najdiščem in pomembnejšimi arheološkimi najdišči v bližini (računalniška priprava A. Preložnik). he archaeological site Ilovica at Vransko (ig. 1) was discovered in October 1994 during an archaeological ield survey.1 Excavations on a surface of 2,400 m² were conducted in 1995 by the Regional Museum Celje team, under the guidance of the author.2 During six months’ work at Vransko, a Roman military tile workshop was researched. he complex encompassed two kilns, a warehouse or a drying-shed and other architectural remains. he discovered material indicates that the tile factory production peaked in the second half of the 2nd century. Between 168 and 172, the legio II Italica, recruited during the time of Marcus Aurelius, was stationed at the legionary fortress in Ločica ob Savinji.3 Several Roman inds stem from Vransko, which lies in the immediate vicinity of the Emona–Celeia Roman road (via 1 2 3 Djurić, Pintér 1994, 11. Lazar 1997; Lazar 1999; Lazar 2003a; Lazar 2003b; Lazar 2006a, 5. In older publications, the site is named as Ločica pri Polzeli (Ločica at Polzela). Arheološko najdišče Ilovica pri Vranskem (sl. 1) na trasi avtocestnega odseka Arja vas–Vransko je bilo odkrito v oktobru leta 1994 pri arheološkem terenskem pregledu.1 1 Djurić, Pintér 1994, 11. 269 publica).4 Roman settlement remains from the site had been mentioned in the 19th century by Freidrich Pichler, who referred to Roman coin inds.5 Small-scale archaeological research took place in 1961, when part of a Roman building was discovered;6 Roman layers were also found during archaeological surveillance in 2004 and 2005.7 he route of the Roman road through this part of the valley is not known. According to some authors, the road could have run from Trojane (Atrans) (where the road is documented) across Presedlje and descending to the Savinja valley at Tabor,8 but there is no archaeological evidence for this assumption. According to another version, the road ran roughly along the old Ljubljana–Celje motorway from Trojane past Vransko.9 Here the road split with one direction going towards Tuhinj valley and further along to Kranj (Carnium), while the main route continued towards Celje (Celeia) and onwards. Given the discovered archaeological remains, their dispersed distribution and the evidence of Roman inds in Vransko, we can assume that a small Roman settlement – a vicus – existed in this area. he main Roman road ran through the immediate vicinity, enabling a good connection to larger settlements. 1 Excavations in 1995 he research area on the fallow of the Ilovica at Vransko was delimited to the south and north by the scope of the construction works, while it was delimited to the east and west by trial trenches. he looding of the Bolska stream and the mechanical ploughing of the hop-ields partially damaged or even destroyed some of the site. It became clear during excavations that the architectural remains expanded over the borders of the construction area to the south and southeast.10 1.1 Architecture In the central part of the site were architectural remains and ruins lying almost directly under the topsoil. he well-preserved walls were built from large cobbles and limestone blocks (igs. 2–3). Architectural remains in the form of the letter ‘E’ were open southwards. Research in the central part soon showed the remains of vaults and kiln structures. Inside the massive walls were the remains of two tile kilns. Circular constructions were added to all four corners, with an added rectangular support in the Izkopavanje na skupni površini 2400 m² je leta 1995 izpeljala ekipa Pokrajinskega muzeja Celje pod vodstvom podpisane.2 V šestih mesecih dela je bila na Ilovici raziskana rimska vojaška opekarna. Arheološki kompleks so sestavljale peči za opeko, skladišče s sušilnico in ostanki arhitekture. Odkrito gradivo potrjuje, da je opekarna razvojni vrh doživela v drugi polovici 2. stoletja. V tem času je bila 168–172 v taboru v Ločici ob Savinji3 nastanjena 2. italska legija, rekrutirana v času cesarja Marka Avrelija. Z Vranskega, ki stoji v neposredni bližini nekdanje rimske ceste (via publica) Emona‒Celeia, izvira kar precej rimskodobnih najdb.4 O poselitvi kraja v rimski dobi je že v 19. stoletju poročal Friedrich Pichler in omenjal najdbe rimskih novcev.5 Manjše arheološke raziskave v kraju so potekale leta 1961, ko so odkrili del rimske stavbe;6 na plasti iz rimskega obdobja so naleteli tudi ob arheološkem nadzoru leta 2004 in 2005.7 Potek ceste skozi ta del doline ni znan. Po eni različici naj bi potekala trasa ceste od Trojan (Atrans), kjer je cesta dokumentirana, verjetno čez Presedlje in se spustila v Savinjsko dolino pri Taboru,8 a arheoloških dokazov ni. Po drugi različici naj bi potekala cesta približno po trasi stare avtoceste Ljubljana–Celje od Trojan mimo Vranskega.9 V tem delu naj bi se krak ceste odcepil proti Tuhinjski dolini in naprej proti Kranju (Carnium). Glede na odkrite arheološke ostanke in njihovo razpršeno razprostranjenost ter podatke o rimskodobnih najdbah na Vranskem smemo sklepati, da je na tem mestu obstajalo manjše rimsko naselje – vicus. V neposredni bližini je tekla glavna rimska cesta, ki je omogočala dobro povezavo do večjih naselij oz. mest. 1 Izkopavanje leta 1995 Meje območja raziskav na ledini Ilovica na Vranskem so bile na južni in severni strani določene z mejo gradbenega posega, na vzhodni in zahodni strani pa smo ga zamejili s sondažnimi jarki. Poplavljanje potoka Bolske in strojna obdelava poljskih površin (hmeljišče) sta najdišče deloma poškodovala ali celo uničila. Med izkopavanji je bilo ugotovljeno, da se arhitekturni objekti širijo čez meje gradbenega posega, proti jugu in jugovzhodu.10 2 3 Bolta 1975. Pichler 1867, 239; Pichler 1879, 11. Kolšek 1961a; Kolšek 1961b, 79. Lazar 2006a, 8. Pirkmajer 1985, 164. 4 9 Pirkmajer 1985, 164, 174. 9 10 Lazar, 2006a, 12. 10 4 5 6 7 8 270 5 6 7 8 Lazar 1997; Lazar 1999; Lazar 2003a; Lazar 2003b; Lazar 2006a, 5. V starejših objavah Ločica pri Polzeli. Bolta 1975. Pichler 1867, 239; Pichler 1879, 11. Kolšek 1961a; Kolšek 1961b, 79. Lazar 2006a, 8. Pirkmajer 1985, 164. Pirkmajer 1985, 164, 174. Lazar, 2006a, 12. Figure 2. Ground-plan of archaeological structures at the site. 1 kiln 1; 2 kiln 2; 3 warehouse; 4 waste pit; 5 architectural remains; 5a tile channel; 6 kiln; 7 cobblestone basin (A. Preložnik). Slika 2. Tloris arheoloških struktur na najdišču. 1 peč 1; 2 peč 2; 3 skladišče; 4 odpadna jama; 5 ostanki arhitekture; 5a kanal iz opek; 6 ostanki peči; 7 jama s prodom (računalniška priprava A. Preložnik). Figure 3. Walls encircling the kilns; view from the west (photo T. Lauko). Slika 3. Zidovi, ki so obdajali peči; pogled z zahoda (foto T. Lauko). Figure 4. Kiln 1; view from the south (photo T. Lauko). Slika 4. Peč 1; pogled z juga (foto T. Lauko). centre of the northern wall. It is possible that the land had been looded before, causing the corners to begin to disintegrate, and were therefore consolidated with circular supports. he kilns and their architecture were encompassed by walls of an enclosure. he eastern wall of the enclosure was repaired in the central part and simultaneously formed the western wall of a large elongated building, probably a warehouse or a drying-shed. A waste pit was situated to the north, and badly preserved remains of other buildings to the west. 1.1.1 Kiln 1 Kiln 1 (or the western kiln) was relatively well preserved (ig. 4).11 From north, east and west it was surrounded by a meter-wide wall. he exterior wall fronts were built of limestone blocks, while the centre was illed with large river cobbles. he kiln interior was built of rectangular and square tiles. Two of the ive vaults of the burning chamber survived. he loor beneath was paved with tegulae and illed with tile rubble. he stoke-hole in the front of the kiln was circular and illed with tile and pottery sherds. he loor was covered with compressed clay, but there 11 Lazar 2006a, 19. 1.1 Arhitektura V srednjem delu najdišča so arhitekturni ostanki in ruševine ležali skoraj tik pod humusom. Dobro ohranjeni zidovi so bili zidani iz večjih prodnikov in lomljenih kamnov apnenca (sl. 2–3). Arhitekturni ostanki v obliki črke ‘E’ so bili odprti proti jugu. Raziskave v srednjem delu so kmalu pokazale ostanke obokov in strukture peči. Znotraj masivnih zidov so ležali ostanki dveh peči za žganje opeke. Na vseh štirih vogalih so bile dodane krožne konstrukcije, na sredini severnega zidu pa še kvadratni opornik. Mogoče je, da je bil teren že takrat večkrat poplavljen in so vogali začeli popuščati, zato so jih utrdili s krožnimi oporniki. Peči in njuno arhitekturo so obkrožali zidovi pod nepravim kotom. Vzhodni zid je bil v sredini popravljen in pozidan. Nadaljeval se je v sosednji objekt – skladišče, velik podolgovat objekt na vzhodnem delu. Na severu je ležala odpadna jama, na zahodu ostanki stavb. 1.1.1 Peč 1 Peč 1 ali zahodna peč je bila bolje ohranjena (sl. 4).11 S severne, vzhodne in zahodne strani je bila obdana z me11 Lazar 2006a, 19. 271 Figure 5. Kiln 2; view from the south-west (photo T. Lauko). Slika 5. Peč 2; pogled z jugozahoda (foto T. Lauko). Figure 6. Aerial view of the site, warehouse is visible to the let of the kiln (photo D. Snoj). Slika 6. Zračni posnetek najdišča, levo od peči je vidno skladišče (foto D. Snoj). were no traces of burnt materials. A layer of roof tiles was visible on the interior of the enclosure wall, leading us to believe that the area in front of the kiln was covered with a roof. All the architectural remains lay immediately below the surface; therefore, the remains of the raised oven loor and the kiln superstructure did not survive. Most of the tiles from which the kiln had been built and tiles from the area in front of the kiln, had the stamp of the legio II Italica. 1.1.2 Kiln 2 he level of the eastern (right) kiln was somewhat higher, resulting in the kiln’s poorer preservation. It was constructed identically to Kiln 1. he kiln superstructure was completely destroyed (ig. 5).12 Based on the foundations, we ascertained that there were seven vaults in the burning chamber. he furnace channel and the central part of the kiln were illed in by tile remains. he stoke-hole in front of the furnace contained no burnt material. 1.1.3 Warehouse To the east of both kilns stood a large building erected in the northwest-southeast direction (ig. 6).13 Its northern side was discovered to be 39 m in length. he rest of the building lay outside the excavation area, so the exact size could not be documented. In the interior of the building were regularly spaced postholes, lined with stones and tiles, probably supporting the building’s roof structure. According to its size, we can assume that it was used as a warehouse and tile drying shed. 1.1.4 Waste pit North of the kilns a large pit was researched, illed with tile remains and wasters.14 Due to its size, it was documented with trial trenches. 12 13 272 14 Lazar 2006a, 20. Lazar 2006a, 21. Lazar 2006a, 22. ter širokimi zidovi. Zunanje fronte zidov so bile zidane iz lomljenega apnenca, sredina je bila zapolnjena z večjimi rečnimi oblicami. Notranjost peči je bila zidana iz pravokotnih in kvadratnih opek. Ohranila sta se dva od petih obokov v prostoru za žganje. Prostor pod oboki je bil tlakovan z navzdol obrnjenimi tegulami in zapolnjen s kosi opek. Manipulacijski prostor pred pečjo (predprostor) je bil okrogle oblike, zatrpan z ostanki opeke in keramike. Tla so bila obložena z zbito ilovico, žganine v njem ni bilo. V južnem proilu izkopa je bila vidna plast strešne opeke na notranji strani obodnega zidu, iz česar sklepamo, da je bil predprostor peči pokrit s streho. Vsi arhitekturni ostanki so ležali plitvo pod površino, ostanki žgalne rešetke ter nadgradnje peči se niso ohranili. Večina opek, iz katerih je bila zidana peč, je imela žig 2. italske legije (legio II Italica), prav tako ostanki opek v manipulacijskem prostoru. 1.1.2 Peč 2 Nivo vzhodne (desne) peči je bil nekoliko višji, zato je bila slabše ohranjena. Zidana je bila na enak način kot peč 1. Oboki peči so bili povsem uničeni (sl. 5).12 Po temeljih smo ugotovili, da jih je bilo sedem. Kuriščni kanal in osrednji del peči sta bila zasuta z ostanki opek. Manipulacijski prostor pred pečjo je bil brez ostankov žganine. 1.1.3 Skladišče Vzhodno od obeh peči je stal večji objekt, postavljen v smeri severozahod‒jugovzhod (sl. 6).13 Njegova severna stranica je bila odkrita v dolžini 39 m. Ostali del zgradbe je ležal zunaj trase avtoceste, zato točne velikosti ni bilo mogoče dokumentirati. V notranjosti objekta so bila v enakomerni razdalji razporejena stojišča, utrjena s kamnom in opeko, verjetno za oporo strešni konstrukciji stavbe. Glede na velikost zgradbe sklepamo, da je bila namenjena skladiščenju in sušenju opeke. 12 13 Lazar 2006a, 20. Lazar 2006a, 21. 1.1.5 Architecture west of the kilns 1.1.4 Odpadna jama he structures in the western part of the excavation area were very poorly preserved. Several wall foundations were discovered, as well as a debris layer with tegulae, tubuli and paving tiles. Numerous small inds were dispersed around the architectural remains. he remains can probably be interpreted as parts of destroyed residential buildings that are earlier than the kilns. Severno od peči je bila raziskana večja jama, zasuta z ostanki opek in uničenih izdelkov.14 Zaradi velike površine je bila dokumentirana s sondami. At the edge of the excavation area, a channel built of tiles was discovered.15 Its relation to the building remains is not clear. he loor of the channel was lined with tegulae, which also covered the channel. he sides were lined with tegulae and tiles with a rectangular hole in the middle, which were probably designed for opening or cleaning from the side. he channel loor descends towards the north. 1.1.6 Remains of a kiln he remains of a destroyed kiln were found at the southern limit of the excavation area.16 It was built of square tiles, none of which were stamped. 1.1.5 Arhitekturni ostanki zahodno od peči Ostanki arhitekturnih objektov na tem delu najdišča so bili zelo slabo ohranjeni. Med drugim so bili odkriti ostanki stavbe, vendar se je ohranil le temelj zidu. Med ostanki zidov je ležala ruševinska plast, pomešani so bili kosi tegul, tubulov in plošč za tlakovanje. Številne drobne najdbe so se razpršeno pojavljale okoli arhitekturnih ostankov. Verjetno smemo odkrite ostanke opredeliti kot del uničenih bivalnih objektov, starejših od obeh peči. Na robu izkopa je bil odkrit kanal, grajen iz opek.15 Njegov odnos do ostankov objektov ni jasen. Dno so sestavljale tegule, ki so kanal tudi pokrivale. Stranice so bile sestavljene delno iz tegul in delno iz opek s pravokotno odprtino v sredini. Verjetno je bil prirejen za odpiranje oziroma čiščenje s strani. Dno kanala je padalo v smeri proti severu. 1.1.6 Ostanki starejše peči 1.1.7 Cobblestone basin he depression in the south-western part of the excavation area was illed with riverine cobbles; there were no small inds. he depression might have been of a natural origin, perhaps a part of the former stream bed. However, we assume that the depression was artiicial, a result of excavating clay for the needs of the factory. he cobbles formed as the natural alluvium after the abandonment of the tile factory.17 1.1.8 Emona–Celeia Road During the surveillance of a drainage channel construction for the motorway, a Roman road was revealed in cross-section. It lay in a depth of 1.2 m, with a preserved width of 8 m.18 his discovery conirmed the route of the Roman road through the valley, passing Vransko and leading on to Šempeter and Celje.19 2 Roman tile workshop Architecture, small inds and stamps on the tiles prove that a Roman tile factory (lat. iglina, oicina) operated at Vransko to accommodate the needs of the fortress at Ločica ob Savinji, where the legio II Italica was stationed. V južnem proilu izkopa smo naleteli tudi na ostanke uničene peči.16 Zidani so bili iz kvadratnih opek, nobena od teh ni bila žigosana. 1.1.7 Kotanja s prodom Jugozahodni del izkopa je bil povsem zapolnjen z naplavinskim prodom, zato je bilo delo opravljeno strojno. Drobnih najdb v naplavini ni bilo; jama bi lahko bila naravnega izvora ali del stare struge potoka. Morda lahko domnevamo, da je jama posledica kopanja ilovice za potrebe obrata, saj je te surovine v neposredni bližini precej, s prodom pa je bila zasuta po antičnem obdobju.17 1.1.8 Cesta Emona–Celeia Pri izkopu drenažnega jarka za odvajanje vode z avtoceste smo pri nadzoru ob zemeljskih delih v proilu ugotovili presek rimske ceste. Ležala je v globini 1,2 m, ohranjena širina je bila 8 metrov.18 S tem odkritjem je bil potrjen potek trase rimske ceste po dolini mimo Vranskega in naprej do Šempetra in Celja.19 14 15 16 17 18 19 Lazar 2006a, 23, igs. 39–41. Lazar, 2006a, 24. Lazar 2006a, 24. Lazar 2006a, 24. Lazar, 2006b, 160. 15 16 17 18 19 Lazar 2006a, 22. Lazar 2006a, 23, sl. 39–41. Lazar, 2006a, 24. Lazar 2006a, 24. Lazar 2006a, 24. Lazar, 2006b, 160. 273 2 Rimski opekarski obrat Figure 7. Aerial view of the motorway route and the site Ilovica at Vransko (photo D. Snoj). Slika 7. Zračni posnetek avtocestne trase in arheološkega najdišča (foto D. Snoj). he location of the factory was carefully chosen, judging by its position (ig. 7). here were suicient amounts of raw materials in the immediate vicinity, i.e. clay, water and wood, all that was necessary for tile production. he via publica Emona–Celeia–Poetovio led through Trojane (Atrans), past Vransko, across the valley to Šempeter, Celeia, and on to Poetovio, enabling a fast and regular distribution of products. Many such facilities mostly supplied their immediate vicinity, while the products could occasionally travel several tens of kilometres distant. he main customer of the Vransko tile workshop was the fortress situated at Ločica ob Savinji, where the legio II Italica was stationed in the last quarter of the 2nd century.20 Evidence of tile fragments with the legion’s stamps in Celeia,21 as well as of tile with REGANO and PARATI stamps, produced at Vransko and discovered during excavations at Zgornje Dovže near Slovenj Gradec,22 show that the Vransko tile workshop supplied also the Celeian ager. Based on the typology of Ninina Cuomo di Caprio, and on the form of the furnace channel and vaults that supported the raised oven-loor,23 the kilns from Vransko belong to group IIB. hese are kilns with a rectangular ground plan with parallel supports for the vaults adjoining the longitudinal walls to the left and right.24 According to the size of the iring area (3.2 by 4 m), they are relatively large. Before the excavations at Vransko, tile kilns had been excavated elsewhere in Slovenia: at Velika vas near Krško, Sevnica and Ptuj.25 Most of them were discovered at Ptuj, where (according to Ivan Žižek) 77 % of the rectangularshaped kilns belonged to group IIB (like the Vransko kilns) following the Cuomo di Caprio typology.26 Among Ostanki arhitekturnih objektov, odkrite najdbe ter žigi na opekah kažejo, da je na ledini Ilovica pri Vranskem obratovala večja rimska opekarna (lat. iglina, oicina), namenjena potrebam vojaškega tabora v Ločici ob Savinji, kjer je bila nastanjena 2. italska legija. Položaj delavnice na Vranskem je bil, sodeč po njeni legi, skrbno izbran (sl. 7). V neposredni bližini so bile zagotovljene zadostne količine surovine – glina, voda in les, vse, kar je bilo potrebno za proizvodnjo opekarskih izdelkov. Državna cesta Emona‒Celeia‒Poetovio je vodila prek Trojan (Atrans) mimo Vranskega, po dolini do Šempetra, Celeje in naprej do Petovione ter omogočala hitro in redno distribucijo izdelkov. Mnogi takšni obrati so zalagali predvsem neposredno okolico, včasih pa so izdelki lahko potovali tudi več deset kilometrov daleč. V našem primeru je bil glavni odjemalec opekarne nedvomno vojaški tabor v Ločici ob Savinji, kjer je bila v zadnji četrtini 2. stoletja nastanjena 2. italska legija.20 Poročila o najdbah opek z legijskimi žigi iz Celeje21 in izkopavanja v Zgornjih Dovžah pri Slovenj Gradcu, kjer se pojavljajo izdelki z žigi REGANO in PARATI, odkriti na Ilovici,22 pa kažejo, da so z izdelki oskrbovali tudi širše področje celejskega agra. Po tipologiji, ki jo je izdelala Ninina Cuomo di Caprio glede na obliko kuriščnega kanala in obokov v centralnem delu peči,23 sodijo peči z Vranskega v skupino IIB. To so peči s pravokotno tlorisno zasnovo, ki imajo stebričke za oboke prislonjene k levi in desni vzdolžni steni.24 Glede na velikost prostora za žganje (3,2 × 4 m) sodijo med večje. Opekarske peči so bile do sedaj na jugovzhodnoalpskem območju znane iz Velike vasi pri Krškem, Sevnice in Ptuja.25 Največ so jih odkrili na Ptuju in po ugotovitvah Ivana Žižka kar 77 % peči pravokotne oblike pripada skupini IIB, enako kot peči na Ilovici.26 Med najbolje ohranjene opekarske obrate na Ptuju sodi leta 1967 izkopani kompleks peči, ki so imele enoten manipulativni prostor.27 Poleg dobro ohranjenih rešet v peči, ki so bila izdelana iz opek s polkrožnimi izjedami in premazana z glino, je bil pri peči A ohranjen tudi del kupole in vhod v peč.28 Kot sorodne primere vojaških opekarskih obratov naj omenimo odkritja iz Velike Britanije in Nemčije. V Veliki Britaniji so do zdaj znane peči za žganje opeke vedno kvadratne ali pravokotne oblike. Njihova velikost je različna in variira od največjih, ki merijo 3,6 × 3,6 m, do manjših, 20 21 20 21 22 23 24 25 274 26 Kandler 1979; Šašel Kos 1986; Petrovitsch 2006. Riedl 1903, 86. Djura Jelenko 1995, 88. Cuomo di Caprio 1979. Cuomo di Caprio 1979, 75, ig. 5.2. Petru, Petru 1978, igs. 7–10; Žižek 1995. Žižek 1995, 82, ig. 45. 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Kandler 1979; Šašel Kos 1986; Petrovitsch 2006. Riedl 1903, 86. Djura Jelenko 1995, 88. Cuomo di Caprio 1979. Cuomo di Caprio 1979, 75, sl. 5.2. Petru, Petru 1978, sl. 7–10; Žižek 1995. Žižek 1995, 82, sl. 45. Šubic 1968, 455. Šubic 1968, 467, sl. 3. the best preserved tile factory facilities at Ptuj is the kiln complex with a common stoke-hole excavated in 1967.27 In Kiln A, apart from the well-preserved, raised oven-loor built of tiles with semi-circular holes and coated with clay, part of the superstructure and the ire-tunnel survived.28 As parallels for Roman tile production facilities, we should mention those of Great Britain and Germany. In Great Britain, the tile kilns known thus far always had square or rectangular shapes. heir size is diferent and varies from the largest measuring 3.6 by 3.6 m, to the smallest of 1.8 by 1.8 m.29 At the South Shields fortress, two tile kilns were discovered, while at Holt, a large tile workshop complex of the legio XX was discovered, spanning over 8 ha.30 Several tile production complexes were also researched in legionary fortresses in Germany. Most kilns were of a square or rectangular shape; the only exception is a kiln discovered at KölnFeldkassel, which had a circular ground plan.31 he facility at Vransko can best be compared to the complex at Dormagen.32 his military tile workshop of the legio I (Germanica) also yielded a large (over 45 m long) drying-shed and kilns. 2.1 The inds Given the diverse tile fragments discovered at Vransko, we can conclude that the workshop made brick and tile of many types and for various purposes:33 rooing tiles, paving tiles, hollow hypocaust bricks, bricks, wall tiles, as well as trapezoidal and square bricks for vaults. he analyses of raw clay, bricks and tiles conirmed that the Vransko workshop used local raw materials.34 Clay of a poorer quality containing numerous sand particles was used to coat the kiln. 2.1.1 Tile stamps Roman legions and other military units had their own tile production facilities since the Augustan period. he irst recorded occurrence of stamping products is known from the mid-1st century, during the reign of Claudius (41–54).35 It is diicult to precisely ascertain why the products were stamped. Private workshops stamped the name of the owner or owners on the tiles, while the army stamped the name of the unit and sometimes even the name of the soldier that made the tiles.36 he stamping probably proved the quality of the products in some manner; for military products, it was even 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 Šubic 1968, 455. Šubic 1968, 467, ig. 3. McWhirr 1979, 98. McWhirr 1979, 171, 187, ig. 6.37. Horn 1987, 175, ig. 419. Müller, Horn 1979; Horn 1987, 175, 400, igs. 109, 338, 339. Lazar 2006a, 31, ig. 51. Zupančič 1998, 372; Zupančič 2006, 252. Szilágy 1972, 433; Brodribb 1987. Helen 1975, 89. katerih dimenzije znašajo 1,8 × 1,8 m.29 V trdnjavi South Shields sta bili odkriti dve peči za opeko, v Holtu, kjer je bilo skladišče 20. legije, pa je bil odkrit večji opekarski kompleks, ki se je razprostiral na osmih hektarjih površine.30 Tudi v legijskih taborih v Nemčiji je bilo raziskanih več opekarskih kompleksov. Večina peči je kvadratne ali pravokotne oblike, izjema je le peč, odkrita na najdišču Köln-Feldkassel, ki je okroglega tlorisa.31 Z obratom na Ilovici lahko primerjamo kompleks iz Dormagena.32 V tej vojaški opekarni 1. (germanske) legije so poleg peči odkopali veliko lopo za sušenje, dolgo več kot 45 m. 2.1 Gradivo Glede na raznovrstne odlomke opek, ki smo jih odkrili na Vranskem, lahko povzamemo, da so v obratu izdelovali opeke vseh vrst in za različne potrebe:33 strešno opeko, tlakovce, votlo opeko za centralno kurjavo, zidake in zidne plošče za oblaganje sten ter klinaste in posebne kvadratne opeke za oboke. Analiza gline in izdelkov je potrdila, da so v opekarni na Vranskem uporabljali lokalne surovine.34 Za oblogo peči so uporabili manj kakovostno glino, ki je vsebovala številne peščene delce. 2.1.1 Žigi na opekah Rimske legije in druge vojaške enote so imele svoje opekarske obrate od avgustejskega obdobja. Prvi pojav žigosanja izdelkov je znan iz sredine 1. stoletja, iz časa vlade cesarja Klavdija (41–54).35 Zdaj je težko natančno ugotoviti, zakaj so žigosali svoje izdelke. Zasebni obrati so na njih odtiskovali ime lastnika ali lastnikov obratov, vojska pa je odtisnila ime legije ali oddelka in včasih tudi ime vojaka, ki je opeko izdelal.36 Verjetno je žigosanje na nek način dokazovalo kakovost izdelkov, za vojaške proizvode so celo domnevali, da naj bi bila žigosana opeka oproščena carine oziroma davkov.37 Angleški raziskovalci menijo, da so ponekod s tem preprosto zaščitili izdelke pred krajo iz odprtih vojaških skladišč.38 Izdelki vojaških opekarn so bili namreč namenjeni predvsem za gradnjo vojaških in cesarskih objektov ter včasih še poslopij provincialnih upravnikov. Pečatniki, s katerimi so označevali izdelke, so ohranjeni v redkih primerih. Najpogosteje so bili verjetno leseni, nekateri pa tudi glineni, železni ali celo svinčeni. Navadno so podolgovate pravokotne oblike, ponekod imajo obliko tabule ansate. 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 McWhirr 1979, 98. McWhirr 1979, 171, 187, sl. 6.37. Horn 1987, 175, sl. 419. Müller, Horn 1979; Horn 1987, 175, 400, sl. 109, 338, 339. Lazar 2006a, 31, sl. 51. Zupančič 1998, 372; Zupančič 2006, 252. Szilágy 1972, 433; Brodribb 1987. Helen 1975, 89. Szilágy 1972, 436. Boon 1984, 16. 275 Figure 8. Tile fragment with a stamp LEG II ITA / AVSPICATVS, giving the name of the legion and the soldier’s name (photo T. Lauko). Slika 8. Odlomek opeke z dvovrstičnim žigom legije in imenom vojaka AVSPICATVS (foto T. Lauko). Figure 9. Stamp LEG II ITALPATR on a tegula fragment is 16 cm long (photo D. Josipovič). Slika 9. Žig LEG II ITALPATR na odlomku tegule je dolg 16 cm (foto D. Josipovič). assumed that the stamped tiles were exempt from taxes.37 English researchers believe that in some areas stamps were simply used to protect products against theft from open military warehouses.38 Speciically, the products of military tile workshops were mainly intended for the military and imperial buildings and sometimes also for the buildings of provincial governors. he tools used to stamp the products are only rarely preserved. Most often, they were probably wooden, some also clay, iron or lead. he shape of the stamps is usually of a rectangle, while some have the form of a tabula ansata. Considering that numerous variants of the same stamp appear on products from Vransko, it is very likely that each worker used his own seal; this is also supported by stamps with the soldiers’ names in the second row, e.g. LEG II ITA / AVSPICATVS (ig. 8). Wooden seals also probably wore out quite quickly and new ones had to be prepared constantly. Given this process, mistakes in the transcription or retracing of letters occurred sometimes; the letters are at times turned up-side-down or twisted around, as can be observed on REGANO stamps.39 Based on tile fragments with stamps one across the other, we can conclude that the seals were perhaps checked or tested to determine whether they are still usable.40 On the products from Vransko, there are eight diferent types of legion’s stamps, a stamp of HILARVS, probably also with military connections, as well as two types of REGANO stamp and a PARATI stamp. he stamps are mainly of an elongated rectangular form, four types are depicted in a tabula ansata; their lengths range from 7.5 to 16 cm. he longest is a stamp of LEG II ITALPATR in a tabula ansata (ig. 9). All are in one row, except for the stamp of LEG II ITA / AVSPICATVS. Legion stamps predominate, REGANO stamps are also represented, while only few tile fragments were stamped with the PARATI stamp. he latter two stamps appear mostly on rooing and building tiles, while they were not documented on other tile types. Considering the fact that completely preserved tiles were rare, we cannot conclude whether all products were stamped or not. It is clear, however, that numerous tiles, of which the kilns were built, were stamped with the legion’s seal. It is very likely that the military tile factory stamped all of its products, even merely as a precaution against theft, as the warehouse was probably just a large open shed. 37 38 39 276 40 Szilágy 1972, 436. Boon 1984, 16. Lazar 2006a, 37, ig. 76: 10, 11. Lazar 2006a, 35, ig. 71. Glede na to, da se na Ilovici pojavlja na izdelkih več različic enakih žigov, je verjetno, da je vsak delavec ali vojak delal s svojim žigom, kar kažejo tudi žigi z imeni vojakov v drugi vrsti, npr. LEG II ITA / AVSPICATVS (sl. 8). Poleg tega so se verjetno predvsem leseni pečatniki hitro izrabili in so morali stalno pripravljati nove. Ob tem je včasih prišlo tudi do napak v prepisovanju oziroma prerisovanju črk, ki so ponekod obrnjene na glavo ali zasukane, kar opazimo pri žigu REGANO.39 Po odlomkih opeke, na katerih so žigi odtisnjeni eden preko drugega, lahko sklepamo, da so žige morda preverjali oz. preizkušali, ali so še uporabni.40 Na izdelkih z Vranskega smo ugotovili 8 različnih vrst legijskih žigov, žig HILARVS, verjetno tudi povezan z vojsko, ter dve obliki žiga REGANO in žig PARATI. Žigi so v glavnem podolgovate pravokotne oblike, štirje tipi so odtisnjeni v tabuli ansati, njihova dolžina znaša od 7,5 do 16 cm. Najdaljši je žig LEG II ITALPATR v tabuli ansati (sl. 9). Vsi so enovrstični, razen žiga LEG II ITA / AVSPICATVS. Med odkritimi žigi po številčnosti vodijo legijski, majhen je odstotek zastopanosti žiga REGANO, le malo odlomkov pa je bilo žigosanih z žigom PARATI. Zadnja dva žiga se pojavljata večinoma na strešni opeki in opeki za gradnjo, na drugih vrstah opek pa jih nismo odkrili. 39 40 Lazar 2006a, 37, sl. 76: 10, 11. Lazar 2006a, 35, sl. 71. A comparison of stamps discovered at Vransko (ig. 10) and the ones found in the area of the Ločica fortress41 shows a direct connection of both sites. he stamps HILARVS42 and LEG II ITA / AVSPICATVS,43 as well as three versions of the LEG II ITA stamp occur at both sites.44 Especially interesting is the stamp LEG II ITAL PF.45 he last two letters in this seal can most probably be linked to the title pia idelis, which was already held by the legio II Italica when it was stationed in Ločica. he epithet was subsequently bestowed several times to the legion.46 2.1.2 Imprints Several types of imprints were found on tiles: bare feet, ingers, domestic and wild animals’ footprints. he focus of our special attention was a tegula with the stamp of the 2nd legion (LEG II ITA) in the centre and an imprint of a nailed shoe sole (ig. 11), approximately 25 cm long and undoubtedly worn by a soldier. Military boots (lat. caligae) 41 42 43 44 45 46 Kandler 1979, ig. 20; Petrovitsch 2006. Kandler 1979, ig. 20: 13. Kandler 1979, ig. 20: 2. Kandler 1979, ig. 20: 3, igs. 25, 32. Lazar 2006a, 37, ig. 76: 8. Winkler 2003, 133. Glede na to, da so na Vranskem v glavnem ohranjeni odlomki in je v celoti ohranjenih opek malo, bi težko rekli, ali so žigosali vse izdelke ali ne. Vsekakor so bile z žigom legije žigosane mnoge opeke, iz katerih je bila grajena peč. Verjetno pa je, da je vojaška opekarna svoje proizvode žigosala v celoti, že zaradi zaščite pred krajo, saj je bilo skladišče le velika odprta lopa. Figure 10. Various types of stamps on the products from Ilovica at Vransko. Scale = 1 : 1. Slika 10. Različne vrste žigov, odtisnjenih na izdelkih z Ilovice. M = 1 : 1. Primerjava žigov, odkritih v opekarni na Vranskem, in žigov, najdenih na območju vojaškega tabora v Ločici,41 kaže na neposredno povezavo obeh najdišč. Med naštetimi žigi z Ilovice (sl. 10) lahko na seznamu žigov iz Ločice prepoznamo žig HILARVS42 in dvovrstični žig LEG II ITA / AVSPICATVS43 ter tri različice žiga LEG II ITA.44 Posebej zanimiv je žig LEG II ITAL PF.45 Zadnji dve črki v njem najverjetneje lahko povežemo z nazivom pia idelis, ki ga je 2. italska legija ob nastanitvi v Ločici že nosila in so ji ga pozneje še večkrat dodelili.46 41 42 43 44 45 46 Kandler 1979, sl. 20; Petrovitsch 2006. Kandler 1979, sl. 20: 13. Kandler 1979, sl. 20: 2. Kandler 1979, sl. 20: 3, sl. 25, 32. Lazar 2006a, 37, sl. 76: 8. Winkler 2003, 133. 277 Figure 11. Tegula fragment with the stamp of the legion and the imprint of a nailed shoe sole (photo T. Lauko). Slika 11. Del tegule z žigom legije in odtisom okovanega podplata (foto T. Lauko). were made of leather. he sole was made of multiple layers of leather held together by iron nails.47 Imprints of military boots on tegulae are also known from other sites, among them from Carnuntum (Petronell, Austria).48 3 Conclusion and interpretation According to the discovered inds and their analysis,49 we can conclude that the workshop at Vransko operated from the 1st century to the irst half or the mid-3rd century. Coins date from the end of the 1st century to the irst half of the 3rd century; half of all coins are from the second half of the 2nd century.50 hese are the coins of Antoninus Pius (138–161), Marcus Aurelius (161–180) and Faustina Minor, the wife of Marcus Aurelius, which all conirm that the second half of the 2nd century was the period of the greatest production and the peak of the tile workshop’s operation. his coincides with the short period between 168 and 172, when the legio II Italica was stationed at the newly built fortress at Ločica ob Savinji.51 Coins, pottery and other small inds show that there had been a small tile and perhaps also pottery workshop at the same place in the irst half of the 2nd century. he remains of the destroyed kiln (in the south-western part of the excavation area) can be linked to it. Unfortunately, its remains were too modest for a determination of whether it was a tile or pottery kiln. However, it was not built of bricks stamped by the legion. Earlier than the military tile manufacture are also the remains of walls in the immediate vicinity of the kiln. hey have two diferent orientations that suggest two building stages he construction remains beneath the tile channel are also earlier than the military manufacture. All these earlier remains can be interpreted as a tile workshop of local importance. It can be connected to products with REGANO and PARATI stamps, which were also found at several other sites of the Celeia ager (Zgornje Dovže, Celeia). Finds of window glass west of the kilns indicate that residential buildings probably stood in the immediate vicinity. Most of the coins from the irst half of the 2nd century were also found in this area. Pottery from the irst half of the 2nd century mostly belongs to simple table- and kitchenware used during the everyday preparation and storing of food; it included very little ine tableware.52 A fundamental change occurred in the mid- or beginning of the second half of the 2nd century. he fortuitous position along the main road and the vicinity of clay probably facilitated the expansion of the workshop, the capacities 47 48 49 50 51 278 52 Bishop, Coulston 1989, 35. Unpublished. Lazar 2006a, 31; Vidrih Perko 2006, 86. Šemrov 1998; Šemrov 2006, 248. Šašel Kos 1986, 253. Vidrih Perko 2006, 87. 2.1.2 Odtisi Poleg žigosanih opek sodijo med zanimivejše najdbe tudi odlomki opek z odtisi, med katerimi najdemo sledi bosih nog, prstov, odtise domačih živali ali celo divjadi. Posebne pozornosti pa je vredna tegula z žigom legije in odtisom z žebljički okovanega obuvala (sl. 11). Tegula ima na sredini žig LEG II ITA, prek njega pa je viden odtis podplata, ki je bil okovan z majhnimi okroglimi žebljički. Obuvalo je bilo dolgo približno 25 cm in je bilo nedvomno vojaško. Vojaški škornji (lat. caligae) so bili izdelani iz usnja. Podplat obuvala je bil iz več plasti usnja, ki so jih skupaj držali železni žeblji.47 Odtise vojaških obuval na tegulah pa poznamo med drugim tudi iz Carnunta (Petronell, Avstrija).48 3 Zaključek in interpretacija Po odkritih najdbah in analizi gradiva49 lahko ugotovimo, da je življenje v tem obratu teklo od 1. stoletja do prve polovice oziroma sredine 3. stoletja. Novčne najdbe so iz obdobja od konca 1. stoletja do prve polovice 3. stoletja, petdeset odstotkov vseh novcev sodi v drugo polovico 2. stoletja.50 To so novci cesarjev Antonina Pija (138–161), Marka Avrelija (161–180) in Favstine Mlajše, žene Marka Avrelija, ki potrjujejo, da je bila druga polovica 2. stoletja obdobje največjega obsega proizvodnje in vrhunca delovanja opekarne na Ilovici. V ta čas sodi tudi kratko obdobje med letoma 168–172, ko je bila 2. italska legija nastanjena v novem taboru v Ločici ob Savinji.51 Najdbe novcev, keramično in drugo drobno gradivo pa kažejo, da je na tem mestu že vsaj v prvi polovici 2. stoletja obstajal manjši obrat, povezan s proizvodnjo opeke, morda tudi keramike. S tem lahko povežemo ostanke uničene peči ob južnem robu izkopa. Žal so bili njeni ostanki preskromni, da bi lahko opredelili, ali gre za opekarsko ali lon47 48 49 50 51 Bishop, Coulston 1989, 35. Neobjavljeno. Lazar 2006a, 31; Vidrih Perko 2006, 86. Šemrov 1998; Šemrov 2006, 248. Šašel Kos 1986, 253. and the production increased considerably, compared to the beginning of the century. he new kilns were built using tiles with the legion’s stamps. hey probably operated during the preparations for and the actual building of the newly founded fortress at Ločica ob Savinji, where the legio II Italica was stationed. he main part of the tile workshop was situated east of the early 2nd century workshop. he central part formed two kilns, surrounded by thick walls and an enclosure, which probably served also as the base of the roof construction above the stoke-hole. East of the kilns lay a large dryingshed or a warehouse. It was adjoined to the kiln complex under a 45° angle. Considering the windy conditions in the valley, it can be assumed that the intention was to use as best as possible the natural capacities for drying products, while at the same time protecting the warehouse and its construction from direct gusts of wind. To the north of the kilns, a natural basin was used as a waste pit, in which large quantities of broken and poorly burnt tiles were found. A channel built of tile west of Kiln 1 descended from the south, from the direction of the Bolska stream, northwards. It is assumed that it was used to direct water to the tile workshop. Unfortunately, the other structures that could help us understand the production process did not survive. Numerous small inds and coins conirm the active activity of the facility in the second half of the 2nd century. A considerable amount of imported pottery and other chronologically sensitive inds concentrate in the mid- and second half of the 2nd century. he appearance of certain pottery forms can be explained with the presence of the army and its connections to the wider area of the Empire. he table- and kitchenware forms show similarities to the pottery in the nearby centres of Šempeter and Celje (Celeia); the diferent fabrics also open the question of local production in the vicinity of the site.53 Legion stamps on tiles from Vransko are in several cases exactly the same as stamps on tiles discovered at the Ločica ob Savinji, the fortress of the legio II Italica 10 km from Vransko.54 he fortress was built in the middle of the second half of the 2nd century.55 his was the time of the irst great invasions of the Germanic tribes living outside the borders of the Roman Empire, threatening the security of the state. Emperor Marcus Aurelius realised this danger early on and around 165 recruited two new legions, the II and III Italica, which were stationed at the border in Noricum and in Raetia.56 A larger invasion of Germanic tribes probably 53 54 55 56 Vidrih Perko 2006, 96. Kandler 1979, 202, ig. 20. Šašel Kos 1986, 243. Šašel Kos 1986, 241. čarsko peč. Dejstvo je, da za njeno gradnjo niso uporabili žigosanih opek z imenom legije, tako kot pri peči 1 in 2. V čas pred delovanjem vojaške opekarne verjetno sodijo tudi ostanki objekta na jugovzhodnem delu izkopanega polja, pri katerem glede na potek zidov lahko govorimo celo o dveh fazah gradnje. Starejši fazi pripadajo tudi ostanki, ki so ležali pod nivojem opečnatega kanala. Najstarejšo fazo lahko opredelimo kot opekarski obrat lokalnega pomena. Tej delavnici lahko pripišemo izdelke z žigi REGANO in PARATI, ki jih najdemo tudi na nekaterih drugih najdiščih celejskega agra (Zgornje Dovže, Celeja). Najdbe okenskega stekla na območju Z od peči nakazujejo, da so v neposredni bližini obrata verjetno stale tudi stanovanjske stavbe. Na tem območju je bila najdena tudi večina novcev iz prve polovice 2. stoletja. Keramično gradivo prve polovice 2. stoletja pretežno pripada navadnemu namiznemu in kuhinjskemu posodju, ki so ga uporabljali pri vsakdanji pripravi hrane in shranjevanju živil, malo je ine keramike.52 Veliko spremembo je mogoče dokazati za sredino oziroma začetek druge polovice 2. stoletja. Ugodna lega lokalnega obrata ob glavni prometni žili in bližina surovin sta verjetno pripomogli k razširitvi obrata, katerega zmogljivost in obseg proizvodnje sta bila tedaj precej večja kot na začetku stoletja. Novozgrajene peči, za katerih gradnjo so že uporabili tudi opeke z žigom legije, so verjetno delovale že v času priprav in gradnje na novo osnovanega vojaškega tabora v Ločici ob Savinji, v katerem so nastanili 2. italsko legijo. Glavni del opekarne se je pomaknil proti vzhodu, njen osrednji del sta sestavljali obe peči, obdani z debelimi zidovi in zidom, ki je verjetno služil tudi kot ograja in opora strešni konstrukciji nad manipulativnim prostorom. Desno od peči je stala velika lopa, ki je služila kot skladišče in verjetno tudi sušilnica izdelkov. Na kompleks peči je bila prislonjena pod kotom 45º. Glede na razmere v dolini, kjer je še zdaj zelo vetrovno in prepišno, lahko domnevamo, da so s tem želeli kar najbolje izrabiti naravne možnosti za sušenje izdelkov, hkrati pa zavarovali skladišče in njegovo konstrukcijo pred neposrednim naletom vetra. Severno od peči so za odpadno jamo izrabili naravno kotanjo, v kateri smo odkrili veliko količino razbite in slabo žgane opeke. Del obrata je bil tudi opečnati kanal zahodno od peči 1, ki je potekal od južne strani – iz smeri potoka Bolske, proti severu. Padajoči nivo in gradnja, prirejena za čiščenje, navajata k domnevi, da je bil namenjen dovajanju vode v opekarno. Žal se druge delovne strukture, po katerih bi lahko sklepali o poteku proizvodnje in izdelavi opek, niso ohranile. Številne drobne najdbe in novci potrjujejo živahno življenje obrata v drugi polovici 2. stoletja. Med keramičnim gradivom je v tem času več uvožene keramike, časovno iz52 Vidirh Perko 2006, 87. 279 povedno gradivo je koncentrirano prav v čas okrog sredine in v drugo polovico 2. stoletja. Pojavljanje nekaterih oblik je mogoče razložiti z navzočnostjo vojske in njenimi povezavami na širšem ozemlju imperija. Namizno in kuhinjsko posodje kaže oblikovno sorodnost z bližnjimi centri, kot sta Šempeter in Celje (Celeia), drugačna faktura pa odpira tudi vprašanje lokalne proizvodnje v bližini najdišča.53 Figure 12. Praetentura Italiae et Alpium (A. Preložnik, ater Šašel 1974). Slika 12. Praetentura Italiae et Alpium (računalniška priprava A. Preložnik, po Šašel 1974). occurred around 168, when the invaders besieged Aquileia, destroyed Opitergium and penetrated as far as Verona. For the irst time it became evident that the Danube limes was not strong enough. A special temporary military zone was founded, the so-called Praetentura Italiae et Alpium, which existed between 168 and 171.57 he praetentura (ig. 12) encompassed the area around Forum Iulii, the municipal territory of Emona, the hinterland of Trieste (Tergeste) and the area of Celje (Celeia), thereby incorporating and defending the main route leading from the Balkan peninsula towards Italy, i.e. the so-called Illyro-Italian gates.58 hus, the legio II Italica was transferred from the Danube to the newly founded fortress at Ločica with the aim of defending the Trojane (Atrans) pass towards Italy, i.e. the passage from the province to the Italian region of Venetia et Histria. Despite the clear connection of the archaeological remains with the historic and political events, we are nevertheless faced with the question of why the area of south Noricum and the ager of Celeia played such an important role during the Marcomannic invasions. Was this a strategically relevant area to Roman military strategic planning from the 1st century onwards?59 Or do we have to consider the prominent personalities of the military-political elites originating in the Norican aristocracy, who reached the peaks of their careers in the second half of the 2nd century; they had an excellent knowledge of the area’s geography and the importance of the Trojane pass. he personality of Titus Varius Clemens and his probable active role in the founding of the Ločica fortress were men- Žigi na izdelkih z oznako legije so v kar nekaj primerih povsem enaki žigom na opekah, odkritih v legijskem taboru v Ločici ob Savinji, 10 km od Vranskega.54 Zato lahko delovanje obrata na Ilovici povežemo z zgodovinskimi dogodki v 2. stoletju v Rimskem cesarstvu, in sicer z vojaškimi operacijami v času prvega večjega vpada germanskih plemen čez limes. Legijski tabor v Ločici ob Savinji, kjer je bila nastanjena 2. italska legija (legio II. Italica), je bil osnovan sredi druge polovice 2. stoletja.55 To je bil čas prvih večjih vpadov germanskih plemen, živečih zunaj mej rimskega imperija, ki so ogrozila varnost države. Cesar Mark Avrelij se je zgodaj zavedel te nevarnosti in ok. leta 165 rekrutiral dve novi legiji, II. in III. Italiko, ki sta bili nameščeni na meji v Noriku in Reciji.56 Do večje invazije germanskih plemen je prišlo verjetno okrog l. 168, ko so napadalci oblegali Akvilejo, razrušili Opitergij in prodrli do Verone. V državi se je prvič pokazalo, da donavska meja ni dovolj trdna. Začasno je bilo ustanovljeno posebno vojaško območje, t. i. Praetentura Italiae et Alpium, ki je obstajala med letoma 168–171.57 Pretentura (sl. 12) je obsegala območje okrog Forum Iulii, emonski mestni teritorij, zaledje Trsta (Tergeste) in območje Celja (Celeia) ter tako vključevala in branila glavno pot, ki je vodila z Balkanskega polotoka proti Italiji – tako imenovana iliro-italska vrata.58 Ob tem je bila 2. italska legija z Donave prestavljena v novoustanovljeni tabor v Ločici, z namenom, da brani prehod prek Trojan (Atrans) v Italijo, torej prehod iz province na italsko območje, v regijo Venetia et Histria. Ob jasni povezavi arheoloških materialnih ostankov z zgodovino in političnim dogajanjem v rimskem imperiju pa se nam nujno zastavi tudi vprašanje, zakaj sta prav območje J Norika in celejski ager odigrala tako vidno vlogo v času markomanskih vpadov. Je bilo to strateško pomembno območje v zavesti rimskega vojaškega razmišljanja in strateškega načrtovanja še od 1. stoletja dalje?59 Ali pa se moramo ozreti po vidnih osebnostih iz vojaškega in političnega vrha iz vrst noriške aristokracije, ki so vrh svoje kariere dosegle prav v drugi polovici 2. stoletja? Torej domačinov, ki so odlično poznali geografske danosti območja in vlogo prehoda prek Trojan. 53 54 55 56 57 58 280 59 Šašel 1974, 226. Šašel 1974, 228. Šašel 1979, 4. 57 58 59 Vidrih Perko 2006, 96. Kandler 1979, 202, sl. 20. Šašel Kos 1986, 243. Šašel Kos 1986, 241. Šašel 1974, 226. Šašel 1974, 228. Šašel 1979, 4. tioned by Jaroslav Šašel and Marjeta Šašel Kos.60 A selection of the Ločica fortress position on a slight rise along the river, immediately along the Carnuntum–Aquileia road, shows an excellent understanding of the terrain,61 which could well be ascribed to the experiences of T. V. Clemens and his possible role in the emperor’s staf. he last known stage of Clemens’ career was from 177, when he was a member of the emperor’s council (consilium principis). he list is given hierarchically and among the 12 possible members Clemens from Celeia was 6th in line. It is likely that he was made a senator, perhaps in gratitude for his achievements during the Marcomannic Wars,62 and he is still considered the only senator among the Norican aristocracy. he military tile workshop at Vransko and the Ločica ob Savinji legionary fortress can thus be directly linked to the political history of the Roman Empire during the second half of the 2nd century, thereby again emphasising the active role of the south-eastern Alpine area during the Marcomannic Wars, probably also of the individual political igures stemming from the area. An increase in production at the Vransko tile workshop and its production in the 2nd century can be linked to the building and garrisoning of the fortress at Ločica. In the mid-2nd century at the latest, the existing local workshop probably 60 61 62 Šašel 1983, 298; Šašel Kos 1984; Šašel Kos 1986, 253. T. V. Clemens is rightfully considered the most illustrious personality of Roman Celeia, as his career – fundamentally the career of an eques Romanus – still inspires awe. He was born into a family of the equestrian order and was raised from early age for a military career, which eventually led him to high administrative functions in the Empire (Šašel 1983, 300). From the 11 dedicatory inscriptions (Lovenjak 2003, 238) that his townspeople dedicated to him in his home town, indicating an especially high degree of honour (Visočnik 2007, 279 and fn. 1065; Visočnik 2008), we can ascertain his development and the progress of his military career. His military career started under Emperor Antoninus Pius (138–161), when he performed numerous functions of prefects and tribunes in military units and further in the provincial administrations. He was (among his other titles) the procurator of Mauretania, the governor of Raetia, Belgica and both Germanias. His functions are listed on the inscription CIL III 5215, on which is also the title ab epistulis augustorum at the very top, a title already belonging to the period of Marcus Aurelius’ and Lucius Verus’ reign in 163 (Šašel 1983, 297; Visočnik 2007, 280; Visočnik 2008). This very important administrative function (the emperor’s secretary or assistant administrating his correspondence) is only mentioned once on the dedicatory inscriptions in Celeia (CIL III 5125); however, it shows the important position T. V. Clemens had achieved by that time. Ater reaching this function, the course of his career is a mystery for a certain period, coinciding with the Marcomannic Wars and the functioning of the fortress in Ločica. Perhaps he was actively involved in the events as member of the emperor’s command moving between Aquileia and Carnuntum (Šašel 1983, 297; Šašel Kos 1986, 243–245). Šašel 1983, 298. Šašel 1983, 298. Na osebnost Tita Varija Klementa (Titus Varius Clemens) in njegovo verjetno aktivno vlogo pri osnovanju vojaškega tabora v Ločici sta opozorila že J. Šašel in M. Šašel Kos.60 Izbor položaja legijskega tabora v Ločici, ob reki, na rahli vzpetini, neposredno ob prometni povezavi Karnuntum‒ Akvileja, kaže na zelo dobro poznavanje terena,61 kar bi lahko pripisali prav izkušnjam T. V. Klementa in njegovi morebitni vlogi v cesarjevem štabu. Zadnja znana stopnja Klementove kariere je iz leta 177, ko je bil član ožjega vladarskega sveta – consilium principis. Popis je zasnovan hierarhično in med 12 možmi najdemo Celejana na šestem mestu. Verjetno je, da je bil sprejet med senatorje, morda v zahvalo za svoje dosežke v času markomanskih vojn,62 in še zdaj velja za edinega senatorja med noriško aristokracijo. Arheološko ugotovljeno vojaško opekarno na Vranskem in legijski tabor v Ločici ob Savinji lahko tako neposredno povežemo s politično zgodovino rimskega imperija v drugi polovici 2. stoletja in na ta način znova opozorimo na aktivno vlogo jugovzhodnoalpskega območja v času markomanskih vojn, verjetno pa tudi posameznih političnih osebnosti, ki so izhajale od tod. Povečan obseg proizvodnje vranske opekarne oziroma njeno proizvodnjo v 2. stoletju lahko povežemo z gradnjo vojaškega tabora v Ločici in navzočnostjo rimske legije v novonastalem taboru. Najpozneje sredi 2. stoletja je bil 60 61 62 Šašel 1983, 298; Šašel Kos 1984; Šašel Kos 1986, 253. T. V. Klement po pravici velja za najznamenitejšo osebnost rimske Celeje, saj njegova kariera, ki je v bistvu kariera rimskega viteza (eques Romanus), še vedno zbuja občudovanje. Rojen v viteški družini, je bil očitno že od mladih let dalje vzgajan za vojaško kariero, ki pa ga je nato pripeljala tudi do visokih administrativnih funkcij v cesarstvu (Šašel 1983, 300). Z enajstih počastilnih napisov (Lovenjak 2003, 238), ki so mu jih dali postaviti v domačem mestu, kar je pomenilo še posebej visoko stopnjo odlikovanja (Visočnik 2007, 279 in op. 1065; Visočnik 2008), je moč razbrati razvoj in vzpon njegove kariere. Njegova vojaška kariera se je vzpenjala pod cesarjem Antoninom Pijem (138–161), ko je opravljal številne funkcije prefektov in tribunov v vojaških enotah, in se nato nadaljevala v upravah provinc. Bil je med drugim prokurator Mavretanije, upravitelj Recije, Belgike in obeh Germanij. Njegove funkcije so v celoti navedene na napisu CIL III 5215, na katerem pa na najvišjem mestu najdemo naslov ab epistulis avgustorum, ki že sodi v čas vlade Marka Avrelija in Lukija Vera, v leto 163 (Šašel 1983, 297; Visočnik 2007, 280; Visočnik 2008). Ta zelo pomembna uradniška funkcija (cesarjev tajnik oziroma uradnik, ki je skrbel za njegovo korespondenco) je na počastilnih napisih v Celeji omenjena le enkrat (CIL III 5125), kaže pa, kako vplivno mesto si je do tega časa pridobil T. V. Klement. O njegovi karieri po dosegu omenjene funkcije se za nekaj časa izgubi vsaka sled prav med markomanskimi vojnami in delovanjem tabora v Ločici. Morda je bil aktivno vključen v dogajanje kot član cesarjevega glavnega štaba, ki se je premikal med Akvilejo in Karnuntom (Šašel 1983, 297; Šašel Kos 1986, 243–245)? Šašel 1983, 298. Šašel 1983, 298. 281 expanded and production changed to meet the needs of the army at Ločica. Whether the old workshop was abandoned at this time or its owners and workers were incorporated into the new facility, we cannot say. Given the positions of both kilns and the irregular wall corners surrounding them, we may assume that they were partly adapted, renovated and incorporated in the new workshop. he short time period during which the legio II Italica built and garrisoned the fortress at Ločica (approx. 168 to 172) was obviously the time of the greatest production at the Vransko tile factory. he circumstances changed thoroughly with the transfer of the unit to the Danube, irst to Albing and then to Enns (Lauriacum, Austria).63 he fortress at Ločica was abandoned. Perhaps the tile production at Vransko ceased at the army’s departure, but it is more likely that the extent of production irst fell drastically. he pottery and coins from the irst half of the 3rd century show that the site continued to function for at least some time after the army’s departure. he small rectangular unstamped tiles discovered immediately under the present-day surface suggest that the tile production continued for some time, although probably on a smaller scale. he waste pit also did not contain the remains of pottery or their wasters, so we can conclude that the production remained the same. However, the capacities of the kilns probably vastly surpassed the local needs. Moreover, despite the vicinity of the main traic connection, which could have enabled the distribution of products to a wider area, the economic and political changes in the Roman state probably inluenced the abandonment of the Vransko tile factory in the irst half or the mid-3rd century. Translation: Vesna Pintarič Kocuvan Language editing: Terry Troy Jackson verjetno razširjen lokalni že obstoječi obrat in proizvodnja preusmerjena za potrebe vojske v Ločici. Ali je bila stara delavnica ob tem opuščena, ali pa so bili njeni lastniki in delavci vključeni v nove razmere, ne moremo pojasniti. Glede na položaj obeh peči in nepravilne kote zidov, ki jih obkrožajo, smemo sklepati, da sta bili delno pozidani na oziroma ob ostankih že obstoječe arhitekture, ki so jo prilagodili, obnovili in vključili v objekte novega obrata. Kratko obdobje, v katerem je 2. italska legija gradila novi tabor in v njem živela (tabor v Ločici je obstajal od ok. leta 168 do 172), je bilo očitno čas največjega obsega proizvodnje opekarne na Ilovici. Okoliščine so se temeljito spremenile s premestitvijo legije na Donavo, najprej v Albing in nato v Enns (Lauriacum, Avstrija).63 Tabor v Ločici je bil opuščen oziroma razstavljen in podrt, glavni odjemalec in porabnik izdelkov z Vranskega se je odselil. Morda je opekarna opustila proizvodnjo že ob odhodu vojske, verjetneje pa je obseg proizvodnje najprej močno upadel. Keramično gradivo in posamezni novci iz prve polovice 3. stoletja kažejo, da je življenje na najdišču vsaj nekaj časa po odhodu vojske teklo naprej. Najdbe malih pravokotnih nežigosanih opek, odkritih takoj pod površino, dajo slutiti, da se je proizvodnja opek še nekaj časa nadaljevala, čeprav verjetno v manjšem obsegu. V odpadni jami tudi ni bilo ostankov keramičnih posod ali odpadkov njihovega žganja, zato sklepamo, da je proizvodnja ostala enaka. Zmogljivost peči pa je verjetno močno presegala lokalne potrebe. In kljub bližini glavne prometne povezave, ki bi ob ustrezni organizaciji lahko omogočila distribucijo izdelkov v širšem okolju, so verjetno tudi že gospodarske in politične spremembe v rimski državi vplivale na to, da je bil obrat na Vranskem v prvi polovici ali sredini 3. stoletja dokončno opuščen. BIBLIOGRAPHY / LITERATURA BISHOP, M. C., COULSTON, J. C. 1989, Roman Military Equipment. – Shire Archaeology 59, Aylesbury. BOLTA, L. 1975, Vransko. – In/V: Arheološka najdišča Slovenije, Ljubljana, 295. BOON, G. C. 1984, Laterarium Iscanum. he Anteixes, Brick & Tile-Stamps of the Second Augustan Legion. – Cardif. 282 DJURA JELENKO, S. 1995, Prvo poročilo o arheoloških izkopavanjih ville rustice v Zgornjih Dovžah v letih 1992–1993. – Koroški zbornik 1, 83–114. DJURIĆ, B., PINTÉR, I. 1994, Poročilo o ekstenzivnem arheološkem pregledu. – Unpublished report / Neobjavljeno poročilo, SAAS, Ljubljana,. BRODRIBB, G. 1987, Roman Brick and Tile. – Gloucester. HELEN, T. 1975, Organization of Roman Brick Production. – Acta Instituti Romani Finlandiae 9, Helsinki. CUOMO di CAPRIO, N. 1979, Pottery- and Tile-Kilns in South Italy and Sicily. – In/V: A. McWhirr (ed./ur.), Roman Brick and Tile, BAR International Series 68, Oxford, 73–96. HORN, H. G. 1987, Das Leben im römischen Rheinland. – In/V: H. G. Horn (ed./ur.), Die Römer in Nordrhein-Westfalen, Stuttgart, 139–318. 63 Winkler 1971, 94; Winkler 2003, 131. 63 Winkler 1971, 94; Winkler 2003, 131. KANDLER, M. 1979, Zu den Grabungen F. Lorgers im Legionslager Ločica (= Lotschitz). – Arheološki vestnik 30, 172– 207 [summary in Slovene / povzetek v slovenščini]. KOLŠEK, V. 1961a, Vransko. – Varstvo spomenikov 8, 254–256. KOLŠEK, V. 1961b, Vransko, Celje – Antičko naselje. – Arheološki pregled 3, 79–80. LAZAR, I. 1997, he Roman Tile Factory at Vransko near Celeia (Noricum). Part One: Excavation Report. – Rei Cretariae Romanae Favtorvm Acta 35, 159–164. LAZAR, I. 1999, he Roman Tile Factory at Vransko near Celeia (Noricum). – In/V: M. R. DeMaine, R. M. Taylor (eds./ur.), Life of the Average Roman, A Symposium, White Bear Lake, 23–34. LAZAR, I. 2003a, Rimska vojaška opekarna. – In/V: D. Prešeren (ed./ur.), Zemlja pod vašimi nogami, Arheologija na avtocestah Slovenije, Vodnik po najdiščih, Ljubljana, 79–83. LAZAR, I. 2003b, Ilovica pri Vranskem. – In/V: D. Prešeren (ed./ur.), Zemlja pod vašimi nogami, Arheologija na avtocestah Slovenije, Vodnik po najdiščih, Ljubljana, 153–154. LAZAR, I. 2006a, Ilovica pri Vranskem. – Arheologija na avtocestah Slovenije 1, Ljubljana. LAZAR, I. 2006b, Rimska cesta Atrans–Celeia. – Rast, letnik XVII, št. 2 (104), Novo mesto, 160–163. LOVENJAK, M. 2003, Rimski napisi iz Celja, najdeni med 1991 in 2003 / Die römischen Inschriften von Celje, gefunden in den Jahren 1991 bis 2003. – Arheološki vestnik 54, 331–368. McWHIRR, A. 1979, Tile-Kilns in Roman Britain. – In/V: A. McWhirr (ed./ur.), Roman Brick and Tile, BAR International Series 68, Oxford, 97–190. MÜLLER, G., HORN, H. G. 1979, Durnomagus. Das römische Dormagen. – Führer des Rheinischen Landesmuseums Bonn 9, Köln. PETROVITSCH, H. 2006, Legio II Italica. – Forschungen in Lauriacum 13, Linz. PETRU, S., PETRU, P. 1978, Neviodunum (Drnovo pri Krškem). – Katalogi in monograije 15, Ljubljana [summary in German / povzetek v nemščini]. SZILÁGY, J. 1972, Ziegel. – In/V: RE XA, 433–446. ŠAŠEL, J. 1974, Über Umfang und Dauer der Militärzone Praetentura Italiae et Alpium zur Zeit Mark Aurels. – Museum Helveticum 31, 225–233 [= Opera selecta, Situla 30, Ljubljana 1992, 388–396]. ŠAŠEL, J. 1979, Avgust 69: vojaški puč v Poetovioni. – Kronika 27/1, 1–7. ŠAŠEL, J. 1983, Zu T. Varius Clemens aus Celeia. – Zeitschrift für Papyrologie und Epigraphik 51, 295–300 [= Opera selecta, Situla 30, Ljubljana 1992, 206–211]. ŠAŠEL KOS, M. 1984, Prerez čez zgodovino celejanskih prebivalcev v luči onomastičnih in prozopografskih podatkov. – Živa antika 34, 251–255. ŠAŠEL KOS, M. 1986, Zgodovinska podoba prostora med Akvilejo, Jadranom in Sirmijem pri Kasiju Dionu in Herodijanu / A historical outline of the region between Aquileia, the Adriatic, and Sirmium in Cassius Dio and Herodian. – Ljubljana. ŠEMROV, A. 1998, Die Fundmünzen der römischen Zeit in Slowenien IV. – Berlin. ŠEMROV, A. 2006, Novci. – In/V: I. Lazar, Ilovica pri Vranskem, Arheologija na avtocestah Slovenije 1, Ljubljana, 248. ŠUBIC, Z. 1968, Kompleks rimskih opekarskih peči v Ptuju. – Arheološki vestnik 19, 455–472 [summary in French / povzetek v francoščini]. VIDRIH PERKO, V. 2006, Keramično gradivo. – In/V: I. Lazar, Ilovica pri Vranskem, Arheologija na avtocestah Slovenije 1, Ljubljana, 86–247. VISOČNIK, J. 2007, Jezikovne značilnosti napisov antične Celeje z okolico kot vir za preučevanje romanizacije celejskega prostora. – Unpublished Ph. D. thesis / Neobjavljena doktorska disertacija, Filozofska fakulteta Univerze v Ljubljani. VISOČNIK, J. 2008, Vojaški napisi iz Celeje in njene okolice / Roman military inscriptions from Celeia and its surroundings. – Arheološki vestnik 59, 325–357. WINKLER, G. 1971, Legio II. Italica. – Jahrbuch des Oberösterreichischen Musealvereines 116, 85–138. PICHLER, F. 1867, Die Münzen der römischen und byzantinischen Kaiser in der Steiermark. – Repertorium der steirischen Münzkunde 2, Graz. WINKLER, G. 2003, Legio II. Italica. Das ‘Hausregiment’ von Lauriacum. – In/V: J. Leskovar, C. Schwanzar, G. Winkler (eds./ ur.) Worauf wir stehen, Archäologie in Oberösterreich, Kataloge der Oberösterreichischen Landesmuseum N. F. 195, Linz, 131–136. PICHLER, F. 1879, Text zur archaeologischen Karte von Steiermark. – Graz. ZUPANČIČ, N. 1998, Izvor in žganje keramike iz arheološkega najdišča Vransko. – Materiali in geookolje 45, 359–373. PIRKMAJER, D. 1985, Rimska cesta Emona–Celeia. Odsek itinerarske ceste Aquileia–Donava. – Celjski zbornik 1985, 159–176. ZUPANČIČ, N. 2006, Analize gline in opek. – In/V: I. Lazar, Ilovica pri Vranskem, Arheologija na avtocestah Slovenije 1, Ljubljana, 253–263. RE: G. Wissowa et al. (eds./ur.), Paulys Real-Encyclopädie der classischen Altewrtumswissenschaft, Stuttgart 1893–1995. RIEDL, E. 1903, Funde aus Cilli. – Mitteilungen der k. k. ZentralKommission 29, 85–87. ŽIŽEK, I. 1995, Lončarske in opekarske peči Petovione. – Unpublished undergraduate thesis / Neobjavljena diplomska naloga, Oddelek za arheologijo, Filozofska fakulteta Univerze v Ljubljani, Ljubljana. 283 GERMANIC SPUR FROM PTUJ GERMANSKA OSTROGA S PTUJA Andrej Preložnik, Aleksandra Nestorović Andrej Preložnik, Aleksandra Nestorović Abstract Izvleček he spur held in the Regional Museum Ptuj Ormož (PMPO) belongs to a group of similar spurs with a prominent prick, mostly made of bronze, which are typical for the region of the middle Danube north of the limes. It is probably a product of Germans who settled there, who had served in the Roman army, or at least been inluenced by the Romans. Due to its location on a strategically important route, Poetovio was involved in events associated with the Marcomannic wars. heir echo can be traced in the spur and in some other objects mentioned in the article. Ostroga, ki jo hrani Pokrajinski muzej Ptuj Ormož (PMPO), sodi v skupino podobnih, večinoma bronastih ostrog s poudarjeno bazo trna, ki so značilne za srednje Podonavje, predvsem za ozemlje severno od limesa. Verjetno so jo izdelali tam naseljeni Germani, ki so sodelovali v rimski vojski ali nanjo vsaj vplivali. Petoviona je bila zaradi lege ob strateško pomembni povezavi vključena v dogajanja, povezana z markomanskimi vojnami. Njihov odmev lahko slutimo tudi v obravnavani ostrogi, morda pa tudi v nekaterih drugih v prispevku omenjenih najdbah. Keywords: spur, Marcomannic wars, Germans, Ptuj, Poetovio, armaments, Danube region Ključne besede: ostroga, markomanske vojne, Germani, Ptuj, Poetovio, oborožitev, Podonavje Figure 1. Bronze spur, PMPO 2071 (photo B. Farič). Slika 1. Bronasta ostroga, PMPO 2071 (foto B. Farič). 285 he archaeological collection of the Regional Museum of Ptuj Ormož (PMPO) has a relatively small number of Roman military equipment items. he majority of these inds entered the collection before systematic excavations and they are therefore without contexts or with not very accurate data. Even the preservation of objects is fairly modest, as they are, for the most part, just fragments. his supports the conjecture that they are random inds, lost or damaged and discarded within the settlement. A review of these objects was published by Iva Mikl Curk some 30 years ago, while some pieces were published later.1 Iva Curk became familiar with this type of material during the preparation of the catalogue of the “old” fundus of Ptuj Museum. In that publication there was a brief description without illustration of a bronze spur, which, until recently, remained overlooked and neglected (ig. 1).2 Probably this was the result of an assumption (mentioned on the description card), that it was a recent item. Since the spur is an interesting and unique ind on the territory of Slovenia we want to present it in more detail. Arheološka zbirka Pokrajinskega muzeja Ptuj Ormož (PMPO) hrani relativno malo delov rimskodobne vojaške opreme. Večinoma so takšne najdbe v muzej prišle še pred sistematičnimi raziskavami in so zato brez kontekstov, če pa že, so ti premalo natančni. Tudi ohranjenost predmetov je dokaj skromna, saj gre po večini za odlomke najverjetneje naključno najdenih, poškodovanih ali zavrženih predmetov iz naselbin. Pregledni zapis o njih je že pred več kot 30 leti objavila Iva Mikl Curk, posamezni kosi pa so bili objavljeni tudi pozneje.1 Iva Curk se je s takšnim gradivom seznanila že ob pripravi kataloga starega fonda ptujskega muzeja. V njem je objavila – a le s sumarnim opisom, brez ilustracije – tudi bronasto ostrogo, ki je zaradi tega ostala do nedavnega spregledana (sl. 1).2 Verjetno se je to zgodilo zaradi na kartotečnem kartonu zapisane domneve o recentnosti predmeta. Ker je ostroga zanimiv in v slovenskem okolju edinstven predmet, jo želiva podrobneje predstaviti. Ostroga Ostroga ima nizek lok s kratkima krakoma z gumbastima zaključkoma ter velik trn s šestimi fasetami, zasukan navzgor tako, da je gornja stran ravna, spodnja pa nekoliko izbočena. Baza trna je debelejša od krakov in od njiju ločena s prečnima robnikoma-izrastkoma, ki jo presegata. Baza trna oz. trn sta izvotljena za 1,1 cm. Razpon loka znaša 6 cm, dolžina trna z bazo 4 cm, brez baze 3,3 cm, maksimalna višina baze trna je 2,1 cm. Izdelana je iz bakrove zlitine3 in odlično ohranjena. Vpisana je pod inv. št. 2071 (sl. 2). Figure 2. Bronze spur, PMPO 2071. Scale = 1 : 1 (drawing N. Uršič). Slika 2. Bronasta ostroga, PMPO 2071. M = 1 : 1 (risba N. Uršič). Spur he spur consists of a slightly curved bow with short arms and knobbed ends and a large prick with six facets, rotated upwards with the upper side straight and the lower slightly convex. he base of the prick is thicker than the arms and separated from them by the transverse projections that extend on either side of the bow. Base and prick are hollow and the conical hole is 1.1 cm deep. he width of the arc is 6 cm, the length of the prick without the base is 3.3 cm (with the base, 4 cm), the maximum height of the base is 2.1 cm. It is made of a copper alloy3 and well-preserved. It is listed as inventory no. 2071 (ig. 2). here is no information on the inding of the spur. Since it is mentioned – although misidentiied – in the irst list of the museum collection prepared in 1902 by Josef 1 Mikl Curk 1980; Žižek 2001. Mikl Curk 1976, 32, cat. no. 2071; Nestorović 2012, 37, cat. no. 43. The analysis of the elemental composition of the alloy has not yet been completed, so the object as well as other inds will be hereater regarded as “bronze”. 4 1 2 3 286 Najdiščnih podatkov za ostrogo ne poznamo. Sodi med starejše najdbe, saj je zajeta – čeprav neprepoznana – že v prvi popis Ferkove muzejske zbirke, ki ga je leta 1902 pripravil Josef Felsner.4 Hranili so jo v vitrini VI »Römische Abteilung«, v sklopu kovinskega nakita in okrasja (»Schmuck und Zierrat«). Pozneje je bila razstavljena v 3. predalu omare VIII Abramićeve postavitve.5 Čeprav skromen, je to pomemben podatek, saj izključuje možnost, da bi predmet izviral iz skupine najdb, odkritih pri gradnji Herbersteinove palače na Dunaju (tam bi takšne germanske najdbe prej pričakovali) in hranjenih na Ptujskem gradu. Najverjetnejše, čeprav ne popolnoma zanesljivo najdišče ostroge ostaja zato Ptuj ali njegova okolica. 2 3 5 Mikl Curk 1980; Žižek 2001. Mikl Curk 1976, 32, kat. št. 2071; Nestorović 2012, 37, kat. št. 43. Analiza elementarne sestave zlitine predmeta še ni bila opravljena, zato bo v nadaljevanju tako kot tudi druge najdbe obravnavan kot bronast. Str. 11: »Nr. 212: Spitze aus Bronze mit 2 angegossenen geschweiten Armen die in kleine kugelförmige knopfendigen. Die Spitze bildet eine 8seitige Pyramide.«; seznam hrani arheološki oddelek PMPO. PMPO, kartoteka predmetov; Abramić 1925, 118, kat. št. 120. Felsner, it evidently belongs with the oldest inds.4 It was located in cabinet VI of Römische Abteilung, with metal jewellery and ornaments (Schmuck und Zierrat). Later, it was exhibited in drawer no. 3 of cabinet VIII of Abramić’s layout.5 Although modest, this is an important point because it excludes the possibility that the object was part of the material subsequently kept in Ptuj Castle which was discovered during the construction of the Herberstein palace in Vienna (where such Germanic inds would be more expected). Although there is no direct evidence, the most likely location for the ind of the spur remains therefore Ptuj or its surroundings. Previous research and typology Currently there is no comparable object in the Ptuj material. Also, such spurs are not known elsewhere in Slovenia. his is not surprising, since it is a form that is found mainly in the area between the Baltic Sea and the Danube River. Bow spurs with knobs are in fact common grave good in the Przeworsk and Wielbark culture, which is why they have long been considered a typical element of equiment of (east) Germanic horsemen.6 Because of these numerous and clear parallels, spurs found in the Danube region and the Carpathian Basin are also treated as a Germanic element, and because these are dated to the 2nd and 3rd centuries, they are associated with invasions of Germanic peoples.7 In the 1980s and 1990s a signiicant number of similar spurs was discovered in the middle Danube region, particularly in Lower Austria. Although this was certainly partly the result of the expansion of amateur metal-detector prospecting, it is nevertheless evidence of a high concentration of these spurs north of the Danube and along the Morava river. he locations and dating of the inds have led researchers to conclude that their presence is associated with the events during and after Marcomannic Wars, when the region was in the centre of events. In this context, they have already been discussed.8 he irst to consider this type of spur was Martin Jahn who marked them as a Mischform with attributes of bow spurs and saddle spurs.9 From the latter they have adopted a distinct prick base with projections. Jahn found such spurs mainly in the Baltic countries (Vimose, Seeland, Obliwice, Kamień, Mojtyny), one in Silesia (Trzebnik) 4 5 6 7 8 9 Page 11: “Nr. 212: Spitze aus Bronze mit 2 angegossenen geschweiten Armen die in kleine kugelförmige knopfendigen. Die Spitze bildet eine 8seitige Pyramide.”; the list is kept at archaeological department of PMPO. PMPO card index of objects; Abramić 1925, 118, cat. no. 120. Jahn 1921, 39–66; Ginalski 1991. E.g. Bóna 1963, 293. Tejral 1999, 160–165; Tejral 2003, 252–257; Tejral 2004, 345, igs. 25, 31; Tejral 2006. Jahn 1921, 64–66, 117. Dosedanje raziskave in tipologije Predmet trenutno med ptujskim gradivom nima primerjav. Tudi drugod v Sloveniji takšnih ostrog ne poznamo. To ni presenetljivo, saj gre za obliko, ki jo najdemo predvsem na ozemlju med Baltikom in Donavo. Gumbaste lokaste ostroge so namreč pogost pridatek v grobovih przeworške in wielbarške kulture, zaradi česar že dolgo veljajo za značilen element (vzhodno) germanske bojevniško-konjeniške oprave.6 Zaradi številnih in jasnih primerjav so kot germanski element obravnavali tudi takšne ostroge, najdene v Podonavju in Panonski nižini, zaradi datacije v 2. in 3. stoletje pa so jih že zgodaj povezovali z vpadi germanskih ljudstev.7 V osemdesetih in devetdesetih letih minulega stoletja je bilo precej podobnih ostrog odkritih v srednjem Podonavju, predvsem v Spodnji Avstriji. Čeprav je to gotovo tudi posledica razmaha detektorskega iskanja arheoloških najdb, je vseeno očitna velika koncentracija takšnih ostrog severno od Donave in ob Moravi. Prostor in datacija sta privedla raziskovalce do sklepa, da je njihova navzočnost povezana z dogajanji med markomanskimi vojnami in po njih, ko je bilo to območje v žarišču dogajanj. V tem kontekstu so bile že večkrat obravnavane.8 Prvi je na ostroge te vrste opozoril Martin Jahn in jih označil za obliko z lastnostmi lokastih in sedlastih ostrog.9 Od slednjih so prevzele poudarjeno bazo trna z izrastki. Jahn je takšne ostroge našel predvsem ob Baltiku (Vimose, Seeland, Obliwice, Kamień, Mojtyny), eno v Šleziji (Trzebnik) in dve na Madžarskem (Dunapentele in neznano najdišče). Gre za precej raznovrstne ostroge, ki se ločijo po obliki, masivnosti in materialu, skupna jim je le razčlenjena baza. Preprosto tipologijo ostrog je za svoj kronološki pregled poznorimske dobe in dobe preseljevanja pripravil Kazimierz Godłowski, ki je ptujski podobne ostroge uvrstil v tip II.10 Bistveno bolj razčlenjeno tipologijo lokastih ostrog przeworške kulture je pripravil Jerzy Ginalski. Ostroge je razvrstil v več skupin in tipov. Ostroge z nizkim lokom, majhnimi gumbi in bolj ali manj koničnim trnom je uvrstil v skupino E, njen prvi tip pa sestavljajo ostroge s klepsidrasto razširjenim osrednjim delom loka oz. z izrastki na bazi trna. Naštel je 11 kosov z 9 najdišč, od katerih je le tista iz Trzebnika bronasta, dve sta nedoločeni, druge pa so železne.11 6 7 8 9 10 11 Jahn 1921, 39–66; Ginalski 1991. Npr. Bóna 1963, 293. Tejral 1999, 160–165; Tejral 2003, 252–257; Tejral 2004, 345, sl. 25, 31; Tejral 2006. Jahn 1921, 64–66, 117. Godłowski 1970, 8, sl. 2: c. Ginalski 1991, 59–61, sl. 11: 1–3, 12 in katalog. 287 and two in Hungary (Dunapentele and unknown site). hose are quite diverse spurs, which are distinguishable by their shape, massiveness and material; the only common element is the elaborated base. Kazimierz Godłowski prepared a simple typology of spurs for his chronological overview of the Late Roman and the migration period. He placed spurs similar to the Ptuj specimen in type II.10 A much more elaborate typology of bow spurs of the Przeworsk culture was prepared by Jerzy Ginalski. Spurs were classiied into several groups and types. Spurs with a low bow, small buttons, and more or less conical prick are placed in Group E, the irst type of which is represented by spurs with a “clepsydra” shaped prick base or transverse projections. He listed 11 pieces from nine sites, of which only one, from Trzebnik, was made of bronze, two were of indeterminate material and the rest of iron.11 Much more common are bronze spurs of the Group E from sites of the Wielbark culture, but these have not yet been subjected to systematic analysis. Among them are some spurs of type E1 after Ginalski or II after Godłowski that show similarities, but also diferences in comparison with those from the Danube area.12 In the absence of a typology that would consider more accurately the bronze specimens and indings from the wider area, Ginalski’s typology is used usually also for the knobbed bow spurs found between the Danube and Baltic. But differences in the forms and a lack of clarity in the typology often cause problems; in some cases, Ginalski, Tejral and Mączyńska ascribe the same bronze spurs to diferent types.13 The Danube Group E1 Most spurs similar to the Ptuj example are found along the middle Danube. hey feature highlighted and proiled prick bases. Because of the knobbed endings and relatively low bow they can be classiied in Group E after Ginalski, but more problematic is their core ranking as having the characteristics of types E1, E5 and E6. Because of the prick base with projections they should be counted to the irst, but the size of the prick in the Danubian specimens is signiicantly bigger. Przeworsk spurs of type E1 have up to 2 cm long pricks, while the Danubian examples are mostly more than 3 cm, similar to type E6. hey also difer in material, being mostly bronze, while the classic Przeworsk specimens are usually made of iron. Because of these differences, it is reasonable to consider them as a separate 10 11 12 288 13 Godłowski 1970, 8, ig. 2: c. Ginalski 1991, 59–61, igs. 11: 1–3, 12, and catalogue. E.g. Niewęgłowski 1983, ig. 16: 5, with projections but with signiicantly broader arms than those from the Danube area. Ginalski 1991; Tejral 2003, ig. 9; Mączyńska 2009, 334, list 35. Veliko pogostejše so bronaste ostroge skupine E na najdiščih wielbarške kulture, vendar pa te še niso bile sistematično predstavljene. Med njimi je tudi nekaj ostrog tipa E1 po Ginalskem oz. II po Godłowskem, ki kažejo podobnosti, a tudi razlike s podonavskimi.12 Ker ni tipologije, ki bi bolj upoštevala bronaste primerke in najdbe s širšega območja, se zdaj za gumbaste lokaste ostroge med Donavo in Baltikom uporablja navadno tipologija Ginalskega. Zaradi razlik v oblikah in zaradi nejasnosti v tej tipologiji je to pogosto problematično; Ginalski, Tejral in Mączyńska v nekaterih primerih iste bronaste ostroge pripisujejo različnim tipom.13 Podonavska skupina E1 Največ ostrog, podobnih ptujski, je bilo najdenih na srednjedonavskem območju. Zanje je značilna poudarjena in proilirana baza trna. Zaradi gumbastih zaključkov in sorazmerno nizkega loka jih lahko uvrstimo med ostroge skupine E po Ginalskem, problematična pa je njihova ožja uvrstitev, saj imajo lastnosti tipov E1, E5 in E6. Zaradi baze trna z izrastki bi jo morali prištevati k prvemu, vendar pa je velikost trna pri podonavskih bistveno večja. Przeworške ostroge tipa E1 imajo do 2 cm dolge trne, podonavske pa večinoma daljše od 3 cm, podobno kot ostroge tipa E6. Razlikujejo se tudi po materialu – večinoma so bronaste, klasični przeworški primerki pa so navadno iz železa. Zaradi teh razlik jih je smiselno obravnavati kot ločeno skupino, za katero zaradi pogostega sklicevanja na tipologijo Ginalskega predlagava pragmatično poimenovanje »podonavska skupina E1«. Vanjo lahko vključimo naslednje ostroge (sl. 3): 1. Vimose (Jahn 1921, 64–65, sl. 67, 117, kat.št. 449–450); 2. Enzersfeld (Stuppner 1988, 288, sl. 719); 3. Mušov, grob (Tejral 1992, sl. 44: 5, 7; Peška, Tejral 2002, 529–534, B 10–11); 4. »Trnavska regija« (Trnavský kraj) (http://www.lovecpokladu.cz/artefakty/nalez/ostroha-6570); 5. Ptuj (Poetovio) (sl. 1, 2; Mikl Curk 1976, 32, kat. št. 2071; Nestorović 2012, 37, kat. št. 43); 6. Trzebnik (Jahn 1921, 65, sl. 68, 117, kat. št. 457); 7. Baumgarten, grob (Adler 1976, 6, sl. 8); 8. Enns (Lauriacum), grob? (Jahn 1921, 51; Ubl 1997, 74, kat. št. I/F-25); 9. Gbelce-Tehelňa, grob 2/61 (Beljak 2006, sl. 5: 7; Beljak, Kolník 2006, 84, sl. 10: 1–2); 10. Obliwice (Jahn 1921, 64–65, sl. 67, 117, kat. št. 452); 11. Bernhardsthal (Allerbauer, Jedlicka 2000, 643, sl. 611); 12. Potzneusiedl (Farka, Nowak 1988, 277, sl. 515); 12 13 Npr. Niewęgłowski 1983, sl. 16: 5, z izrastki, a bistveno širšimi kraki kot podobne iz Podonavja. Ginalski 1991; Tejral 2003, sl. 9; Mączyńska 2009, 334, seznam 35. Figure 3. Spurs of “Danube Group E1”. 1 Vimose; 2 Enzersfeld; 3 Mušov; 4 “Trnavský region”; 5 Ptuj; 6 Trzebnik; 7 Baumgarten; 8 Enns; 9 Gbelce; 10 Obliwice; 11 Bernhardsthal; 12 Potzneusiedl; 13 “Hungary”. 3, 9 iron; 1 bronze and iron; rest bronze. Scale 2, 3, 5, 7, 9, 11, 12 = 1 : 2; rest ca 1 : 2 (1, 6, 10 ater Jahn 1921; 2 ater Stuppner 1988; 3 ater Tejral 1992; 4 drawing ater photo www.lovecpokladu; 7 ater Adler 1976; 8 drawing ater photo, Museum Lauriacum, Enns; 9 ater Beljak 2006; 11 ater Allerbauer, Jedlicka 2000; 12 ater Farka, Nowak 1988; 13 ater Zschille, Forrer 1899). Slika 3. Ostroge »podonavske skupine E1«. 1 Vimose; 2 Enzersfeld; 3 Mušov; 4 »Trnavska regija«; 5 Ptuj; 6 Trzebnik; 7 Baumgarten; 8 Enns; 9 Gbelce; 10 Obliwice; 11 Bernhardsthal; 12 Potzneusiedl; 13 »Madžarska«. 3, 9 železo; 1 bron in železo; drugo bron. M 2, 3, 5, 7, 9, 11, 12 = 1 : 2; drugo pribl. 1 : 2 (1, 6, 10 po Jahn 1921; 2 po Stuppner 1988; 3 po Tejral 1992; 4 risba po fotograiji www. lovecpokladu; 7 po Adler 1976; 8 risba po fotograiji, Museum Lauriacum, Enns; 9 po Beljak 2006; 11 po Allerbauer, Jedlicka 2000; 12 po Farka, Nowak 1988; 13 po Zschille, Forrer 1899). group. On the basis of frequent references to the typology of Ginalski we suggest that a pragmatic solution would be to classify these Danubian examples as “the Danube Group E1”. he following spurs can be incorporated into it at the moment (ig. 3): 1. Vimose (Jahn 1921, 64–65, ig. 67, 117, cat. nos. 449–450); 2. Enzersfeld (Stuppner 1988, 288, ig. 719); 3. Mušov, grave (Tejral 1992, ig. 44: 5, 7; Peška, Tejral 2002, 529–534, B 10–11); 4. “Trnavský region” (Trnavský kraj) (http://www. lovecpokladu.cz/artefakty/nalez/ostroha-6570); 5. Ptuj (Poetovio) (igs. 1, 2; Mikl Curk 1976, 32, cat. no. 2071; Nestorović 2012, 37, cat. no. 43); 6. Trzebnik (Jahn 1921, 65, ig. 68, 117, cat. no. 457); 7. Baumgarten, grave (Adler 1976, 6, ig. 8); 8. Enns (Lauriacum) grave? (Jahn 1921, 51; Ubl 1997, 74, cat. no. I/F-25); 13. »Madžarska« (Zschille, Forrer 1899, 12, t. XXI: 3; Jahn 1921, 117, kat. št. 459). Domnevno sodijo v to skupino tudi: 14. Purbach (kartirana pri Tejral 1999, sl. 41: 19; Tejral 2003, sl. 9: 19); 15. Seeland (navedena pri Jahn 1921, 117, kat. št. 451). Sorodna, vendar s krajšim trnom, širšimi izrastki in v mlajšem kontekstu: 16. Dunaújváros (Dunapentele, Intercisa), grob B85 (Jahn 1921, 117, kat. št. 458; Bóna 1963, 248, kat. št. 27; Teichner 2011, 120, sl. 51, 126, kat. št. M128, 258, t. 18: B85:10). Na podlagi objavljenih risb in opisov lahko ostroge te skupine glede na masivnost baze trna in njene proilacije razdelimo v več različic. 289 Figure 4. Map of selected types of bronze (red) and iron (black) spurs of Group E. Danube Group E1; + E1; ◆ E2; • E5 and E 6; E7. Numbered are ind places of spurs of the Danube Group E1 and similar: 1 Ptuj; 2 Dunaújváros; 3 Gbelce; 4 Purbach; 5 Potzneusiedl; 6 Baumgarten; 7 Bernhardsthal; 8 Mušov; 9 Enzersfeld; 10 Enns; 11 Trzebnik; 12 Obliwice; 13 Vimose (with adittions ater Ginalski 1991, ig. 12: 1; Peška, Tejral 2002, igs. 6, 7 and 8; Tejral 2003, ig. 9; Maczyńska 2009, ig. 47). Slika 4. Karta izbranih tipov bronastih (rdeče) in železnih (črno) ostrog skupine E. podonavska skupina E1; + E1; ◆ E2; • E5 in E 6; E7. Oštevilčena so najdišča ostrog podonavske skupine E1 in sorodnih: 1 Ptuj; 2 Dunaújváros; 3 Gbelce; 4 Purbach; 5 Potzneusiedl; 6 Baumgarten; 7 Bernhardsthal; 8 Mušov; 9 Enzersfeld; 10 Enns; 11 Trzebnik; 12 Obliwice; 13 Vimose (dopolnjeno po Ginalski 1991, sl. 12: 1; Peška, Tejral 2002, sl. 6, 7 in 8; Tejral 2003, sl. 9; Maczyńska 2009, sl. 47). 9. Gbelce-Tehelňa, grave 2/61 (Beljak 2006, ig. 5: 7; Beljak, Kolník 2006, 84, ig. 10: 1–2); 10. Obliwice (Jahn 1921, 64–65, ig. 67, 117, cat. no. 452); 11. Bernhardsthal (Allerbauer, Jedlicka 2000, 643, ig. 611); 12. Potzneusiedl (Farka, Nowak 1988, 277, ig. 515); 13. “Hungary” (Zschille, Forrer 1899, 12, pl. XXI: 3; Jahn 1921, 117, cat. no. 459). Possible additonal entries in this category: 14. Purbach (mapped in Tejral 1999, ig. 41: 19; Tejral 2003, ig. 9: 19); 15. Seeland (cited in Jahn 1921, 117, cat. no. 451). A related spur, but with a shorter prick, broader projections and younger context: 16. Dunaújváros (Dunapentele, Intercisa) grave B85 (Jahn 1921, 117, cat. no. 458; Bóna 1963, 248, cat. no. 27; Teichner 2011, 120, ig. 51, 126, cat. no. M128, 258, pl. 18: B85:10). Based on published drawings and descriptions, spurs of this group can be divided into several subsets according to the massiveness of the prick base and its proile. One includes spurs with a high elevated base and emphasized projections. he original version can be seen in the spur from Vimose (ig. 3: 1), its simpliied version in spurs from Enzersfeld and “Trnavský region” (ig. 3: 2, 4), while there is an iron version in a pair of spurs from Mušov (ig. 3: 3). he irst three have a base decorated with more or less stressed upright lines. Other spurs have the base still separated from the bow, but lower, with the line between projections lat (Baumgarten, Gbelce: ig. 3: 7, 9), conical (Ptuj, Trzebnik: ig. 3: 5, 6) or wavy (Obliwice: ig. 3: 10). he base of the spur from Enns (ig. 3: 8) has one side lat and the opposite conical. For the spurs from Bernhardsthal and Potzneusiedl (ig. 3: 11, 12) due to poor preservation, it is unclear whether they had the projections in the irst place, but it seems that the sideline of their base had a slot in the middle, which connects them with a spur from Obliwice. he spur from Hungary has a stronger base with straight sides without protuberances (ig. 3: 13). Most of these spurs have faceted pricks, but that is not unique element of this group. At least for some of the better illustrated or described spurs, we know that they had an asymmetrical bent prick (Baumgarten, Ptuj, Enns, Vimose, Enzersfeld, Mušov: ig. 3: 1–3, 5, 7–8). hey all have large long pricks that were usually partially hollowed to reduce the weight (ig. 3: 2, 5–6, 8–9, 11). Only two of them were made of iron (Mušov, Gbelce: ig. 3: 3, 9), one is made of bronze and iron (Vimose: ig. 3: 1), the others were bronze. Jaroslav Tejral attributed the hollowed prick of some iron spurs to the imitation of bronze prototypes.14 290 14 Peška, Tejral 2002, 169. Eno sestavljajo ostroge z izrazito dvignjeno bazo in poudarjenimi izrastki. Izvirno obliko te različice lahko vidimo v ostrogi iz Vimoseja (sl. 3: 1), njen enostavnejši posnetek v tisti iz Enzersfelda in »Trnavske regije« (sl. 3: 2, 4), železno izvedbo pa v paru ostrog iz Mušova (sl. 3: 3). Prve tri imajo bazo tudi okrašeno z razmeroma izrazitimi pokončnimi linijami. Pri drugih ostrogah je baza še vedno ločena od loka, vendar nižja, njena stranica med izrastki pa je lahko ravna (Baumgarten, Gbelce: sl. 3: 7, 9), konična (Ptuj, Trzebnik: sl. 3: 5, 6) ali valovita (Obliwice: sl. 3: 10). Baza ostroge iz Ennsa (sl. 3: 8) ima eno stranico ravno, drugo konično. Pri primerkih iz Bernhardsthala in Potzneusiedla (sl. 3: 11, 12) zaradi slabe ohranjenosti ni jasno, ali sta izrastke sploh imela, zdi pa se, da je imela njuna baza trna na sredi zarezo, kar ju povezuje z ostrogo iz Obliwic. Primerek iz »Madžarske« ima le poudarjeno bazo z ravnimi stranicami brez izrastkov (sl. 3: 13). Večina ostrog te skupine je fasetiranih, kar sicer ni posebnost te skupine. Vsaj za nekatere bolje narisane ali opisane vemo, da so imele trn asimetrično ukrivljen (Baumgarten, Ptuj, Enns, Vimose, Enzersfeld, Mušov: sl. 3: 1–3, 5, 7–8). Vse imajo velik, dolg trn, ki je zaradi velikosti navadno deloma izvotljen (sl. 3: 2, 5–6, 8–9, 11). Le dve sta izdelani iz železa (Mušov, Gbelce: sl. 3: 3, 9), ena je iz brona in železa (Vimose: sl. 3: 1) druge so bronaste. Izvotljenost trna pri nekaterih železnih ostrogah pripisuje Jaroslav Tejral posnemanju bronastih predlog.14 Če to drži, bi tudi pri ostrogah naše skupine bile bronaste izvedbe starejše od železnih. Geografsko segajo takšne ostroge od Baltika (Vimose, Seeland? in Obliwice) prek Šlezije (Trzebnik) do Podonavja, od koder jih poznamo največ. Ptuj je zaenkrat najbolj jugozahodno najdišče. Kot kaže, jih ne pozna przeworška kultura, pa tudi wielbarška ne v večjem številu. To odpira zanimiva vprašanja o njihovem izvoru. Ostroga iz Vimoseja je zanesljivo kakovostnejša in dražja izvedba, ki je bila morda vzor za podobne iz Podonavja. To sicer ne pomeni, da kvalitetnih izdelkov niso nosili (ali izdelovali) tudi ob limesu, saj najdemo bimetalno ostrogo npr. tudi v germanskem grobu iz Mušova in v rimskem taboru Iža ob Donavi. Velika koncentracija ob srednji Donavi kaže, da so večino ostrog obravnavane skupine nosili in izdelovali prav tam. Med seboj so si podobne, vendar niso identične, zaradi česar lahko domnevamo skupni izvor, a izdelovanje v več delavnicah. Zanimivo je, da se primerljivi primerki najdejo na precejšnjih razdaljah, kar kaže na mobilnost teh predmetov oz. njihovih nosilcev. Pri ptujski ostrogi je ob razdalji pomembno tudi dejstvo, da je bila odkrita v notranjosti imperija, čeprav v strateško pomembnem velikem mestu ob glavni prometni žili v Ita14 Peška, Tejral 2002, 169. If this is correct, the bronze versions of spurs of our group might be older than iron spurs. his kind of spur occurs from the Baltic Sea (Vimose, Seeland? Obliwice) through Silesia (Trzebnik) to the Danube, from where we know most of them. Ptuj represents the most southwest site. It seems that they are unknown or absent in the Przeworsk culture and rare in the Wilbark culture, which raises interesting questions about their origin. he spur from Vimose is deinitely a more elaborate and precious version that might have been a model for similar ones from the Danube. his does not mean that quality products were not worn (or even produced) at the limes; bimetallic spurs were found for example in the Germanic tomb at Mušov and in the Roman camp at Iža by the Danube. High concentrations of inds along the middle Danube show that the majority of the spurs of this group were produced and used right there. hey are similar, but not identical, which is why we can assume a common origin, but production in several workshops. It is interesting that comparable spurs were found at a considerable distance from the places where they would originally have developed, which indicates the mobility of these items or their users. In the case of the spur from Ptuj, besides distance, the fact that the object was detected in the interior of the empire – though in a strategically important large town on the main road to Italy – is also important. Because of its shape its Germanic origin is undoubted, while analogies and comparisons with other spurs of the Group E shows that their roots go back far to the north and not in the area directly behind the Carpathian Mountains. Due to the lack of closed contexts, the grave of Baumgarten is still the best support for the dating of this group of spurs. On the basis of a bronze kettle Egger 48 and a set of dipper/pan and strainer Egger 160/161, the grave is dated to the B2/C1 phase, therefore in the period after the Marcomannic wars.15 A similar date is also proposed for grave 3 (2/61) from Gbelce-Tehelňa dated to phase B2–B2/C1 because of the spurs, belt and ibula in it.16 lijo. Zaradi oblike je njihov germanski izvor nedvomen, analogije in primerjava z drugimi ostrogami skupine E pa kaže, da segajo njihove korenine daleč proti severu, in ne na ozemlje neposredno za Karpati. Zaradi pomanjkanja zaprtih kontekstov je še vedno najboljša opora za datiranje te skupine ostrog grob iz Baumgartna, ki je zaradi bronastega kotlička Egger 48 ter kompleta korca in cedila Egger 160/161 datiran v stopnjo B2/C1, torej v čas po markomanskih vojnah.15 Podobno je datiran tudi grob 3 (2/61) z grobišča Gbelce-Tehelňa, ki je na podlagi ostrog, spone in ibule datiran v stopnjo B2–B2/C1.16 Germanic or Roman? Germanska ali rimska? In addition to the spurs of the Danube Group E1 in the Danube region there are also frequent inds of bronze spurs with pronounced prick of type E5 and E6, while the type E2 with a short prick and the E7 with a protrusion at the base of the prick are also represented.17 Similar spurs from Group E are known in both the Przeworsk and Wielbark cultures, with a clear diference: Przeworsk spurs are mostly made of iron, Wielbark are of bronze (ig. 4). his 15 16 17 Adler 1976; Peška, Tejral 2002, 169; Tejral 2006, ig. 29. Beljak, Kolník 2006, 86–87. Tejral 1999, Abb. 20-23; Masek 2013. Razen ostrog podonavske skupine E1 so v Podonavju pogoste tudi bronaste ostroge z izrazitim trnom tipa E5 in E6, zastopana pa sta še tipa E2 s kratkim trnom in E7, z značilnim gumbastim izrastkom ob bazi trna.17 Podobne ostroge skupine E poznata tudi przeworška in wielbarška kultura, a z jasno razliko: przeworške so večinoma železne, wielbarške bronaste. (sl. 4). To razmerje, ki je lahko 15 16 17 Adler 1976; Peška, Tejral 2002, 169; Tejral 2006, sl. 29. Beljak, Kolník 2006, 86–87. Tejral 1999, sl. 20–23; Masek 2013. 291 diference, which may be conditioned by technological know-how, availability of raw materials or the popularity of the material, shows that the spurs in the Danube region must be linked with the Wielbark spurs, and their users with the peoples and groups from the northern regions. On the question of whether their owners belong to enemies or allies of the Roman empire Tejral pointed to the fact that most of the bronze spurs in the Danube region and Dacia were found in areas under the control of the Roman army, unlike iron ones, which are characteristic of the neighboring Germanic areas. He interpreted this as being due to the presence of Germanic auxiliary units in the Roman army.18 At the same time, he connected the local bronze spurs of Group E with the co-presence of certain ibulae types of Groups Almgren II and V, which are also characteristic for Wielbark culture. Because ibulae are considered as the primary element of women's costumes, this shows that entire groups of Germanic settlers must be taken in consideration.19 Magdalena Mączyńska came to similar conclusions.20 It is interesting that Germanic ibulae are also known from Ptuj. In Rabelčja vas a ibula of Almgren 41 type was found.21 As in the case of the spur, Ptuj represents the extreme southwest site for the brooch, which is probably not a coincidence. he presence of these Germanic groups does not necessary mean enforced settlement, as Tejral considering it,22 but could be welcome colonization of devastated areas. We can ind clues for that in the written sources. Cassius Dio reports on the authorization for the settlement of the territories within the Empire given to some allied tribes under the peace treaties.23 hat is consistent with the important role played by the communities in these border areas which had the contacts with the Empire and with free Germans after the Marcomannic wars.24 Despite the obvious Germanic origin of spurs under discussion, that does not mean that they were exclusively used by Germans. One way or another – through contact with opponents or allies – Romans got to knew them. Considering that they were found on the territory of the empire, some even in Roman camps or towns, it is possible that they were also used by the Roman cavalry. Such an example may be represented by the spur from Enns, 18 19 20 21 22 23 292 24 Tejral 1999, 193, igs. 40–41; Tejral 2003, 252–254. Tejral 1999, 188–196; Tejral 2003, 257, igs. 10, 11; Tejral 2004, 345, igs. 28a, 29–30. Mączyńska 2009, 62–63, 132–133, igs. 16, 22, 24–26, 47. Horvat 1982, 41–42, 55, pl. 1: 6; about the type see Mączyńska 2009, 35–39. Tejral 2006, 159. Cassius Dio, Historia 71,11,1–6, 71.21; historical overview with the extensive earlier literature, for example Šašel Kos 1986, 238f; Stahl 1989; Kehne 2009 Tejral 2006, 152–168. povezano s tehnološkim znanjem, dostopnostjo surovin ali priljubljenostjo materiala, kaže, da je treba ostroge v Podonavju povezovati z wielbarškimi, njihove nosilce pa z ljudstvi oz. s skupinami iz severnih predelov. Ob vprašanju, ali so bile te skupine sovražniki ali zavezniki imperija, je Tejral opozoril na dejstvo, da je bila večina bronastih ostrog v Podonavju in Dakiji najdena na območjih pod nadzorom rimske vojske, v nasprotju z železnimi, ki so značilne za sosednja germanska območja. To je pojasnjeval z navzočnostjo germanskih pomožnih enot v rimski vojski.18 Hkrati je tamkajšnje bronaste ostroge skupine E povezal s sočasno navzočnostjo ibul nekaterih tipov skupin Almgren II in V, ki so prav tako značilne za wielbarško kulturo. Ker so obravnavane ibule predvsem sestavni del ženske noše, je nujno računati na cele skupine germanskih naseljencev.19 Podobno je ugotavljala tudi Magdalena Mączyńska.20 Zanimivo je, da poznamo »germansko« ibulo tudi s Ptuja. V Rabelčji vasi je bila najdena ibula tipa Almgren 41.21 Tako kot pri obravnavani ostrogi je Ptuj tudi pri teh ibulah skrajno jugozahodno najdišče, kar verjetno ni naključje. Pri takšnih germanskih skupinah pa ne gre nujno le za izsiljeno naselitev, kot razmišlja Tejral,22 temveč tudi za dobrodošlo kolonizacijo opustošenih območij. Za to najdemo indice tudi v pisnih virih. Kasij Dijon piše npr. o dovoljenju za naselitev na ozemljih znotraj imperija, ki so ga nekatera zavezniška plemena dobila v okviru mirovnih pogodb.23 To bi se ujemalo tudi s pomembno vlogo, ki so jo skupnosti s teh obmejnih območij imele v stikih med imperijem in svobodnimi Germani v času po markomanskih vojnah.24 Kljub očitnemu germanskemu izvoru obravnavanih ostrog pa to ne pomeni, da so bili njihovi nosilci izključno Germani. Tako ali drugače – pri nasprotnikih ali zaveznikih – so jih spoznali tudi Rimljani. Če upoštevamo, da so bile najdene na ozemlju imperija, nekatere celo v rimskih taborih ali mestih, je mogoče, da so jih uporabljali tudi rimski konjeniki. Kot primer lahko navedemo ostrogo iz Ennsa, najdeno v grobu (?) znotraj legijskega tabora v Lavriaku, ali sicer mlajši grob iz Intercise (Dunapentele B85) z značilno rimsko vojaško pasno garnituro in ostrogo, ki spominja na tip E1. Da so tudi rimski vojaki prevzemali germanske elemente, kaže germanski pasni jeziček z obročkom (tip 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Tejral 1999, 193, sl. 40–41; Tejral 2003, 252–254. Tejral 1999, 188–196; Tejral 2003, 257, sl. 10, 11; Tejral 2004, 345, sl. 28a, 29–30. Mączyńska 2009, 62–63, 132–133, sl. 16, 22, 24–26, 47. Horvat 1982, 41–42, 55, t. 1: 6; o tipu nazadnje Mączyńska 2009, 35–39. Tejral 2006, 159. Cassius Dio, Historia 71,11,1–6; 71,21; zgodovinski pregled z obsežno starejšo literaturo npr. Šašel Kos 1986, 238ss; Stahl 1989; Kehne 2009. Tejral 2006, 152–168. which was found in the tomb (?) within the legionary camp Lauriacum, or otherwise in a later grave from Intercisa (Dunapentele B85) with a typical Roman military belt set and a spur that resembles type E1. hat the Roman soldiers also took up the Germanic elements is indicated by the Germanic belt itting (type II J Raddatz 3), which was an integral part of the belt set, also found in Lauriacum.25 How did the spur come to Ptuj? Since we have no ind information, we do not know anything about the context in which it was discovered. We can assume that it was brought into Poetovio by someone who has been actively connected with historical events – perhaps a veteran soldier from struggles with the Germans, perhaps a member of the unit responsible for the safety of the town and nearby routes. Raddatz J II 3), ki je bil sestavni del garniture, prav tako odkrite v Lavriaku.25 Kako se je ostroga znašla na Ptuju? Ker gre za najdbo brez podatkov, ne vemo nič o kontekstu, v katerem je bila odkrita. Domnevamo lahko, da jo je v Petoviono prinesel nekdo, ki je bil aktivno povezan s takratnimi dogodki. Morda veteran iz bojev z Germani, morda član enote, ki je skrbela za varnost poti in mesta? Sočasne vojaške najdbe s Ptuja Z markomanskimi vojnami lahko povežemo ustanovitev 2. dačanske kohorte (cohors II Aurelia Dacorum).26 Njena navzočnost je na Ptuju izpričana s koščeno tesero optia Iustusa, odkrito v drugem mitreju.27 Concurrent military inds from Ptuj he formation of the second Dacian cohort – cohors II Aurelia Dacorum can be linked with the Marcomannic wars.26 Its presence is attested in Ptuj with the bone tessera of optio Iustus found in the second mithraeum.27 From the third mithraeum we have the remains of scale armour.28 his type of defensive armour is a frequent ind in the Roman camps on the Danube, as well as in Germanic environments.29 With the events of that time or shortly after, perhaps grave 600 from the western Poetovio necropolis is related.30 In the tomb were found an iron pommel-ring sword and scabbard-slide.31 he sword has an unusually shaped short blade. On the basis of the handle design it seems to belong to the type of the swords that were popular in the 2nd– 3rd century in the northern (Germanic) provinces, as well as in free Germania.32 Similar comments can be made for the scabbard-slide, which is in the shape common in the Przeworsk culture of the period B2/C1–C1a.33 Although the Ptuj set cannot be directly linked to the Germans, it represents a weapon, which was known and used by the both sides involved in the conlict either through direct clashes or introduced by mercenaries. Also the deceased person from grave 600 may be someone who had an active role (judging from writing accessories maybe a low rank- Iz tretjega mitreja poznamo ostanke luskastega oklepa.28 Ti sodijo med pogoste najdbe v rimskih taborih ob Donavi, pa tudi v germanskih okoljih.29 S takratnim dogajanjem ali časom tik po njem je morda povezan grob 600 z zahodne petovionske nekropole.30 V grobu sta bila odkrita železen meč z obročastim glavičem in obešalka z nožnice meča.31 Meč ima nenavadno oblikovano kratko rezilo, na podlagi ročaja pa sodi med meče, ki so bili v 2.–3. stoletju priljubljeni v severnih (germanskih) provincah, pa tudi v svobodni Germaniji.32 Podobno velja za obešalko z nožnice, ki je v przeworški kulturi značilna oblika iz obdobja B2/C1–C1a.33 Čeprav ptujskega kompleta ne moremo neposredno povezati z Germani, je dejstvo, da so takšno orožje zaradi spopadov in/ali najemnikov poznali in uporabljali obe v konlikt vpleteni strani. Tudi v primeru pokojnika iz groba 600 gre torej lahko za nekoga, ki je imel aktivno vlogo (glede na pisalni pribor je bil morda nižji častnik) v vojaški strukturi Petovione v času markomanskih vojn ali po njih. V zvezi z germanskimi prvinami iz Petovione velja omeniti še en nenavaden predmet. Na videz spominja na kavlje hitre tehnice (kot tak je bil tudi interpretiran), a se od teh razlikuje po strukturi – sestavljen je iz kavlja, okoli katerega je tesno navita žica, ki se končuje z zanko.34 Znani so še trije podobni predmeti, ki so v objavah pripisani ger25 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 Ubl 2002, 276–277, pl. I: 3–8, itting: 6, for the dispersion see Mączyńska 2009, 113–115, ig. 44. Ilkić 2006, 64–67. Abramić 1925, 127, ig. 88; Nestorović 2012, 37, cat. no. 40. Mikl Curk 1976, 51, cat. no. 7939; Žižek 2001, pl. 21: 3. E.g. Tejral 2006, 152, ig. 24: 6, 15. Istenič 2000, 196–197, pls. 129–130. Istenič 2000, pl. 129: 5, 6. Istenič 1999, 66–67; Jaskanis 2005, 95. Istenič 1999, 67; Biborski 2000, 58, igs. 4: 1, 5: 1, 6: 4; Beljak 2006, ig. 5: 3; Beljak, Kolník 2006, 77, 84, ig. 12: 2; Miks 2007, 305–308. 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 Ubl 2002, 276–277, t. I: 3–8, germ. jeziček: 6; za razprostranjenost glej Mączyńska 2009, 113–115, sl. 44. Ilkić 2006, 64–67. Abramić 1925, 127, sl. 88; Nestorović 2012, 37, kat. št. 40. Mikl Curk 1976, 51, kat. št. 7939; Žižek 2001, t. 21: 3. Npr. Tejral 2006, 152, sl. 24: 6, 15. Istenič 2000, 196–197, t. 129–130. Istenič 2000, t. 129: 5, 6. Istenič 1999, 66–67; Jaskanis 2005, 95. Istenič 1999, 67; Biborski 2000, 58, sl. 4: 1, 5: 1, 6: 4; Beljak 2006, sl. 5: 3; Beljak, Kolník 2006, 77, 84, sl. 12: 2; Miks 2007, 305–308. Mikl Curk 1976, 20, kat. št. 846, t. 26: 51. 293 ing oicer?) in the military structure of Poetovio during or after the Marcomannic wars. Considering the Germanic elements from Poetovio it is worth mentioning another unusual object. In appearance it resembles the hook of a steelyard balance (it has been interpreted as such), but difers from one in structure – it consists of a hook around which the wire is tightly wound ending with a loop.34 here have been three other similar objects attributed to the Germanic peoples. he best analogy is a similar object from Dolne Lovčice northeast of Bratislava, Slovakia.35 Bona attributed inds from the graves to the Quadi. He found analogies and interpretations among the Germanic inds from the Silesian Kartuzy and from Libeř in the Czech Republic.36 he similarities are there in the function of the connecting element between the loop attached to the waist and ire steel. Although the piece from Ptuj has a larger hook, it may be a similar suspension (or part of some other useful object) of Germanic origin because it has a similar shape and structure. Conclusion he Marcomannic wars caused major economic and demographic changes in the Noric-Pannonian area. hey introduced a new military doctrine, as well as new military equipment and even the settlement of new ethnic groups. Poetovio as a metropolis on the strategically important transport route was certainly involved in these processes. Consequently, we can interpret the spur together with the other military and Germanic inds mentioned here as an echo of those turbulent times. manskim ljudstvom. Najboljša analogija zanje je podoben predmet iz Dolnih Lovčic, severovzhodno od Bratislave na Slovaškem.35 Bona je najdbe iz tamkašnjih grobov pripisal Kvadom, za obravnavani predmet pa je našel analogije in razlago v germanskih najdbah iz spodnješlezijskega mesta Kartuzy in iz Libeřa na Češkem.36 Tam sta podobna predmeta imela vlogo povezovalnega člena med zanko, pritrjeno na pas, in kresilom. Čeprav ima ptujski kos večji kavelj, lahko gre zaradi enake oblike in izvedbe tudi v tem primeru za podobno obešalo za kresilo (ali za del kakega drugega uporabnega predmeta) germanskega izvora. Sklep Markomanske vojne so na noriško-panonskem ozemlju povzročile velike ekonomske in demografske spremembe. Prinesle so novo vojaško doktrino, pa tudi novo vojaško opremo in celo naselitev novih etničnih skupin. Petoviona kot velemesto na strateško zelo pomembni prometni povezavi je bila gotovo vključena v te procese, kot odmev vsega naštetega pa lahko razumemo tudi v članku predstavljeno »germansko« ostrogo in druge sočasne vojaške najdbe. Zahvale Za pomoč pri identiikaciji posameznih predmetov se zahvaljujeva dr. Zsoltu Mrávu, Zsóiji Masek (oba Magyar Nemzeti Múzeum, Budapest) in dr. Reinhardtu Harreitherju (Museum Lauriacum, Enns), ki je dal prijazno na razpolago fotograijo tam hranjene ostroge, Borisu Fariču in Nejki Uršič (oba PMPO Ptuj) za odlične fotograije oz. risbe ptujske ostroge, ter Claudii Marchesi, ki je lektorirala prevod v angleščino. Acknowledgements For their help with the identiication of individual items we would like to thank Dr. Zsolt Mráv, Zsóia Masek (both at the Magyar Nemzeti Muzeum, Budapest) and Dr. Reinhardt Harreither (Museum Lauriacum, Enns), who also provided a photo of the spur stored there. We would also like to thank to Boris Farič and Nejka Uršič (both at the PMPO Ptuj) for excellent photos and drawings of the spur from Ptuj. Claudia Marchesi provided proofreading support. Translation: Andrej Preložnik Language editing: Claudia Marchesi 34 35 294 36 Mikl Curk 1976, 20 cat. no. 846, pl. 26: 51. Bóna 1963, 243, cat. no. 13, pl. XLIII: 13. Bóna 1963, 275; Pič 1907, 152, pl. 58: 3. 35 36 Bóna 1963, 243, kat. št. 13, t. XLIII: 13. Bóna 1963, 275; Pič 1907, 152, t. 58: 3. BIBLIOGRAPHY / LITERATURA ABRAMIĆ, M. 1925, Poetovio. Vodnik po muzeju in stavbnih ostankih rimskega mesta. – Ptuj. ADLER, H. 1976, Kaiserzeitliche Funde aus Baumgarten an der March. – Mitteilungen der anthropologischen Gesellschaft in Wien 106, 3–16. ALLERBAUER, S., JEDLICKA, F. 2000, Bernhardsthal. – Fundberichte aus Österreich 39, 642–643. BELJAK, J. 2006, Púchovská kultúra a Germáni na Pohroní v staršej dobe rímskej. – In/V: E. Droberjar, M. Lutovský (eds./ ur.), Archeologie barbarů 2005, Sborník příspěvků z I. protohistorické konference “Pozdně keltské, germánské a časně slovanské osídlení”, Kounice, 20–22, září 2005, Praha, 257–272. BELJAK, J., KOLNÍK, T. 2006, Germánske hroby z Čaky a Gbeliec. Príspevok k osídleniu juhozápadného Slovenska v dobe rímskej. – Slovenská archeológia 54/1, 57–91. BIBORSKI, M. 2000, Nowe znaleziska rzymskich mieczy z Barbaricum w świetle problemów konserwatorskich. – In/V: R. Madyda-Legutko, T. Bochnak (eds./ur.), Superiores Barbari, Księga ku czci Profesora Kazimierza Godłowskiego, Kraków, 49–80. BÓNA, I. 1963, Beiträge zur Archäologie und Geschichte der Quaden. – Acta Archaeologica Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae 15, 239–307. FARKA, C., NOWAK, H. 1988, Potzneusiedl. – Fundberichte aus Österreich 24–25 (1985–1986), 276–277. GINALSKI, J. 1991, Ostrogi kabłąkowe kultury przeworskiej. Klasyikacja typologiczna. – Przegląd Archeologiczny 38, 53–82 [summary in German / povzetek v nemščini]. GODŁOWSKI, K. 1970, he Chronology of the Late Roman and Early Migration Periods in Central Europe. – Zeszyty naukowe Uniwersytetu Jagiellońskiego 217, Prace archeologiczne 11, Kraków. HORVAT, M. 1982, K rimskim ibulam iz Rabelčje vasi v Ptuju. – Arheološki vestnik 33, (1983), 47–56 [summary in German / povzetek v nemščini]. ILKIĆ, M. 2006, Antičke plombe iz Sotina (Cornacum). – Radovi Zavoda za povijesne znanosti HAZU u Zadru 48, 57–80 [summary in English / povzetek v angleščini]. ISTENIČ, J. 1999, Poetovio, zahodna grobišča I. Grobne celote iz Deželnega muzeja Joanneuma v Gradcu / Poetovio, the western cemeteries I. Grave-Groups in the Landesmuseum Joanneum, Graz. – Katalogi in monograije 32, Ljubljana. ISTENIČ, J. 2000, Poetovio, zahodna grobišča II. Grobne celote iz Deželnega muzeja Joanneuma v Gradcu. Katalog / Poetovio, the western cemeteries II. Grave-Groups in the Landesmuseum Joanneum, Graz. Catalogue. – Katalogi in monograije 33, Ljubljana. JASKANIS, J. 2005, Krupice. Ein Graberfeld Der Przeworsk- Und Wielbark-Kultur in Ostpolen. – Monumenta archaeologica barbarica 10, Warszawa. KEHNE, P. 2009, Rom in Not. Zur Geschichte der Markomannenkriege. – In/V: 2000 Jahre Varusschlacht, Konlikt, Stuttgart, 98–108. MĄCZYŃSKA, M. 2009, Der frühvölkerwanderungszeitliche Hortfund aus Łubiana, Kreis Kościerzyna (Pommern). – Bericht der Römisch-Germanischen Kommission 90, 7–482. MASEK, Zs. 2013, Római kori bronz sarkantyú Pér-Mindszentpusztáról / Ein römerzeitlicher bronzener Sporn von PérMindszentpuszta. – In/V: I. G. Farkas, A. Szabó (eds./ur.), Res Militares Antiquae, Specimina nova dissertationum ex Instituto Historiae Antiquae et Archaeologiae Universitatis Quinqueecclesiensis Supplementum 12, Pécs, 135–149. MIKL CURK, I. 1976, Poetovio I. – Katalogi in monograije 13, Ljubljana. MIKL-CURK, I. 1980, Nekaj vojaških starin iz Poetovione. – In/V: Zbornik posvečen Stanetu Gabrovcu ob šestdesetletnici, Situla 20–21, Ljubljana, 431–437 [summary in English / povzetek v angleščini]. MIKS, Ch. 2007, Studien zur römischen Schwertbewafnung in der Kaiserzeit. – Kölner Studien zur Archäologie der römischen Provinzen 8, Leidorf. NESTOROVIĆ, A. 2012, Velemesto Petoviona / he City of Poetovio. – In/V: M. Vomer Gojkovič, I. Žižek, A. Nestorović, Sprehod skozi tisočletja, Arheologija Spodnjega Podravja / Travelling through milleniums, Archaeology of the Lower Drava river region, Ptuj, 10–25, 37–54. NIEWĘGŁOWSKI, A. 1983, Dwa cmentarzyska z okresu rzymskiego w Goździku, gm. Borowie, woj. Siedlce. – Sprawozdania Archeologiczne 35, 131–159 [summary in English / povzetek v angleščini]. PEŠKA, J., TEJRAL, J. 2002, Das germanische Königsgrab von Mušov in Mähren. – Römisch-Germanisches Zentralmuseum, Monographien 55, Mainz. PIČ, J. L. 1907, Die Urnengräber Böhmens. – Leipzig. STAHL, M. 1989, Zwischen Abgrenzung und Integration: Die Verträge der Kaiser Mark Aurel und Commodus mit den Völkern jenseits der Donau. – Chiron 19, 289–317. STUPPNER, A. 1988, Enzersfeld. – Fundberichte aus Österreich 24–25, (1985–1986), 288. ŠAŠEL KOS, M. 1986, Zgodovinska podoba prostora med Akvilejo, Jadranom in Sirmijem pri Kasiju Dionu in Herodijanu / A historical outline of the region between Aquileia, the Adriatic, and Sirmium in Cassius Dio and Herodian. – Ljubljana. JAHN, M. 1921, Der Reitersporn seine Entstehung und früheste Entwicklung. – Mannus Bibliothek 21, Leipzig. 295 TEICHNER, F. 2011, Die Gräberfelder von Intercisa II. Die Altfunde der Museumssammlungen in Berlin, Mainz und Wien. – Bestandskatalog 11, Berlin. des 13. Internationalen Symposiums “Grundprobleme der frühgeschichtlichen Entwicklung im mittleren Donauraum” , Zwettl, 4.–8. Dezember 2000, Wien, 327–387. TEJRAL, J. 1992, Die Probleme der römisch-germanischen Beziehungen unter Berücksichtigung der neuen Forschungsergebnisse im niederösterreich-südmährischen hayalußgebiet. – Bericht der Römisch-Germanischen Kommission 73, 377–475. TEJRAL, J. 2006, Die germanische Gießereiwerkstatt in Pasohlávky (Bez, Břeclav). Ein Beitrag zur Frage der Fernhandels und Kulturbeziehungen nach den Markomannenkriegen. – Památky Archeologické 97, 133–170. TEJRAL, J. 1999, Die Völkerwanderungen des 2. und 3. Jhs. und ihr Niederschlag im archäologischen Befund des Mitteldonauraumes. – In/V: J. Tejral (ed./ur.), Das mitteleuropäische Barbaricum und die Krise des römischen Weltreiches im 3. Jahrhundert, Spisy Archeologického ústavu AV ČR Brno 12, Brno, 137–213. UBL, H. (ed./ur.) 1997, Katalog zur Schausammlung “Römerzeit” des Museums Lauriacum – Enns. Bd. 2: Katalog der Ausstellung. – Forschungen in Lauriacum 12/2, Enns, Wien. TEJRAL, J. 2003, Zur Frage der germanisch-sarmatischen kulturellen Beziehrungen an der Wende von der älteren zur jüngeren Kaiserzeit. – In/V: C. von Carnap-Bornheim (ed./ur.), Kontakt – Kooperation – Konlikt, Germanen und Sarmaten zwischen dem 1. und dem 4. Jahrhundert nach Christus, Internationales Kolloquium des Vorgeschichtlichen Seminars der Philipps-Universität Marburg, 12.–16. Februar 1998, Schriften des Archäologischen Landesmuseums 1, Neumünster, 239–274. TEJRAL, J. 2004, Mušov und Czarnówko. Bemerkungen zu weiträumigen Verbindungen zwischen germanischen Herrschaftszentren. Archäologische Beiträge. – In/V: H. Friesinger, A. Stuppner (eds./ur.), Zentrum und Peripherie – Gesellschaftliche Phänomene in der Frühgeschichte, Materialien 296 UBL, H. 2002, Ein “Ringschnallencingulum” aus Lauriacum. – In/V: M. Buora (ed./ur.), Miles Romanus dal Po al Danubio nel Tardoantico, Atti del convegno internazionale, Pordenone-Concordia Sagittaria, 17–19 marzo 2000, Pordenone, 275–285. ZSCHILLE, R., FORRER, R. 1899, Der Sporn in seiner Formenentwicklung 2. – Berlin. ŽIŽEK, I. 2001, Tretji ptujski mitrej v luči materialne kulture. – In/V: M. Vomer Gojkovič, N. Kolar (eds./ur.), Ptuj v rimskem cesarstvu, mitraizem in njegova doba, Mednarodno znanstveno srečanje / Ptuj im römischen Reich, Mithraskult und seine Zeit, Internationales Symposium / Ptuj in the Roman empire, mithraism and its era, International scientiic symposium, Ptuj, 11.–15. oktober 1999, Archaeologia Poetovionensis 2, Ptuj, 125–166 [summary in German / povzetek v nemščini]. HAKAMORA IN DRUGI DELI KONJSKE OPREME IZ RIMSKE VILE PRI MOŠNJAH Veronika Plaum, Judita Lux Izvleček Med izkopavanji ob gradnji gorenjske avtoceste so bili v rimski podeželski vili pri Mošnjah najdeni tudi redki predmeti, ki se uvrščajo v skupino domnevno vojaške konjske opreme. Ob dvojnih gumbih, obeskih in ploščati okrogli okrasni plošči zbuja posebno pozornost del bronaste enodelne brzde, t. i. hakamore, ki je prva takšna najdba v Sloveniji. Predmeti se uvrščajo večinoma med splošno razširjene oblike, le okrasni plošči sta bolj lokalni obliki, z analogijami v Sisciji. Najdbe so datirane v 1. in 2. stoletje, redke lahko še do sredine 3. stoletja, torej v čas življenja rimske vile pri Mošnjah. Ključne besede: Slovenija, Mošnje, rimska doba, rimska vila, konjska oprema, brzde, hakamora, obeski, okrasne plošče, dvojni gumbi 2 Najdbe 2.1 Enodelna kovinska brzda oz. hakamora 1 Uvod 2.1.1 Opis najdbe Med izkopavanji ob gradnji gorenjske avtoceste v letih 2006 in 2007 so bili v rimski podeželski vili pri Mošnjah blizu Radovljice (sl. 1) najdeni tudi redki predmeti, ki se uvrščajo v skupino konjske opreme, za katero se sklepa, da so jo uporabljali predvsem v vojaškem okolju: dvojni gumbi, obeska, ploščati okrogli okrasni plošči, predvsem pa del bronaste enodelne kovinske brzde, t. i. hakamore. Izsledki izkopavanj še niso objavljeni.1 Pregled gradiva in stratigrafskih podatkov kaže, da je vila živela v 1. in 2. stoletju, nato pa se je porušila (sl. 2). Redke najdbe iz 3. in 4. stoletja kažejo na skromnejšo poselitev na nekaterih mestih območja nekdanje vile in morda tudi v bližnji okolici. Ohranjeni del bronaste enodelne kovinske brzde oz. hakamore (sl. 3; t. 1: 1) je le polovica celotne brzde. Brzda ima okroglo stransko ušesce, stranica pod njim je razčlenjena v polkrog, in zaobljeni krilci. Kotni del z ušescem je od nosnega traku ločen s prečnima vrezoma in pravokotnima stopničkama. Ploščati nosni trak se nato še rahlo širi proti neohranjeni sredini. Po sredini nosnega traku poteka vzdolžno rebro. Paličasti stranski krak je okroglega preseka, spodnji lok ni ohranjen. Ohr. vel. 14,33 × 12,4 cm; teža 100 g. Slika 1. Lega rimske podeželske vile pri Mošnjah blizu Radovljice, raziskane ob gradnji gorenjske avtoceste (izdelava J. Lux in J. Ravnik). Figure 1. Position of the Roman villa rustica at Mošnje near Radovljica, excavated during the construction of the Gorenjska highway (J. Lux and J. Ravnik). Enodelna kovinska brzda iz vile pri Mošnjah je bila najdena v stanovanjskem poslopju vile (t. i. objekt 2), ob zahodni steni njegovega vzhodnega prostora (sl. 6). Ležala je v ruševinski plasti z novci iz 1. in 2. stoletja. 2.1.2 Terminologija 1 Sagadin, Lux 2007; Lux 2008; Lux, Sagadin 2012; Lux, Kramar 2011; Kramar, Lux, Mirtič 2008. Izraz hakamora, ki se v arheologiji uporablja za označevanje rimskih kovinskih enodelnih brzd (ang. hackamore, nem. Hackamore, v francoščini za te predmete upora- 297 Slika 2. Pogled na izkopane ostaline rimske vile pri Mošnjah iz zraka (foto J. Hanc). Figure 2. View from the air of the unearthed remains of the Roman villa at Mošnje (photo J. Hanc). 3 Slika 3. Mošnje. Bronasta enodelna kovinska brzda oz. hakamora (brez merila; foto A. Ogorelec). Figure 3. Mošnje. Bronze onepiece bridle or so-called hackamore (not to scale; photo A. Ogorelec). Slika 4. Domnevna načina uporabe enodelne kovinske brzde oz. hakamore po Annabel K. Taylor (po Taylor 1975, sl. 5 in 6). Figure 4. Two possible ways of using the one-piece metal bridle or hackamore, as supposed by Annabel K. Taylor (ater Taylor 1975, igs. 5 and 6). bljajo izraz caveçon2), je prevzet iz sodobnega konjeniškega izrazja in označuje sodobno vrsto konjske brzde, ki po obliki spominja na antično. Ker enačenje antičnih brzd s sodobnimi po funkciji ali po imenu ni ustrezno, predvsem v nemščini skušajo vpeljati ustreznejši, vendar opisni izraz za takšne antične brzde – kovinska brzda oz. enodelna kovinska brzda (Metallzaum oz. einteiliger Metallzaum), izraz hakamora pa ob njem ostaja zaradi lažjega razumevanja.3 V slovenskem konjeniškem žargonu se je sicer ustalil izraz hakamor, ki se pregiba po moško, vendar smo se na podlagi spola nemškega izraza odločili za žensko slovnično obliko hakamora, saj je ta različica v arheologiji splošno uveljavljena. Tudi mi zaradi nedvoumnosti ohranjamo izraz hakamora, sicer pa uporabljamo opisno oznako enodelna kovinska brzda. 2.1.3 Splošno o enodelnih kovinskih brzdah Enodelne kovinske brzde so izdelane iz enega kosa, ulitega iz brona oz. bakrove zlitine. Redkeje so skovane iz železa. Brzdo sestavljajo ploščat nosni trak, ozka stranska kraka in spodnji lok. Nataknjena je bila na konjsko glavo in ni segala v gobec, delovala pa je s pritiskom na konjevo nosno kost in ličnici ali spodnjo čeljust. Glede na arheološke najdbe, upodobitve, pisne vire in sodobne poskuse sta dokazana dva načina uporabe enodelnih kovinskih brzd (sl. 4). Pri prvem je bil spodnji lok obrnjen nazaj in je bil pod ličnicama, pri drugem je bil obrnjen naprej in je bil pod spodnjo čeljustjo.4 Enodelne kovinske brzde so uporabljali skupaj z žvalami za brzdanje predvsem jezdnih živali, včasih tudi vprežnih.5 4 2 298 4 3 Npr. Feugère 1993, 179–180. Junkelmann 1992, 24; Simon Ortisi 2003, 65–66. 5 Izčrpno Simon Ortisi 2003, 66–82; tudi Junkelmann 1992, 29–32, sl. 28; Taylor 1975, 111–113, sl. 5, 6; Palágyi 1989, 134, 136, sl. 6, 9, 12, 13. Simon Ortisi 2003, 81, 91–92; Junkelmann 1992, 29, 32; Palágyi 1990, 35, 37. Slika 5. Zemljevid razširjenosti enodelnih kovinskih brzd oz. hakamor skupine III.B2 po Christini Simon Ortisi (dopolnjeno po Simon Ortisi 2003, sl. 25). Figure 5. Distribution of the onepiece metal bridles or hackamores of the group III.B2 ater Christina Simon Ortisi (ater Simon Ortisi 2003, ig. 25). Slika 6. Načrt raziskanih delov rimske vile pri Mošnjah z označeno lego najdb (izdelava J. Lux in J. Ravnik). Figure 6. Plan of the excavated parts of the Roman villa at Mošnje with positions of the inds marked (J. Lux and J. Ravnik). Najstarejše znane enodelne kovinske brzde so iz avgustejske dobe, zunaj Italije so se v tistem času pojavljale le v vojaških utrdbah. Večina najdb je datiranih v 1. in 2. stoletje, predvsem v Panoniji in utrdbah ob limesu pa od sredine 2. do začetka ali sredine 3. stoletja. Najdbe je pogosto težko datirati, ker najdiščne okoliščine niso znane ali ne omogočajo ožje datacije.6 6 Simon Ortisi 2003, 39–40; Palágyi 1990, 32–34; Palágyi 1989, 139. Glede na kontekste dosedanjih najdb iz rimskih provinc prevladuje mnenje, da so enodelne kovinske brzde uporabljali predvsem v vojaškem okolju. Kot ugotavlja Christina Simon Ortisi, v provincah večja navzočnost vojske in mobilnost vojakov otežuje ali onemogoča ločevanje vojaškega in civilnega konteksta za posamezno najdbo.7 Za najdbe iz Pompejev in okolice pa dokazuje, da so jih tam uporabljali v civilnem okolju (kot statusni predmet, za vsakdanjo rabo, kot surovino ali za prodajo). 7 Simon Ortisi 2003, 106–116, 134. 299 Slika 7. Mošnje. Bronasta obeska in okrasni plošči iz svetle kovine (brez merila; foto A. Ogorelec). Figure 7. Mošnje. Two bronze pendants and two decorative plates made of bright metal (not to scale; photo A. Ogorelec). 7 9 Slika 8. Bronasti obeski s predrtim robom in apliciranim reliefnim okrasom. 1–2 Siscija; 3 rimska vila v Višićih v Hercegovini. M 1–2 = 1 : 1; 3 približno 1 : 1 (1–2 po RadmanLivaja 2004, t. 66: 480, 481; 3 po Čremošnik 1965, t. X: 1). Figure 8. Bronze pendants with perforations along the edges and an applied relief decoration. 1–2 Siscia; 3 Roman villa in Višići in Herzegovina. Scale 1–2 = 1 : 1; 3 approximately 1 : 1 (1–2 ater Radman-Livaja 2004, pl. 66: 480, 481; 3 ater Čremošnik 1965, pl. X: 1). Slika 9. Mošnje. Bronasti dvojni gumbi (brez merila; foto A. Ogorelec). Figure 9. Mošnje. Bronze double studs (not to scale; photo A. Ogorelec). 8 1 3 2.1.4 Opredelitev najdbe iz Mošenj 2.2 Obeska Tipološko delitev enodelnih kovinskih brzd je na podlagi nosnih trakov naredila Annabel K. Taylor.8 Nekoliko drugačno delitev je za panonske najdbe predlagala Sylvia Palágyi.9 Njuni tipologiji je prevzela in dopolnila Christina Simon Ortisi, tipe pa zaradi unikatnosti brzd raje imenovala skupine.10 2.2.1 Opis najdb Enodelna kovinska brzda iz vile pri Mošnjah je glede na dosedanje objave prva takšna najdba v Sloveniji. Uvršča se v skupino enodelnih kovinskih brzd z nosnim trakom rombične oblike, okrašenim z rebrom, in z okroglima ušescema (skupina III.B2 po Ch. Simon Ortisi). Najdbe te skupine so znane iz osrednje Italije, z renskega limesa, območja vzhodnih Alp in iz Panonije (sl. 5).11 Najdba iz Slovenije med njimi nima prave analogije, saj nam primerek s podobnima krilcema ob ušescih doslej ni znan. 8 9 10 300 2 11 Taylor 1975; Lawson 1978, 140–143, sl. 6. Palágyi 1990, 34–35. Simon Ortisi 2003, 20–23. Simon Ortisi 2003, 32–35, 157, sl. 25. Bronasti obesek12 (sl. 7; t. 1: 2) je preproste ozke listaste oblike z narebrenim zunanjim robom in gumbastim zaključkom. Na vrhu je nazaj zavita zanka za obešanje okroglega preseka. Dol. 3,68 cm; šir. 1,25 cm; deb. 0,12 cm, teža 1 g. Bronasti obesek13 (sl. 7; t. 1: 3) s širokim ploščatim trupom ima kapljičasti zaključek, zgornji del pa je odlomljen. Ohr. dol. 3,25 cm; ohr. šir. 3,09 cm; deb. 0,08 cm; teža 2 g. Obeska iz Mošenj sta bila najdena v neposredni bližini glavne stanovanjske zgradbe vile (t. i. objekt 2), v plasteh, okvirno datiranih v 1. in 2. stoletje (sl. 6). 2.2.2 Opredelitev najdb Prvi obesek (t. 1: 2) sodi v veliko in oblikovno raznovrstno skupino obeskov v obliki lista, ki jo Mike C. Bishop ozna12 13 Gorenjski muzej, inv. št. A 1050. Gorenjski muzej, inv. št. A 1046. čuje kot tip 4.14 Obesek iz Mošenj se uvršča med najpreprostejše, poenostavljene oblike znotraj te skupine. Listasti obeski so krasili konjsko opremo, morda tudi jermenje vojaških predpasnikov. So zelo široko razširjeni, uporabljali so se od sredine 1. stoletja do najmanj začetka 2. stoletja.15 Drugi obesek (t. 1: 3) je tako malo ohranjen, da ga je težko zanesljivo uvrstiti v doslej določene tipe. Glede na širok trup gre najverjetneje za obesek tako imenovanega tipa s krilci (tako poimenovan zaradi širokega ploščatega trupa) in kavljem za obešanje v obliki stilizirane živalske glavice, to je tip 7 po M. C. Bishopu.16 To je bila najbolj razširjena oblika obeskov predlavijskega časa; pojavila se je v poznoavgustejskem obdobju, razcvet doživela sredi 1. stoletja oz. v obdobju cesarjev Klavdija in Nerona, uporabljati pa so takšne obeske nehali v zadnji tretjini 1. stoletja.17 2.3 Okrasni plošči 2.3.1 Opis najdb Bronasta okrogla plošča (sl. 7; t. 1: 4) ima poševno nazobčan zunanji rob, okroglo luknjico na sredini in vrezana koncentrična kroga okrog nje na sprednji strani. Na tej strani je tudi delno ohranjena tenka plast prevleke srebrne barve in kovinskega sijaja. Hrbtna stran je neokrašena. Pr. 3,71 cm; deb. 0,15 cm; teža 12 g. Bronasta okrogla plošča oz. aplika (sl. 7; t. 1: 5) ima rob, razčlenjen v polkroge in okrašen s predrtinami polkrožne in ledvičaste oblike ter valovitimi vrezanimi črtami na sprednji strani. Osrednje polje je okroglo ter na zunanjem robu okrašeno s koncentričnima vrezanima črtama, zunanjo valovito in notranjo ravno. V okroglo polje je z vrezom zarisano kvadratno polje, ki ga obroblja niz kratkih poševnih vrezov. Na površini okova so sledovi srebrne(?) pločevine, največ v kvadratnem polju. Na hrbtni strani plošče sta okrogla izbočena nastavka. Dol. 5,63 cm; šir. 5,54 cm; deb. 0,15 cm; teža 16 g. M. C. Bishopu). Tako imenovane falere so uporabljali na mestu križanja različnih jermenov ali kot vezni člen med obeskom in jermenjem.18 Okrasne plošče oz. falere, podobne prvi plošči iz Mošenj (torej ravne v preseku, z nazobčanim robom in brez zank, obročkov ali trnov na hrbtni strani; t. 1: 4) so zelo redke. Kot analogijo lahko omenimo najdbo iz Siscije s trikotno nazobčanim robom in koncentričnima vrezoma, ki pa ima na hrbtni strani trna za pritrditev in nima luknjice na sredini.19 Za nazobčano okrasno ploščo iz Mošenj nimamo opore za datacijo po analogiji ali kontekstu na najdišču, prav tako je ne moremo zanesljivo uvrstiti med konjsko opremo. Druge okrasne plošče oz. aplike iz Mošenj (t. 1: 5) ni mogoče uvrstiti v noben doslej določen tip konjske opreme. Analogije najdemo v kvadratnih aplikah s predrtim robom, trnoma na zadnji strani in vrezanim iguralnim okrasom iz Bolgarije, iz gomile z vozovi in konjsko opremo v Jambolu.20 Aplike so bile ob objavi datirane v konec 3. in začetek 4. stoletja.21 V osnovi zelo podobna sta tudi nekdaj posrebrena obeska konjske opreme iz Siscije z apliciranim reliefnim okrasom.22 Obeska imata predrt in razčlenjen rob, pravokotno oz. ovalno osrednje polje ter okrogli okrasni polji, na katerih je aplicirana tenka plast svetle pločevine s iguralno oz. portretno reliefno upodobitvijo (sl. 8: 1, 2). Taki obeski so redki in so jih po mnenju Ivana RadmanaLivaje morda izdelovali v Sisciji. Na podlagi apliciranega reliefnega okrasa jih datira v drugo polovico 1. stoletja in v 2. stoletje.23 Podoben obesek je bil najden še v rimski podeželski vili v Višićih v Hercegovini (sl. 8: 3), datirani od konca 1. stoletja do konca 4. stoletja,24 po eden pa je znan še iz Maroka, Švice in Francije.25 Ker kontekst na najdišču ne omogoča datacije, tudi okrasne plošče iz Mošenj zaenkrat s pomočjo analogij ne moremo ožje datirati. 2.4 Dvojni gumbi 2.4.1 Opis najdb Obe okrasni plošči iz vile pri Mošnjah sta bili najdeni v plasteh, ki znotraj rimske dobe nista ozko datirani (sl. 6). 2.3.2 Opredelitev najdb Okrogle okrasne plošče konjske opreme oz. tako imenovane falere imajo zaradi svoje funkcije navadno na hrbtni strani različno število zank, obročkov ali trnov za pritrditev. Razlikuje se tudi oblika preseka teh plošč; ravne, kakršna je prva plošča iz Mošenj, so redke (dekorativni tip 8 po 14 15 16 17 Bishop 1988, 96. Deschler-Erb 1999, 55–56; analogija iz Augsta: DeschlerErb 1999, 168, kat. št. 563, t. 28: 563. Bishop 1988, 98. Bishop 1988, 98; Deschler-Erb 1999, 50–51; analogiji iz Vindonisse in Siscije: Unz, Deschler-Erb 1997, 40, kat. št. 1352, t. 50: 1352; Radman-Livaja 2004, 138, kat. št. 503, t. 69: 503. Bronasti dvojni gumb (sl. 9; t. 1: 6) ima rahlo izbočeni okrogli glavici, ena je nekoliko večja od druge. Pr. večje glavice 1,48 cm; pr. manjše glavice 1,30 cm; viš. 1,27 cm, teža 6 g. 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Bishop 1988, 94–95; Deschler-Erb 1999, 58. Radman-Livaja 2004, 133, kat. št. 247, t. 39: 247. Venedikov 1960, 59, št. 285–286, t. 51: 174; Božič 2001, 25, sl. 1: 3, 2: 2; za opozorilo na objavi se zahvaljujeva Draganu Božiču. Venedikov 1960, 49, 100–101; o zanesljivosti datacije Božič 2001, 25. Koščević 1991, 52, 128–129, kat. št. 6.371, 6.372, t. XV: 224, 225; Radman-Livaja 2004, 138, kat. št. 480, 481, t. 66: 480, 481. Radman-Livaja 2004, 111–112. Čremošnik 1965, 150, 196, t. X: 1. Božič 2001, 26. 301 Bronasti dvojni gumb (sl. 9; t. 1: 7) ima rahlo izbočeni okrogli glavici skoraj enake velikosti. Pr. večje glavice 1,38 cm; pr. manjše glavice 1,3 cm; viš. 1,55 cm, teža 8 g. Bronasti dvojni gumb (sl. 9; t. 1: 8) ima majhni ploščati okrogli glavici skoraj enake velikosti, manjša je poškodovana. Pr. večje glavice 0,94 cm; ohr. pr. manjše glavice 0,7 cm; viš. 0,81 cm, teža 2 g. Bronasti dvojni gumb (sl. 9; t. 1: 9) ima veliki ploščati okrogli glavici skoraj enake velikosti. Pr. večje glavice 2,81 cm; pr. manjše glavice 2,7 cm; viš. 1,73 cm, teža 34 g. Bronasti dvojni gumb (sl. 9; t. 1: 10) ima okrogli glavici različne velikosti. Zgornji je večji in rahlo izbočen, spodnji majhen in ploščat. Pr. večje glavice 2,00 cm; pr. manjše glavice 0,6 cm; viš. 0,87 cm, teža 6 g. Vsi dvojni gumbi so bili najdeni v plasteh, ki znotraj rimske dobe niso ozko datirane (sl. 6). 2.4.2 Opredelitev najdb Bronasti dvojni gumbi so pogosta najdba. Glede na arheološke vire so jih uporabljali vsaj na dva načina: na usnjenem jermenju vojaških pasov za pritrjevanje v kombinaciji z okroglo ali pravokotno pasno spono ter na jermenju konjske opreme. Najdbe so datirane od sredine 2. do sredine 3. stoletja, redkeje do konca 3. stoletja.26 3 Sklep Predstavljena skupina 10 zanesljivih in domnevnih delov konjske opreme iz rimske podeželske vile pri Mošnjah je sicer majhna, vendar pestra. V njej najdemo splošno razširjene oblike, kot so dvojni gumbi (ki so lahko tudi del vojaških pasov), obeski ter enodelna kovinska brzda oz. hakamora, in tudi bolj lokalne oblike, med katere lahko uvrstimo okrasno ploščo z nazobčanim robom (sl. 7; t. 1: 4) z analogijo v Sisciji, za katero pa le domnevamo, da je bila sestavni del konjske opreme. Za predrto okrasno ploščo (t. 1: 5; sl. 7), ki po obliki in okrasu med gradivom izstopa kot manj vsakdanji in zato redkejši predmet, je mogoče domnevati, podobno kot domnevajo za sorodne obeske, da je bila izdelana v Sisciji. Obravnavani predmeti časovno v grobem sodijo v 1. in 2. stoletje, redki lahko še do sredine 3. stoletja, izjemoma pa do konca 4. stoletja. Glavna opora za datacijo so splošne 26 302 Oldenstein 1976, 167–170, t. 47: 494–503; Bishop, Coulston 1993, 152–153; Radman-Livaja 2004, 95, 134, t. 45: 299–305; izključno med konjsko opremo jih uvršča npr. Franke 2009, 43, kat. št. 750–754; primer najdbe dvojnih gumbov z rahlo izbočenima glavicama, ki sta bila dela konjske opreme: Palágyi 1990, 21, 23, 41, 43, kat. št. 1.15., 3.13., sl. 15: 79.11.15., 79.11.58. datacije tipov in datacije posamičnih analogij. Stratigrafski podatki najdišča zaenkrat še ne omogočajo natančnejših datacij; za to bo treba počakati na izsledke analiz keramičnega gradiva in novcev, ki bi plasti lahko ožje časovno opredelili. Najstarejša sta obeska, datirana v 1. stoletje (obesek s krilci, t. 1: 3; sl. 7) oz. v drugo polovico 1. stoletja in začetek 2. stoletja (obesek v obliki lista, t. 1: 2; sl. 7). Enodelna kovinska brzda (t. 1: 1; sl. 3) in predrta okrasna plošča (t. 1: 5; sl. 7) sta datirani precej široko, v 1. in 2. stoletje, brzda lahko še do sredine 3. stoletja, okrasna plošča pa do konca 4. stoletja. Dvojni gumbi (t. 1: 6–10; sl. 9) so datirani od sredine 2. do sredine 3. stoletja. Nazobčana okrasna plošča (t. 1: 4; sl. 7) zaenkrat znotraj rimske dobe ni ožje datirana. Predmeti se tako umeščajo v čas življenja rimske vile pri Mošnjah. Kot je bilo omenjeno že v uvodu, gre za dele konjske opreme, ki jih arheologi navadno uvrščajo med vojaško opremo. Virov, ki bi omogočali ločevanje vojaške konjske opreme od civilne, žal ni. Glavni argument za uvrstitev med vojaško opremo je pogostnost takih najdb v vojaških kontekstih.27 Najdišče pri Mošnjah je kot podeželska vila v osnovi civilne narave. Najdbe konjske opreme kot možni (oz. verjetni), ne pa nesporni deli vojaške opreme tako ne zadoščajo, da bi preprosto sklepali na vojaško navzočnost na območju vile. To je le ena od možnih razlag, pomisliti pa moramo tudi na lego vile tik ob pomembni in prometni antični cesti ter na mobilnost vojske oz. vojakov. HACKAMORE AND OTHER PARTS OF EQUINE EQUIPMENT FROM THE ROMAN VILLA AT MOŠNJE (Abstract) During the excavation (at the construction of the Gorenjska highway) of the Roman villa rustica near village of Mošnje, some rare objects were found, which were apparently part of cavalry equipment. Among them are studs and discs (phalerae). Of particular attention was the part of the bronze bridle or the so-called hackamore, which is irst such ind in Slovenia. It was found in the rubble layer in residential object no. 2 with 1st and 2nd century coins. According to the provincial inds, hackamores are deined as military equipment while the bridles from Pompeii and its surroundings were also used in a civil environment. For the phalerae, we know only few comparatively similar items (the nearest are from Siscia), and they could not be more accurately dated. One of the discs has analogies in the appliqués and pendants of military equipment with its perforated edge and applied decorative sheet metal on the central ield. he items in question are dated to the 1st and 2nd centuries, some even to the middle of the 3rd century. hat is also the time when the Roman villa rustica near Mošnje was populated. 27 Prim. npr. Bishop 1988, 112–116. LITERATURA / BIBLIOGRAPHY BISHOP, M. C. 1988, Cavalry equipment of the Roman army in the irst century A. D. – V/In: J. C. Coulston (ur./ed.), Military Equipment and the Identity of Roman Soldiers, Proceedings of the Fourth Roman Military Equipment Conference, BAR International Series 394, Oxford, 67–195. BISHOP, M. C., COULSTON, J. C. N. 1993, Roman military equipment. From the Punic Wars to the fall of Rome. – London. BOŽIČ, D. 2001, Décors de harnais romain à bordure ajourée. – Instrumentum 13, 25–26. ČREMOŠNIK, I. 1965, Rimska vila u Višićima. – Glasnik Zemaljskog muzeja u Sarajevu n. s. Arheologija 20, 147–260 [povzetek v nemščini / summary in German]. DESCHLER-ERB, E. 1999, Ad arma! Römisches Militär des 1. Jahrhunderts n. Chr. in Augusta Raurica. – Forschungen in Augst 28, Augst. FEUGÈRE, M. 1993, Les armes des Romains. − Paris. FRANKE, R. 2009, Römische Kleinfunde aus Burghöfe 3. Militärische Ausrüstungsgegenstände, Pferdegeschirr, Bronzegeschirr und -gerät. – Frühgeschichtliche und Provinzialrömische Archäologie 9, Rahden. JUNKELMANN, M. 1992, Die Reiter Roms III. Zubehör, Reitweise, Bewafnung. – Kulturgeschichte der antiken Welt 53, Mainz am Rhein. KOŠČEVIĆ, R. 1991, Antička bronca iz Siska. Umjetničko-obrtna metalna produkcija iz razdoblja Rimskog carstva. – Zagreb [povzetek v angleščini / summary in English]. KRAMAR, S., LUX, J., MIRTIČ, B. 2008, Analiza izbranih vzorcev malt in drugih gradbenih materialov iz objekta 2 rimske vile pri Mošnjah / Analysis of selected samples of mortars and other construction materials from object 2 of the Roman villa near Mošnje. – Varstvo spomenikov 44, 170–189. LAWSON, A. K. 1978, Studien zum römischen Pferdegeschirr. Jahrbuch des Römisch-Germanischen Zentralmuseums Mainz 25, 131–172. LUX, J. 2008, Mošnje – rimska naselbina Pod cesto. – Varstvo spomenikov, Poročila 44, 163–165. LUX, J., KRAMAR, S. 2011, Črno-bel mozaik, odkrit v rimski vili rustiki pri Mošnjah / I mosaici bianco-neri scoperti nella villa Rustica presso Mošnje. – V/In: M. Stokin, S. Kramar (ur./ eds.), Mozaiki severnega Jadrana / I mosaici dell’Alto Adriatico, Ljubljana, 113–126. LUX, J., SAGADIN, M. 2012, Poskus časovne umestitve objekta 2 rimske vile rustike pri Mošnjah. – V/In: I. Lazar, B. Županek (ur./eds.), Emona med Akvilejo in Panonijo / Emona between Aquileia and Pannonia, Koper, 311–321 [povzetek v angleščini / summary in English]. OLDENSTEIN, J. 1976, Zur Ausrüstung römischer Auxiliareinheiten. Studien zu Beschlägen und Zierat an der Ausrüstung der römischen Auxiliareinheiten des obergermanisch-raetischen Limesgebietes aus dem zweiten und dritten Jahrhundert n. Chr. – Bericht der Römisch-Germanischen Kommission 57, 49–284. PALÁGYI, S. 1989, Rekonstruktionsmöglichkeiten der Pferdegeschirrfunde aus Pannonien. – V/In: C. van Driel-Murray (ur./ ed.), Roman Military Equipment: the Sources of Evidence, Proceedings of the Fifth Roman Military Equipment Conference, BAR International Series 476, Oxford, 123–142. PALÁGYI, S. K. 1990, Römerzeitliches Pferdegrab in Tihany. – Alba Regia 24, 17–45. RADMAN-LIVAJA, I. 2004, Militaria Sisciensia. Nalazi rimske vojne opreme iz Siska u fundusu Arheološkoga muzeja u Zagrebu / Finds of the Roman military equipment in Sisak in the holdings of the Archeological Museum in Zagreb. – Katalozi i monograije Arheološkoga muzeja u Zagrebu 1/1, Zagreb. SAGADIN, M., LUX, J. 2007, Poročilo o arheoloških izkopavanjih na lokaciji Mošnje – Pod cesto na trasi AC Vrba – Peračica. – Kranj. SIMON ORTISI, Ch. 2003, Studien zum römischen Pferdegeschirr aus Pompeji, Herculaneum und den Vesuv-villen. Metallzäume, Trensen und Kandaren. – Doktorska disertacija / Ph. D. thesis, München. (http://edoc.ub.uni-muenchen.de/3456/1/Simon_Ortisi_Christina.pdf; zadnjič obiskano 10. 4. 2012) TAYLOR, A. K. 1975, Römische Hackamoren und Kappzäume aus Metall. – Jahrbuch des Römisch-Germanischen Zentralmuseums Mainz 22, 106–133. UNZ, Ch., DESCHLER-ERB, E. 1997, Katalog der Militaria aus Vindonissa. Militärische Funde, Pferdegeschirr und Jochteile bis 1976. – Veröfentlichungen der Gesellschaft Pro Vindonissa 14, Brugg. VENEDIKOV, I. 1960, Trakijskata kolesnica. – Soija. 303 Tabla 1. Mošnje. 1 enodelna kovinska brzda oz. hakamora; 2–3 obeska; 4–5 okrasni plošči; 6–10 dvojni gumbi. 1, 2, 3, 6–10 bron; 4 svetla kovina; 5 bron in srebro (?). M = 1 : 2 (risba N. Druškovič). Plate 1. Mošnje. 1 one-piece metal bridle or hackamore; 2–3 two pendants; 4–5 two decorative plates; 6–10 double studs. 1, 2, 3, 6–10 bronze; 4 bright metal; 5 bronze and silver (?). Scale = 1 : 2 (drawing N. Druškovič). 304 VOJAKI IZ RIMSKIH AVTONOMNIH MEST NA SLOVENSKEM, KI SO SLUŽBOVALI DRUGOD PO IMPERIJU Julijana Visočnik Izvleček Avtorica v prispevku zbere vojake, ki so izvirali iz rimskih avtonomnih mest na Slovenskem, a so službovali drugod po rimskem imperiju. Pri tem sta izvzeti mesti Celeja in Neviodun; prvo zaradi tega, ker so bili vojaki iz Celeje predstavljeni že na drugih mestih,1 iz Nevioduna pa do zdaj še ni bil dokumentiran vojak, ki bi sodil v takšno skupino (doma iz Nevioduna, služba vojaka »na tujem«). Glavnina prispevka je tako posvečena vojakom, ki so izvirali iz Emone ali Petovione, vojaška pot pa jih je zanesla na različne konce rimskega imperija. Avtorica jih je razvrstila v tabeli, da bi omogočila in olajšala primerjave ter analize zbranih posameznikov. Pri tem se je izrisalo število pretorijancev, legionarjev, pripadnikov pomožnih enot, veteranov in drugih, manj pogostih funkcij, ki so jih opravljali. Predstaviti in primerjati pa je bilo mogoče tudi enote, v katerih so svoje službe opravljali, in pri tem opozoriti na razlike ali sorodnosti med obravnavanimi mesti. Ključne besede: rimska doba, Emona, Celeja, Petoviona, Neviodun, vojska, legije, pomožne enote, pretorijanci 1 Uvod Leta 2008 je bil v Arheološkem vestniku objavljen članek o vojaških napisih iz Celeje,2 ki je doživel nadaljevanje, ko so na vrsto prišli še vojaki iz Celeje v službah drugod po rimskem imperiju.3 Pri tem se je izrisala slika vojakov, njihovih funkcij in enot, njihove geografske razporeditve, ki sama po sebi ne pove veliko. Ko pa podatke primerjamo s tistimi iz sosednjih mest, rezultati dobijo večjo težo. Narejena je bila primerjava z vojaki iz Flavije Solve,4 ki se je zdela smiselna tudi zato, ker sta Celeja in Flavija Solva sosednji mesti in obe v južnem Noriku. Zato se zdi toliko bolj smiselno, da vojake iz Celeje, ki so službovali drugod po imperiju, primerjamo z vojaki iz drugih rimskih avtonomnih mest na jugovzhodnoalpskem območju z namenom, da bi odkrili ustaljene prakse in zakonitosti v rekrutiranju in pošiljanju vojakov po imperiju, njihovo razpršenost po različnih delih rimske države, funkcije, ki so jih opravljali, in enote, v katerih so delovali. Poleg Celeje nas zanimajo vojaki iz Emone, Nevioduna in Petovione. Na eni strani imamo torej južnonoriški municipij Celejo, na drugi kolonijo v Italiji (regio X),5 in municipij ter kolonijo v jugozahodni Panoniji.6 Pripadnost različnim upravnim enotam (provinci Norik in Panonija oz. Italija), različno zgodovinsko ozadje ter različen čas ustanovitve teh mest gotovo vplivajo tudi na novačenje rekrutov. Vojake iz Emone in Petovione smo zbrali s pomočjo epigrafskih računalniških baz, heidelberške (EDH), frankfurtske (EDCS) in rimske (EDR).7 Vojake iz posameznega mesta smo identiicirali in uvrstili v katalog na podlagi izvora (origo: domo Emona, domo Poetovione) ter s pomočjo vojaške funkcije in/ali enote, v kateri so službo opravljali. Napisi so navedeni po provincah, kjer so bili postavljeni; niso pa citirani v celoti. Ob imenu vojaka, njegovi funkciji, vojaški enoti, provinci je citirana še objava v enem od glavnih korpusov (CIL, AE) ter objave v bazah. S pomočjo omenjenih baz ni bilo mogoče najti nobenega predstavnika rimske vojske iz Nevioduna zunaj mestnega območja, kar je nekoliko nenavadno, saj je v samem mestu izpričanih več vojakov.8 2 Katalog9 2.1 Vojaki iz Emone (sl. 1) 5 6 7 8 1 2 3 4 Visočnik 2008; Visočnik 2012. Visočnik 2008. Visočnik 2012. Pochmarski 2007. 9 Šašel Kos 2002; Šašel Kos 2003; Vičič 2003. Za Neviodun glej Lovenjak 2003; za Petoviono glej Horvat et al. 2003. Pri vojakih iz Emone smo pritegnili članek J. Šašla iz RE o Emoni (Šašel 1968). Prim. Lovenjak 1998, 394–395. Sledita tabeli emonskih in petovionskih vojakov, v katerih so najprej pretorijanci in drugi vojaki v Rimu ter Italiji, nato sledijo vojaki, ki so bili dokumentirani v provincah. Te pa so razvrščene po abecednem vrstnem redu. 305 Slika 1. Razprostranjenost napisov emonskih vojakov po imperiju (pripravila M. Belak). Figure 1. Distribution of epygraphic monuments of soldiers from Emona across the Empire (M. Belak). 306 Zap. št. Ime Origo Funkcija, enota Najdišče, lokacija Datacija Objava 1. Caius Romanius Italicus Iulia Emona praetorianus Rim 2. st. CIL VI 2328, CIL VI 32638, HD 015853, EDR 074389 2. Caius Aurelius Paternus Iulia Emona eques Rim 2. st. CIL VI 2328, CIL VI 32638, HD 015853, EDR 074389 3. Caius Iulius Statutianus Iulia Emona praetorianus Rim 2. st. CIL VI 2328, CIL VI 32638, HD 015853, EDR 074389 4. Publius Aelius Victorinus Iulia Emona tubicen Rim 2. st. CIL VI 2328, CIL VI 32638, HD 015853, EDR 074389 5. Caius Cen… Emona praetorianus Rim 2. st. CIL VI 2328, CIL VI 32638, HD 015853, EDR 074389 6. … Ursinus? Emona praetorianus Rim 2. st. CIL VI 2328, CIL VI 32638, HD 015853, EDR 074389 7. Caius Veratius Severus Emona eques (?) Rim prva pol. 2. st. CIL VI 32515, CIL VI 2375 8. Titus Flavius Lucanus Emona praetorianus Rim prva pol. 2. st. CIL VI 32515, CIL VI 2375 9. …lius Cupitus Emona praetorianus Rim prva pol. 2. st. CIL VI 32515, CIL VI 2375 10. … Quintilianus Emona praetorianus Rim prva pol. 2. st. CIL VI 32515, CIL VI 2375 11. Marcus Tullius Tertius Emona praetorianus Rim prva pol. 2. st. CIL VI 32515, CIL VI 2375 12. …ianus Emona praetorianus Rim 159/161 CIL VI 32520, CIL VI 2379, EDR 126679 13. Lucius Vibienus Ianuarius Emona praetorianus Rim 159/161 CIL VI 32520, CIL VI 2379, EDR 126679 14. Lucius Tertius Atilius Emona praetorianus Rim 159/161 CIL VI 32520, CIL VI 2379, EDR 126679 15. Caius Pontius Moderatus Emona praetorianus Rim 159/161 CIL VI 32520, CIL VI 2379, EDR 126679 16. Titus Caesernius Festinus Emona praetorianus Rim 159/161 CIL VI 32520, CIL VI 2379, EDR 126679 17. Marcus Vinicius Ianuarius Iulia Emona urbanicianus Rim 218 CIL VI 32526 EDR 121970 18. Marcus Ulpius Valerius Iulia Emona urbanicianus Rim 218 CIL VI 32526 EDR 121970 19. Publius Aelius Annamatus Iulia Emona praetorianus Rim 2. st. CIL VI 32640, EDCS-21800371 20. Quintus Annius Iuncianus Emona praetorianus Rim 2. st. (?) CIL VI 34408, EDCS-23900621 21. Caius Poetilius Paullus Emona miles cohortis III praetoriae Rim 51–120 CIL VI 2504, CIL VI 32652, EDR 104359 22. Marcus Verus Ulpius Iulia Emona mensor cohortis III praetoriae Rim 2. st. CIL VI 2518, EDR 104572 23. Lucius Optatius Secundinus Iulia Emona miles cohortis IX praetoriae Rim 2. st. CIL VI 2718, EDR 104572 24. Lucius Optatius Crispinus Iulia Emona eques cohortis IX praetoriae Rim 2. st. CIL VI 2718, EDR 104572 25. ??? domo Emona praetorianus (?) Rim 258 CIL VI 32561, EDR 122297 26. Titus Flavius Paternus Iulia Emona miles cohortis X praetoriae LATIUM ET CAMPANIA – REGIO I 171–230 CIL XIV 2952, EDR 119885 27. Titus Flavius Severus Iulia Emona miles cohortis XXVI Voluntariae LATIUM ET CAMPANIA – REGIO I 171–230 CIL XIV 2952, EDR 119885 28. Marcus Aurelius Germanus domo Emonae GERMANIA SUPERIOR 222–235 CIL XIII 6708, HD 055167 29. Caius Iulius Pudens Iulia Emona veteranus legionis X Piae Fidelis GERMANIA INFERIOR druga pol. 1. st. CIL XIII 8735, EDCS-11100829 30. Marcus Aurelius Victorinus Iulia Aemona (!) patria evocatus H I S PA N I A CITERIOR 2. st. CIL II 6087, EDCS-05601155 307 31. … Pudens? Emona miles legionis III Augustae (?) NUMIDIA 2./3. st. CIL VIII 18085, EDCS-24700803 32. Caius Valerius Secundus Emona veteranus legionis II Adiutricis PANNONIA INFERIOR 2. st. CIL III 3569, EDCS-28600030 33. ??? … domo Emona miles legionis XV Apollinaris PANNONIA SUPERIOR 1.–3. st. AE 1934, 268, HD 027223 … Emon(a?) miles legionis … PANNONIA SUPERIOR 1.–3. st. AE 2005, 1214, HD 037736 34. 2.2 Vojaki iz Petovione (sl. 2) Slika 2. Razprostranjenost napisov petovionskih vojakov po imperiju (pripravila M. Belak). Figure 2. Distribution of epygraphic monuments of soldiers from Poetovio across the Empire (M. Belak). 308 Zap. št. Ime Origo Funkcija, enota Najdišče, lokacija Datacija Objava 1. … Neron? Poetovione praetorianus Rim 2./3. st. CIL VI 32626, EDCS-21800365 2. … Titus Poetovione praetorianus Rim 2./3. st. CIL VI 32626, EDCS-21800365 3. … Longinius … … oriundus ex provincia Pannonia Superiore civitate Poetoviense eques (?) Rim 2./3 st. CIL VI 32804a, EDCS-22900181 4. … Tert? natione Pannonus domo Ulpia Poetovione equitum singularium Augusti Rim 2./3. st. CIL VI 32859, EDCS-25300424 5. Marcus Aurelius Valerinus Ulpia Poetovione praetorianus Rim 2. st. CIL VI 32523, HD 020171, EDR 072322 6. …turus Poetovione praetorianus Rim 3. st. CIL VI 32623, EDR 121570 7. Caius Licinius Atilianus Poetovione praetorianus Rim 2.–3. st. CIL VI 32624, EDR 121561 8. Caius Iulius Valentinus Poetovione praetorianus Rim 2.–3. st. CIL VI 32624, EDR 121561 9. Marcus Aurelius Novellus Poetovione praetorianus Rim 2.–3. st. CIL VI 32624, EDR 121561 10. Caius Attius Valerianus Poetovione praetorianus Rim 2.–3. st. CIL VI 32624, EDR 121561 11. Marcus Caelius Victor Poetovine praetorianus Rim 2.–3. st. CIL VI 32624, EDR 121561 12. Titus Trophimus? Firmus Poetovione praetorianus Rim 2.–3. st. CIL VI 32624 EDR 121561 13. Caius Coponius Silvanus Poetovione praetorianus Rim 2./3. st. CIL VI 32627, EDCS-21800366 14. Marcus Aurelius Crispio Poetovione praetorianus Rim 2. st. CIL VI 32640, EDCS-21800371 15. Marcus Mummius Verinus Poetovione centurio V cohortis vigilum Rim 210 CIL VI 31234, EDR 104184 16. … Candidianus Poetovione (?) praetorianus Rim 208/209 CIL VI 32533, EDR 122314 17. Ulpius Tertius natione Petoviensis miles cohortis IV praetoriae Rim 3. st. CIL VI 2552, EDR 105509 18. … Claudius Saturninus Poetovione praetorianus Rim 201–225 CIL VI 32536, EDR 121980 19. … Ingenuus Poetovione praetorianus Rim 201–225 CIL VI 32536, EDR 121980 20. Marcus Calven… … Poetovione eques Rim 201–225 CIL VI 32536, EDR 121980 21. ??? Petovio praetorianus Rim 258 CIL VI 32561, EDR 122297 22. Marcus … domo Petovio praetorianus Rim 258 CIL VI 32561, EDR 122297 23. Caius Iulius Ulpia Poetovione praetorianus Rim 211–217 CIL VI 2579, EDR 105705 24. Caius Iulius Iulianus veteranus Augusti nostri Rim 211–217 CIL VI 2579, EDR 105705 25. Caius Iulius Glaus miles legionis II Parthicae Antoninianae Piae Fidelis Felicis Aeternae Rim 211–217 CIL VI 2579, EDR 105705 26. Caius Iulius tribunus militum cohortis XII urbanae Rim 211–217 CIL VI 2579 EDR 105705 309 27. Marcus Aebutius Victorinus Ulpia Traiana Poetovione centurio legionis X Geminae, centurio legionis XI Claudiae, centurio legionis XIIII Geminae, centurio legionis Minerviae, centurio legionis XXII Primigeniae, centurio legionis XIII Geminae, centurio legionis VII Claudiae, centurio legionis XV Apollinaris. GALATIA druga pol. 2. st. CIL III 260, EDCS-22300517 28. Lucius Septimius Marcellinus natione Pannonius domo Ulpia Poetovione centurio legionis I Adiutricis, item legionis XIIII Geminae, item legionis XXX Ulpiae Victricis Severianae Alexandrianae GALLIA LUGDUNENSIS 3. st. CIL XIII 1890, EDCS-10500845 29. Marcus Aurelius LuCILius Poetovione ex singularibus Imperatoris centurio legionis I Adiutricis legionis II Traianae legionis VIII Augustae legionis XIIII Geminae legionis VII Claudiae legionis VII Geminae III hastatus prior HISPANIA CITERIOR 2./3. st. CIL II 4147, EDCS-05503179 30. Marcus Ulpius Silmius Poetovione miles legionis MAURETANIA CAESARIENSIS 2. st. CIL VIII 9765, EDCS-25500580 31. Marcus Aurelius Ianuarius Ulpia Poetovione signifer SYRIA 2./3. st. CIL III 6700, EDCS-27800667 3 Analiza 3.1 Vojaki iz Emone Največjo skupino vojakov iz Emone gotovo predstavljajo pretorijanci (št. 1–26),10 dokumentiranih jih je 26, od tega jih je 18 zapisanih na petih seznamih pretorijancev (latercula praetoriani). V skupini pretorijancev so poleg navadnih pretorijancev (miles cohortis III pretoriae) navedene še nekatere posebne funkcije. Gaj Aurelij Patern iz Julije Emone (št. 2) je bil namreč eden izmed konjenikov (eques) oddelka, ki ga je imela vsaka pretorijanska enota.11 Konjenika sta bila tudi Gaj Veratij Sever (št. 7) in Lucij Optatij Krispin (št. 24). Podobno je vsaka pretorijanska kohorta imela tudi trobentača (tubicen), ki je skrbel za dajanje zvočnih znamenj, signalov;12 to funkcijo je opravljal Publij Elij Viktorin iz Julije Emone (št. 4). Pretorijanec Mark Ulpij Ver (št. 22) je opravljal zanimivo in ne pogosto izpričano funkcijo vojaškega inženirja (mensor), ki je morda v ustroju pretorijanske enote niti ne bi pričakovali, saj naloge pretorijancev niso bile toliko povezane z gradbenimi dejavnostmi, kot je bilo to pri legionarjih.13 Vojaški inženirji so bili tako sestavni in nujni del vsake legije. Mensor se je ukvarjal z načrtovanjem gradnje cest, vodovodov, taborov, torej z vsemi 10 11 12 310 13 Za pretorijance glej Keppie 2000; Passerini 1939; Durry 1938; Šašel 1972. Prim. Keppie 2000, 111. Prim. Lammert 1939, 754–755, trobentač igra na tubo, s katero je dajal znamenja za napad, umik, odhod, delo, počitek. Vsak manipel in vsaka turma sta imela svojega. Fabricius 1931. meritvami, ki so bile za takšne posege nujne. V legijah jih je bilo prvotno 11, pozneje manj; prisotni pa so bili tudi v pomožnih enotah. Njihovo osnovno orodje je bil zemljemerski drog oz. merilo (t. i. groma). Drugi pretorijanci iz Emone očitno niso imeli drugih posebnih zadolžitev, saj bi jih v nasprotnem primeru zapisali na nagrobnik. Gaj Poetilij Paullus (št. 21.) je služboval v Tretji pretorijanski kohorti, Lucij Optatij Sekundin v Deveti (št. 23), Tit Flavij Patern pa v Deseti (št. 26). Lucij Optatij Krispin (št. 24) je bil konjenik v Deveti pretorijanski kohorti, ki je svojemu predanemu bratu Sekundinu (št. 23) iz iste kohorte postavil nagrobnik. Tit Flavij Patern (št. 26) iz Desete kohorte je imel brata Tita Flavija Severa (št. 27), vojaka Šestindvajsete kohorte prostovoljcev (cohors XXVI Voluntaria), o kateri ni veliko znanega. Z gotovostjo lahko trdimo le, da je veliko časa preživela v Germaniji.14 Na enem izmed seznamov pretorijancev, na katerem je zapisanih kar šest pretorijancev iz Emone, sta med temi tudi dva, katerih imeni nista ohranjeni v celoti: Gaj Cen? (št. 5) in … Ursin (št. 6). Na enem izmed šestih laterkulov sta zapisana tudi Mark Vinicij Januarij (št. 17) in Mark Ulpij Valerij (št. 18), ki sta bila vojaka posadke mesta Rima urbaniciani (milites). Gre namreč za cohortes urbanae, ki jih je prav tako ustanovil cesar Avgust kot protiutež pretorijancem, ki so postajali vse večja vojaška in politična sila. Opravljali so predvsem težje policijske naloge (v nasprotju z vigiles). Na začetku 14 Cichorius 1901, 355; Holder 1980, 238. so bili organizirani v tri, nato v štiri kohorte. V mestnih kohortah so lahko službovali samo polnopravni rimski državljani, predvsem z ozemlja Italije.15 Med vojaki iz Emone so znani tudi trije veterani. Nagrobnik za veterana Marka Avrelija Viktorina (št. 30) je bil postavljen v Hispaniji; iz napisa ni razvidno, v kateri enoti je opravil svojo vojaško obveznost. Kot sestavni del njegovega origa je uporabljena beseda domovina – patria, kar je pri vojakih, ki izvirajo z jugovzhodnoalpskega območja, zapisano prvič. Iz Spodnje Panonije je znan Gaj Valerij Secund (št. 32), ki je službovanje zaključil v Drugi pomožni legiji16 s taborom v Akvinku. Kot ni bilo za veterane nič neobičajnega, se je tudi on vključil v javno življenje, saj je bil najverjetneje član združenja collegium fabrum et centonariorum (gasilci), ki mu je nagrobnik tudi postavilo. V Spodnji Germaniji je izpričan Gaj Julij Pudent (št. 29), ki je kot legionar deloval v Deseti legiji.17 Pri dveh napisih vojakov iz Zgornje Panonije (št. 33 in 34) zaradi fragmentarne ohranjenosti imeni Emoncev nista ohranjeni, vendar je pri prvem znana vsaj njegova legija: legio XV Apollinaris.18 Med napise, ki omenjajo vojake iz Emone, sem uvrstila tudi oltar, posvečen Jupitru Najboljšemu in Največjemu, Sabaziju, Ohranjevalcu in časti orla19 Dvaindvajsete predane in zveste legije Primigenije,20 ki ga je dal postaviti Mark Avrelij German (št. 28) iz Emone, katerega funkcija (če jo je imel) zaradi fragmentarnosti napisa ni znana. Zaradi posvetitve (posredno) legiji je sicer mogoče sklepati, da je prav v tej legiji tudi služboval. Zanimiva je tudi povezava vrhovnega rimskega božanstva (I O M) s Sabazijem in s samo legijo, ki jo lahko iščemo tudi v službovanju posvetitelja v tej vojaški enosti. Sabasius je frigijski bog; njegov kult, povezan z misteriji, se je razširil po grškem in tudi po rimskem svetu. Po eni strani ga enačijo z Dionizom, od tod bi naj izhajal tudi orgiastični značaj njegovega kulta, po drugi pa bi naj bil kar Dionizov sin.21 namreč deloval v enoti singulares, bil pa je tudi centurion v Prvi pomožni legiji,22 Drugi Trajanovi legiji,23 Osmi Avgustovi legiji,24 Štirinajsti dvojni,25 Sedmi Klavdijevi,26 in kot hastatus prior27 v Sedmi dvojni.28 Ob smrti je bil star šestdeset let, pri čemer jih je v vojski preživel štirideset. Podobno je tudi pri Marku Ebutiju Viktorinu (št. 27), ki je bil centurion v Deseti dvojni,29 Enajsti Klavdijevi,30 Štirinajsti dvojni, Prvi Minerviji,31 Dvaindvajseti Primigeniji,32 Trinajsti dvojni,33 Sedmi Klavdijevi in Petnajsti Apolonovi legiji.34 Služboval je 45 let. Primerjava podobnih primerov kaže, da so bila znotraj centurionata možna napredovanja in službovanje v različnih enotah in različnih legijah. Starejših izkušenih centurionov sicer niso pošiljali v prve bojne vrste, so jih pa radi porabili za mnoge druge naloge, npr. urjenje kohort oz. urjenje rekrutov. Kariera posameznega centuriona je načeloma podana kronološko, torej tako, kot so si funkcije dejansko sledile, začenši ali s prvo ali z zadnjo. Kariera Marka Avrelija Lucilija bi tako lahko bila padajoča, saj se zdi, da je mesto med equites singulares najvišje (glej spodaj). Oba, Mark Avrelij Lucilij in Mark Ebutij Viktorin, sta službovala zelo dolgo, prvi 40, drugi celo 45 let. Pa vendar ta dva primera nista osamljena, z napisov poznamo več centurionov, ki so bili v službi med 40 in celo 60 leti.35 Podoben je primer Lucija Septimija Marcelina (št. 28), ki je kot centurion služil v treh različnih legijah: Prvi pomočnici, Štirinajsti dvojni in Trideseti zmagovalni.36 Veliko skupino vojakov iz Petovione predstavljajo pretorijanci (št. 1–23), katerih imena so zapisana spet predvsem na daljših seznamih (laterkulih). Mnogi med njimi so ohranjeni samo fragmentarno, zato njihovih imen in funkcij ne poznamo, pač pa le origo. Na laterkulih so načeloma seznami pretorijancev, občasno pa so zapisane tudi posebne funkcije posameznikov. V enem primeru srečamo funkcijo eques singularis Augusti37 (št. 4) – pripadniki cesar22 23 3.2 Vojaki iz Petovione Tudi iz Petovione poznamo lepo število po rimskem imperiju izpričanih vojakov. Trije nagrobniki (št. 27, 28, 29), iz Galacije, Galije in iz Tostranske Hispanije, so posvečeni vojakom, ki po številu enot, v katerih so delovali, izstopajo. Mark Avrelij Lucilij (št. 29), izpričan v Hispaniji, je 24 Ritterling 1925, 1642–1664 ; Reddé 2000. 25 Ritterling 1925, 1727–1747; Franke 2000b. Ritterling 1925, 1614–1629; Strobel 2000. Centurion je peti v vrsti pri poveljevanju kohorte, pred njim so: pilus prior, pilus posterior, princeps prior, princeps posterior, za njim še hastatus posterior; prim. Southern 2007, 332–333. Ritterling 1925, 1629–1642; Le Roux 2000. Ritterling 1925, 1678–1690; Gómez-Pantoja 2000. Ritterling 1925, 1690–1705; Fellmann 2000. Ritterling 1925, 1420–1433; Le Bohec 2000b; Eck 2000. Ritterling 1925, 1797–1820; Franke 2000a. Ritterling 1925, 1710–1727, predvsem 1713–1715; Wolf 2000; prim. še Piso 2000, 220–224. Ritterling 1925, 1747–1758; Wheeler 2000. Birley 1988, za podobne kariere centurionov glej predvsem 209–212; v dodatku na str. 219–220 so centurioni, ki so služili več kot 40 let, med njimi tudi oba centuriona iz Petovione. Za centurione na splošno glej še Domaszewski, Dobson 1967, uvod XX–XXII; Le Bohec 1994, 43–44; Domaszewski 1899. Ritterling 1925, 1821–1829; Le Bohec 2000a. Goldsworthy 2003, 58. 26 27 28 29 30 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 Prim. Keppie 1984, 153–154; Keppie 2000, 105. Ritterling 1925, 1437–1456; Lőrincz 2000. Ritterling 1925, 1678–1690; Gómez-Pantoja 2000. Ritterling 1925, 1747–1758; Wheeler 2000. Glede tabora legije v Emoni glej Šašel Kos 1998. Posvetitve Honori aquilae so razmeroma pogoste, prim. HD 022346, HD 054851, HD 054855, HD 055282, HD 055288. I(ovi) O(ptimo) M(aximo) / Sabasio / Conservatori / Honori aquilae / leg(ionis) XXII Pr(imigeniae) P(iae) F(idelis) / [[[Alexandr]ianae]] / M(arcus) Aur(elius) Germanus / d(omo) Emon(a)[e]; Ritterling 1925, 1797–1820; Franke 2000a. Schaefer 1920. Ritterling 1925, 1380–1405; Lőrincz 2000. Ritterling 1925, 1484–1493; Daris 2000. 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 311 jeve osebne konjenice so cesarja spremljali vedno, ko je zapustil mesto Rim. Ta konjeniška enota, ki je predstavljala del pretorijancev, je tudi edina njena enota, v katero je bil dovoljen vstop peregrinom. Vojake za to enoto so namreč rekrutirali med najboljšimi konjeniki v alah – konjeniških oddelkih pomožnih čet. Pri nekaterih je zanimiv tudi origo, npr.: oriundus ex provincia Pannonia Superiore civitate Poetoviense (št. 3), natione Pannonus domo Ulpia Poetovione (št. 4), in natione Pannonius domo Ulpia Poetovione (št. 28), daljši in natančnejši od drugih. Mark Mumij Verin (št. 15) pa je deloval kot centurion v kohorti »gasilcev« (cohors vigilum). Poleg pretorijancev so bile v Rimu od cesarja Avgusta naprej še druge enote, namreč vigiles (vigiles urbani, cohortes vigilum), ki so imele vlogo gasilske brigade in tudi policijskega oddelka (predvsem ponoči, neke vrste nočna straža). Vojake iz Petovione najdemo torej na desetih seznamih, med njimi pa niso samo pretorijanci, temveč tudi člani drugih enot mesta Rima. Na zanimivem nagrobniku iz Rima so zapisana imena štirih bratov, Julijev, ki so zelo verjetno vsi opravljali poklic vojaka, vendar v različnih enotah. Dva med njimi sta bila najbrž pretorijanca (št. 23), eden od njiju že veteran (Julijan; št. 24), Gaj Julij Glavs (št. 25) je bil legionar v Drugi partski legiji,38 četrti brat pa je bil vojaški tribun v Dvanajsti mestni kohorti (št. 26).39 Tudi iz Petovione torej izvirajo družine, ki so bile vojaško usmerjene. Mark Avrelij Januarij (št. 31) je opravljal funkcijo praporščaka (signifer),40 a zaradi fragmentarnosti napisa ne vemo, v kateri legiji. Vsak manipel, ki jih je bilo v legiji 30, je imel svoj prapor. Signum, ki so ga zaupali signiferju, je imel obliko daljšega okrašenega kopja. V drugi polovici 2. stoletja je bila v provinci Siriji nameščena Tretja galska legija,41 v kateri je Januarij najverjetneje tudi služboval. V Cesarski Mavretaniji je izpričan legionar Mark Ulpij Silmij (št. 30), čigar enote prav tako ne poznamo; verjetno je služboval v Tretji Avgustovi legiji,42 ki je bila praktično ves čas svojega obstoja nameščena v Afriki. 3.3 Primerjava s Celejo43 Zbrano gradivo je pokazalo, da je bilo Emoncev (26) in Petovioncev (23) v sestavi pretorijanske garde (in tudi drugih mestnih enot) približno enako kot pretorijancev iz Celeje (25).44 Pri Emoni je to mogoče povezati z dej38 39 40 41 42 43 44 312 Ritterling 1925, 1476–1483; Ricci 2000; Van Rengen 2000. Za cohortes urbanae glej zgoraj. Prim. Kubitschek 1923. Prim. Ritterling 1925, 1517–1532; Dabrowa 2000. Ritterling 1925, 1493–1505; Le Bohec 2000c. Poleg omenjenih člankov o celejskih vojakih, za Celejo na splošno glej Šašel 1970 in Lazar 2002. Visočnik 2012, 243, tab. 1, pri čemer je treba upoštevati tako pretorijance (na vrhu tabele) kakor večino vojakov iz zaključnega dela (»ostali«), kamor so bili uvrščeni vojaki z laterkulov. stvom, da je rekrutiranje potekalo več časa, saj je kolonija spadala v Italijo, pri Petovioni pa morda z intenzivnejšim rekrutiranjem v pretorijanske vrste od časa Septimija Severa naprej.45 Množica in pestrost izpričanih funkcij (vsaj pri pretorijancih) pa je pri vojakih iz Emone in Petovione večja; najdemo namreč tudi pripadnike različnih mestnih kohort in cesarjeve konjenice. Po drugi je število izpričanih legionarjev iz Emone (3) in Petovione (3) manjše kot število legionarjev iz Celeje (9 oz. 10), veteranov (Emona 3, Petoviona 1, Celeja 2) pa je približno enako (do 3). Iz Petovione poznamo tri centurione, ki so službovali okoli 40 let in v več različnih legijah. Takšna kariera do zdaj še ni izpričana za kakega Celejana ali Emonca. Če ne bi bilo teh treh centurionov, bi bilo tudi število izpričanih legij, v katerih so službovali vojaki, v Petovioni veliko manjše. Število veteranov iz obravnavanih mest je v vseh treh približno enako, kar velja tudi za pripadnike pomožnih enot, saj poznamo iz Emone in Petovione po enega, iz Celeje pa dva. Med vsemi dokumentiranimi vojaki iz Emone in Petovione je samo eden postavil votivni spomenik. Geografska razprostranjenost vojakov je nekoliko drugačna kot pri celejskih. Vojake iz Emone in Petovione namreč srečamo tako v Afriki kakor v vzhodnih provincah (sl. 1–2), v nasprotju s Celejo pa ni nobenega iz Britanije ali Mezije. 4 Namesto zaključka Veliko skupino vojakov iz Emone predstavljajo vojaki, ki so službovali v Rimu oziroma malo širše v Italiji. Skupaj jih je 27, njihova imena so zapisana na seznamih pretorijancev in tudi na nagrobnikih. Poleg pravih pretorijancev so še predstavniki drugih mestnih (rimskih) kohort: urbaniciani (2). Pri pretorijancih je nujno opozoriti še na posebne funkcije vojakov iz Emone: eques (3), tubicen (1), mensor (1). Origo emonskih pretorijancev je v vseh primerih zapisan na preprost način: ali samo Emona ali v kombinaciji z Iulia. Med Emonci sta dva primera, ko sta na nagrobniku omenjena sorodnika (brata), ki sta delila vojaški poklic. Eden izmed njiju je posebno zanimiv, saj je poleg pretorijanca omenjen brat, ki je bil vojak v Šestindvajseti kohorti prostovoljcev, torej v pomožni enoti, v kateri so načeloma delovali peregrini. V Italiji je izpričan še Tit Flavij Klavdijan (CIL V 6302), ki je deloval kot vojaški tribun v Peti makedonski legiji. Ker omenjena funkcija spada v začetni del viteške kariere, je v obravnavo ne moremo pritegniti. Sledijo trije veterani iz različnih provinc: Spodnje Germanije, Tostranske Hispanije in Spodnje Panonije. Dva sta zapisana kot veterana, tretji kot evocatus.46 Pri enem enote, 45 46 Prim. Šašel 1972. Sicer veterani (odsluženi vojaki), a so jih v nevarnih časih spet poklicali k orožju, vendar pa so bili na pohodnih nekoliko privilegirani. v kateri je deloval, ne poznamo, pri drugih dveh gre za Deseto legijo in Drugo pomožno legijo. V treh primerih gre za legionarje – miles legionis, ki so službovali v različnih legijah (Tretja Avgustova, Petnajsta Apolonova) in različnih provincah (Numidija in Zgornja Panonija). Zaradi fragmentarne ohranjenosti pa v nekaterih primerih del podatkov manjka, včasih ime, drugič enota. Tak primer imamo tudi iz Zgornje Germanije. Tudi Petovionci so največ službovali kot vojaki v Rimu. Na dvanajstih seznamih pretorijancev iz Rima in dveh nagrobnikih je 23 vojakov, predvsem pretorijancev, en pripadnik enote vigilov (vigiles), ki je bil celo centurion njihove kohorte, in en vojaški tribun v mestni kohorti (cohors urbana). Med pretorijanci je izpričan še en konjenik in en pripadnik cesarjeve osebne konjenice (equites singulares). Mnogi laterkuli z omembo petovionskih vojakov so poškodovani, zato ne poznamo njihovih imen ali njihovih posebnih funkcij oz. nalog. Trije centurioni iz Petovione svoje funkcije niso opravili v eni legiji in se potem »upokojili«, ampak je mogoče govoriti o t. i. centurionatu – karieri centuriona, ki je služboval v več legijah, njegova vojaščina pa je trajala okoli 40 let. Takih primerov iz Emone in Celeje ne poznamo; paralele na napisih pa kažejo, da je podobne kariere centurionov mogoče srečati po vsem imperiju. Petoviona nekoliko izstopa, ker poleg številnih vojakov v Rimu in teh treh centurionov ni prav veliko drugih vojakov, niti legionarjev niti pripadnikov pomožnih enot. Poznamo namreč le dva legionarja in enega praporščaka, dejansko pa nobenega vojaka katere od številnih pomožnih čet. Do zdaj ni znano, da bi kak vojak iz Petovione kje po imperiju postavil votivni spomenik; v primeru Emone lahko z veliko gotovostjo sklepamo na enega. Kataloga vojakov iz Emone in Petovione predstavljata osnovo za primerjavo z razmerami v sosednjih mestih, predvsem s Celejo, za katero so bile natančnejše študije že narejene, tudi znotraj samega mesta.47 Ko bodo za vsako od obravnavanih mest takšne in podobne analize narejene, bodo gotovo možni še nadaljnji sklepi (npr. o vojakih, ki so se vrnili domov, ali o tujcih, ki so v Emoni ali Petovioni ostali), pa tudi onomastične in »demografske« analize. 47 Visočnik 2008; Visočnik 2011; Visočnik 2012. SOLDIERS FROM ROMAN AUTONOMOUS TOWNS IN SLOVENIA, ACTIVE IN OTHER PARTS OF THE ROMAN EMPIRE (Summary) Soldiers who served in Rome or slightly wider in Italy represent a large group of soldiers from Emona. All together there are 27, their names are written on lists of praetorians and on tombstones. Besides proper praetorians there are also representatives of other town (Roman) cohorts: urbaniciani (2). Among praetorians soldiers from Emona also performed special duties: eques (3), tubicen (1), mensor (1). he origo of praetorians from Emona is always written in a simple manner: either solely Emona or in a combination with Iulia. Among Emonians we see two examples when a tombstone mentions relatives (brothers), who shared the profession of a soldier. One of these is especially interesting since beside the name of the praetorian the name of his brother is written who was a soldier in cohors XXVI Voluntaria, thus in an auxiliary unit where peregrines usually served. In Italy we also ind Titus Flavius Claudianus (CIL V 6302), who served as a military tribune in legio V Macedonica. Because this function belongs to the starting period of an equestrian career he cannot be included among the discussed. hree veterans from various provinces follow: Germania Inferior, Hispania Citerior, and Panonnia Inferior. Two are written down as veterans, the third as evocatus. he unit of his service is unknown for one of them, while the other two served in legio X and legio II Adiutrix. here are three legionaries – milites legionis, who served in diferent legions (legio III Augusta, legio XV Apollinaris), in diferent provinces (Numidia and Panonnia Superior). Due to the fragmented preservation in some cases a part of data is missing, in some instances the name, elsewhere the unit. One such example also comes from Germania Superior. Poetovionians also mostly served as soldiers in Rome. On twenty lists of praetorians from Rome and two tombstones we ind 23 soldiers, mostly praetorians, one member of the vigils unit (vigiles), who was even a centurion of their cohort, and one military tribune in a town cohort (cohors urbana). Among praetorians we have a cavalryman and one member of the imperial horseguards (equites singulares) attested. Many laterculi with the mention of Poetovian soldiers are damaged; due to this we are not familiar either with their names or their special functions. hree centurions from Poetovio did not perform their function in one single legion and then »retired«, rather we can speak about the so-called centurionate – the career of a centurion, who served in several legions and whose service lasted about 40 years. Such cases are not known from Emona and Celeia; yet the parallels on the inscriptions indicate that similar centurion careers can be encountered all through the Empire. Poetovio slightly difers since besides 313 numerous soldiers in Rome and these three centurions, there are not many other soldiers, neither legionaries nor members of auxiliary units. Namely, we know only of two legionaries and one standard bearer, while there are no soldiers serving in one of the many auxiliary units. Up until the present day we know of no soldiers from Poetovio anywhere in the Empire erecting any votive monuments; in the case of Emona we can with great certainty assume one. he catalogues of soldiers from Emona and Poetovio present the basis for comparison with circumstances in neighbouring towns, primarily with Celeia, for which more detailed studies have already been made, even within the town itself. Once such and similar analyses will be made for each of the discussed towns, further conclusions should be possible (e.g. about those soldiers who returned home, or foreigners who stayed in Emona or Poetovio), as well as onomastic and »demographic« analyses. Translation: Maja Sužnik LITERATURA / BIBLIOGRAPHY AE: L'Année épigraphique. Revue des publications épigraphiques relatives a l'antiquité romaine. – Paris, Nendeln. BIRLEY, E. 1988, Promotions and Transfers in the Roman Army II. he Centurionate. – he Roman Army Papers 1929–1986, Mavors 4, Amsterdam, 206–220 [= Carnuntum Jahrbuch 1963/64, 21–33]. CICHORIUS, C. 1901, Cohors. – V/In: RE IV/1, 231–356. CIL: Corpus Inscriptionum Latinarum. DABROWA, E. 2000, Legio III Gallica. – V/In: Y. Le Bohec, C. Wolf (ur./eds.), Les légions de Rome sous le haut-empire, Actes du congrès de Lyon (17–19 septembre 1998), Collection du Centre d’études romaines et gallo-romaines n. s. 20/27, Paris, 309–315. DARIS, S. 2000, Legio II Traiana Fortis. – V/In: Y. Le Bohec, C. Wolf (ur./eds.), Les légions de Rome sous le haut-empire, Actes du congrès de Lyon (17–19 septembre 1998), Collection du Centre d’études romaines et gallo-romaines n. s. 20/27, Paris, 359–363. DOMASZEWSKI, A. 1899, Centurio. – V/In: RE III/2, 1962– 1964. DOMASZEWSKI, A., DOBSON B. 1967, Die Rangordnung des römischen Heeres. – Beihefte der Bonner Jahrbücher 50, Köln, Graz. DURRY, M. 1938, Les cohortes prétoriennes. – Paris. 314 ECK, W. 2000, Die legio I Minervia. Militärische und zivile Aspekte ihrer Geschichte im 3. Jh. n. Chr. – V/In: Y. Le Bohec, C. Wolf (ur./eds.), Les légions de Rome sous le haut-empire, Actes du congrès de Lyon (17–19 septembre 1998), Collection du Centre d’études romaines et gallo-romaines n. s. 20/27, Paris, 87–93. EDCS: Epigraphik – Datenbank Clauss – Slaby. http://db.edcs. eu/epigr/epi_de.php [spletna epigrafska baza; zadnji dostop: 2. 3. 2013]. EDR: Epigraphic Database Roma. http://www.edr-edr.it/Italiano/ index_it.php [spletna epigrafska baza; zadnji dostop: 2. 3. 2013]. FABRICIUS, E. 1931, Mensor. – V/In: RE XV/1, 956–960. FELLMANN, R. 2000, Die 11. Legion Claudia Pia Fidelis. – V/In: Y. Le Bohec, C. Wolf (ur./eds.), Les légions de Rome sous le haut-empire, Actes du congrès de Lyon (17–19 septembre 1998), Collection du Centre d’études romaines et gallo-romaines n. s. 20/27, Paris, 127–131. FRANKE, T. 2000a, Legio XXII Primigeniae. – V/In: Y. Le Bohec, C. Wolf (ur./eds.), Les légions de Rome sous le haut-empire, Actes du congrès de Lyon (17–19 septembre 1998), Collection du Centre d’études romaines et gallo-romaines n. s. 20/27, Paris, 95–104. FRANKE, T. 2000b, Legio XIV Gemina. – V/In: Y. Le Bohec, C. Wolf (ur./eds.), Les légions de Rome sous le haut-empire, Actes du congrès de Lyon (17–19 septembre 1998), Collection du Centre d’études romaines et gallo-romaines n. s. 20/27, Paris, 191–202. GOLDSWORTHY, A. K. 2003, he Complete Roman Army. – London. GÓMEZ-PANTOJA, J. 2000, Legio X Gemina. – V/In: Y. Le Bohec, C. Wolf (ur./eds.), Les légions de Rome sous le haut-empire, Actes du congrès de Lyon (17–19 septembre 1998), Collection du Centre d’études romaines et gallo-romaines n. s. 20/27, Paris, 169–190. HD: Epigraphische Datenbank Heidelberg. http://edh-www.adw. uni-heidelberg.de/home [spletna epigrafska baza; zadnji dostop: 2. 3. 2013]. HOLDER, P. 1980, Studies in the Auxilia of the Roman Army from Augustus to Trajan. – BAR International Series 70, Oxford. HORVAT, J., LOVENJAK, M., DOLENC VIČIČ, A., LUBŠINA-TUŠEK, M., TOMANIČ-JEVREMOV, M., ŠUBIC, Z. 2003, Poetovio. Development and Topography. – V/ In: M. Šašel Kos, P. Scherrer (ur./eds.), he autonomous towns of Noricum and Pannonia / Die autonomen Städte in Noricum und Pannonien, Pannonia 1, Situla 41, Ljubljana, 153–189. KEPPIE, L. 1984, he Making of the Roman Army. From Republic to Empire. – London. KEPPIE, L. 2000, he Praetorian Guard before Sejanus. – V/In: L. Keppie, Legions and Veterans, Roman Army Papers 1971–2000, Mavors Roman army researches 12, Stuttgart, 99–122. KUBITSCHEK, W. 1923, Signifer. – V/In: RE IIA/2, 2348–2358. LAMMERT, F. 1939, Tubicen. – V/In: RE VIIA/1, 754–755. LAZAR, I. 2002, Celeia. – V/In: M. Šašel Kos, P. Scherrer (ur./ eds.), he Autonomous Towns of Noricum and Pannonia / Die autonomen Städte in Noricum und Pannonien, Noricum, Situla 40, Ljubljana, 71–101. LE BOHEC, Y. 1994, he imperial Roman Army. – London. LE BOHEC, Y. 2000a, Legio XXX Vlpia. – V/In: Y. Le Bohec, C. Wolf (ur./eds.), Les légions de Rome sous le haut-empire, Actes du congrès de Lyon (17–19 septembre 1998), Collection du Centre d’études romaines et gallo-romaines n. s. 20/27, Paris, 71–74. LE BOHEC, Y. 2000b, Legio I Minervia (Ier–IIe siècle). – V/In: Y. Le Bohec, C. Wolf (ur./eds.), Les légions de Rome sous le hautempire, Actes du congrès de Lyon (17–19 septembre 1998), Collection du Centre d’études romaines et gallo-romaines n. s. 20/27, Paris, 83–86. LE BOHEC, Y. 2000c, Legio III Augusta. – V/In: Y. Le Bohec, C. Wolf (ur./eds.), Les légions de Rome sous le haut-empire, Actes du congrès de Lyon (17–19 septembre 1998), Collection du Centre d’études romaines et gallo-romaines n. s. 20/27, Paris, 373–381. LE ROUX, P. 2000, Legio VII Gemina (pia) felix. – V/In: Y. Le Bohec, C. Wolf (ur./eds.), Les légions de Rome sous le haut-empire, Actes du congrès de Lyon (17–19 septembre 1998), Collection du Centre d’études romaines et gallo-romaines n. s. 20/27, Paris, 383–396. LŐRINCZ, B. 2000, Legio I Adiutrix. – V/In: Y. Le Bohec, C. Wolf (ur./eds.), Les légions de Rome sous le haut-empire, Actes du congrès de Lyon (17–19 septembre 1998), Collection du Centre d’études romaines et gallo-romaines n. s. 20/27, Paris, 159–168. LOVENJAK, M. 1998, Neviodunum. – Situla 37, Inscriptiones Latinae Sloveniae 1, Ljubljana. LOVENJAK, M. 2003, Municipium Flavium Latobicorum Neviodunum. – V/In: M. Šašel Kos, P. Scherrer (ur./eds.), he autonomous towns of Noricum and Pannonia / Die autonomen Städte in Noricum und Pannonien, Pannonia 1, Situla 41, Ljubljana, 93–105. SOUTHERN, P. 2007, he Roman army. A social and institutional history. – Oxford, New York. STROBEL, K. 2000, Zur Geschichte der legiones V (Macedonica) und VII (Claudia pia idelis) in der früen Kaiserzeit und Stellung der Provinz Galatia. – V/In: Y. Le Bohec, C. Wolf (ur./ eds.), Les légions de Rome sous le haut-empire, Actes du congrès de Lyon (17–19 septembre 1998), Collection du Centre d’études romaines et gallo-romaines n. s. 20/27, Paris, 515–528. ŠAŠEL, J. 1968, Emona. – V/In: RE Suppl. XI, 540–578 [= Opera selecta, Situla 30, Ljubljana 1992, 559–579]. ŠAŠEL, J. 1970, Celeia. – V/In: RE Suppl. XII, 139–148 [= Opera selecta, Situla 30, Ljubljana 1992, 583–587]. ŠAŠEL, J. 1972, Zur Rekrutierung der Prätorianer. – Historia 21, 474–480 [= Opera selecta, Situla 30, Ljubljana 1992, 379–385]. ŠAŠEL KOS, M. 1998, Je bila Emona nekdanji tabor 15. legije in veteranska kolonija? – Zgodovinski časopis 52/3, 317–329 [povzetek v angleščini / summary in English]. ŠAŠEL KOS, M. 2002, he boundary stone between Aquileia and Emona / Mejnik med Akvilejo in Emono. – Arheološki vestnik 53, 373–382. ŠAŠEL KOS, M. 2003, Emona was in Italy, not in Pannonia. – V/In: M. Šašel Kos, P. Scherrer (ur./eds.), he autonomous towns of Noricum and Pannonia / Die autonomen Städte in Noricum und Pannonien, Pannonia 1, Situla 41, Ljubljana, 11–19. VAN RENGEN, W. 2000, La IIe Légion Parthique à Apamée. – V/In: Y. Le Bohec, C. Wolf (ur./eds.), Les légions de Rome sous le haut-empire, Actes du congrès de Lyon (17–19 septembre 1998), Collection du Centre d’études romaines et gallo-romaines n. s. 20/27, Paris, 407–410. PASSERINI, A. 1939, Le coorti pretorie. – Roma. PISO, I. 2000, Les légions dans la province de Dacie. – V/In: Y. Le Bohec, C. Wolf (ur./eds.), Les légions de Rome sous le hautempire, Actes du congrès de Lyon (17–19 septembre 1998), Collection du Centre d’études romaines et gallo-romaines n. s. 20/27, Paris, 205–225. POCHMARSKI, E. 2007, Solvenser Soldaten. – Schild von Steier 20, 269–291. RE: G. Wissowa et al. (ur./eds.), Paulys Real-Encyclopädie der classischen Altewrtumswissenschaft, Stuttgart 1893–1995. REDDÉ, M. 2000, Legio VIII Augusta. – V/In: Y. Le Bohec, C. Wolf (ur./eds.), Les légions de Rome sous le haut-empire, Actes du congrès de Lyon (17–19 septembre 1998), Collection du Centre d’études romaines et gallo-romaines n. s. 20/27, Paris, 119–126. RICCI, C. 2000, Legio II Parthica. Una messa a punto. – V/In: Y. Le Bohec, C. Wolf (ur./eds.), Les légions de Rome sous le hautempire, Actes du congrès de Lyon (17–19 septembre 1998), Collection du Centre d’études romaines et gallo-romaines n. s. 20/27, Paris, 397–406. RITTERLING, E. 1925, Legio. – V/In: RE XII/2, 1329–1829. SCHAEFER, H. 1920, Sabazios. – V/In: RE IA/2, 1540–1551. VIČIČ, B. 2003, Colonia Iulia Emona. 30 Jahre später. – V/ In: M. Šašel Kos, P. Scherrer (ur./eds.), he autonomous towns of Noricum and Pannonia / Die autonomen Städte in Noricum und Pannonien, Pannonia 1, Situla 41, Ljubljana, 21–45. VISOČNIK, J. 2008, Vojaški napisi iz Celeje in njene okolice / Roman military inscriptions from Celeia and its surroundings. – Arheološki vestnik 59, 325–357. VISOČNIK, J. 2011, Vojaki iz Celeje. – V/In: D. Mihelič, M. Bizjak (ur./eds.), Vojaki iz slovenskega prostora na tujih tleh v preteklosti, Ljubljana, 29–36. VISOČNIK, J. 2012, Vojaki iz Celeje na tujem / Celeian soldiers attested across the Empire. – Arheološki vestnik 63, 235–264. WHEELER, E. L. 2000, Legio XV Apollinaris: From Carnuntum to Satala – and beyond. – V/In: Y. Le Bohec, C. Wolf (ur./ eds.), Les légions de Rome sous le haut-empire, Actes du congrès de Lyon (17–19 septembre 1998), Collection du Centre d’études romaines et gallo-romaines n. s. 20/27, Paris, 259–308. WOLFF, C. 2000, La legio XIII Gemina au Ier siècle. – V/In: Y. Le Bohec, C. Wolf (ur./eds.), Les légions de Rome sous le haut-empire, Actes du congrès de Lyon (17–19 septembre 1998), Collection du Centre d’études romaines et gallo-romaines n. s. 20/27, Paris, 203–204. 315 DIE ZEIT DES KAISERS GALLIENUS UND DIE ROLLE DES HEERES IN POETOVIO GALIENOVO OBDOBJE IN VLOGA VOJSKE V PETOVIONI Anja Ragolič Anja Ragolič Zusammenfassung Izvleček Die Präsenz römischer Truppen in Poetovio ist nach dem 1. und 2. Jh. auch noch für das 3. Jh. n. Chr. dokumentiert. Die bislang einzige römische Inschrift, auf welcher Vexillationen der vier pannonischen Legionen erwähnt sind, kann in die Zeit nach 260 datiert werden. Diese Truppenabteilungen wurden in Poetotvio entweder von den Usurpatoren oder von Kaiser Gallienus selbst stationiert. Im Zuge der römischen Politik des 3. Jh., welche in erster Linie dem Schutz des Balkanraumes und der beiden Pannonien galt, wurden vor dem Jahr 269 die Vexillationen zweier dakischer Legionen, der legio V Macedonica und der XIII Gemina, nach Poetovio verlegt. Gallienus hat diese zwei Truppen wahrscheinlich deswegen hierher beordert, damit sie ihm gegen allfälligen Angrif des Postumus den Rücken frei halten oder auch um der drohenden Germanengefahr zu begegnen; zu guter letzt wohl auch zur Sicherung Italiens. Auf jeden Fall spielte Poetovio in der Zeit des Gallienus beim Schutz des Imperiums vor inneren und äußeren Feinden eine wichtige Rolle und zählte damals zu den wichtigsten militärischen Stützpunkten des Römischen Reiches. Vojaška navzočnost je v Petovioni po 1. in 2. st. dokumentirana spet v 3. st. Edini (do zdaj) najdeni napisni kamen z omembo veksilacij štirih panonskih legij datiramo po letu 260. Te oddelke so v Petoviono namestili uzurpatorji ali Galien. V sklopu Galienove politike zaščite Balkanskega polotoka in Panonije pa sta se pred letom 269 v Petovioni pojavili tudi veksilaciji dačanskih legij Pete makedonske in Trinajste dvojne. Galien je ti dve veksilaciji namestil zato, da bi mu ščitili hrbet ob morebitnem ponovnem napadu proticesarja Postuma, ali zaradi nevarnosti vpada Germanov ali pa zaradi zaščite Italije. Vsekakor je imela Poetovio v Galienovem času pomembno vlogo pri zaščiti imperija pred notranjimi in zunanjimi sovražniki ter je bila ena ključnih vojaških točk. Schlüsselwörter: Epigraphik, Gallienus, Reformen, Heer, Usurpatoren, Pannonien, Poetovio, drittes Mithräum 1 Einführung Die Probleme, die im 3. Jh. das Römische Reich plagten und die sich im Laufe der Zeit noch verschärfen sollten, führten den Staat in eine Krise, die ihren Höhepunkt in der Herrschaftsperiode des Gallienus erreichten. Die ständigen Schwierigkeiten in der Staatsführung, in der Wirtschaft, weiters im militärischen und religiösen Bereich sind nur einige von vielen Problemen, mit denen die römischen Kaiser konfrontiert waren. Steinbrüche und Bergwerke wurden wegen Rohstofmangels geschlossen, es fehlte an Arbeitskräften, die erhöhten Lebensmittelpreise führten in den Hunger und in die Kriminalität. Die einzelnen Kaiser, die oft mit Gewalt an die Macht gekommen waren, blieben so gut wie machtlos. Eine wichtige Zäsur in der Staatsführung bedeutete das Jahr 284 und die Reformen Ključne besede: epigraika, Galien, reforme, vojska, uzurpatorji, Panonija, Poetovio, tretji mitrej 1 Uvod Težave, v katerih se je rimski imperij znašel v 3. st. in ki so se z leti samo še kopičile in stopnjevale, so državo pripeljale v krizo, ki je dosegla vrh prav v Galienovem obdobju. Nenehne težave pri upravljanju države, v gospodarstvu, v zvezi z vojsko in religijo so samo nekatere, s katerimi so se morali spoprijemati rimski cesarji. Zaradi velike razsežnosti države so bili kamnolomi in rudniki izčrpani, delovne sile je bilo premalo, povišane cene živil pa so vodile v lakoto in kriminal. Vladarji, ki so na oblast pogosto prihajali s silo, so velikokrat ostali nemočni. Večjo spremembo v upravi države je pomenilo leto 284 in Dioklecijanove reforme. Notranje neravnovesje in vdori barbarov v Podonavje, pa tudi premiki ljudstev na vzhodu so pomenili začetek propada rimskega imperija.1 V zmešnjavi rimske politike je tedaj nastopil svojo cesarsko pot najprej kot sovladar očetu Valerijanu (253–260),2 1 2 Alföldy 1989, 328–333. Kienast 1990, 212–214. 317 des Kaiser Diokletian. Nicht nur die innere Disharmonie und die Barbareneinfälle in den Donauraum, sondern auch die Barbarenzüge im Osten läuteten das Ende des Römischen Imperiums ein.1 In diesem politischen und wirtschaftlichen Chaos übernahm Publius Licinius Egnatius Gallienus zuerst als Mitregent seines Vaters Valerian (253–260),2 danach als selbständiger Kaiser (260–268) die Herrschaft.3 Um sich den einzelnen Problemen in den Provinzen leichter widmen zu können, teilten die beiden Kaiser die Verwaltungsgebiete untereinander auf. Valerian ging nach Osten, um sich mit den Persern auseinanderzusetzen. Gallienus führte die Herrschaft über die europäischen und die afrikanischen Provinzen. Zosimos berichtet,4 dass Gallienus zusammen mit der europäischen Reichshälfte auch einen Teil des Heeres übernahm. Neben den stehenden Grenztruppen, den Prätorianerkohorten und der legio II Parthica aus Alba (Castra Albana, Albano Laziale), bestand sein Heer aus den rätischen (von Castra Regina, Regensburg) und pannonischen (von Carnuntum, Deutschaltenburg-Petronell) Legionen, somit aus der legio III Italica, II Italica, X Gemina und XIV Gemina.5 Als erste Maßnahme sorgte Gallienus für den Schutz der Donauund Rheingrenze. Denn diese waren durch Germaneneinfälle gefährdet.6 Bis zum Jahr 257 konnte er den Balkanraum absichern, später überließ er die einfacheren Aufgaben seinen Generälen und Söhnen. Er selbst widmete sich fortan ganz den Problemen entlang des Donaulimes.7 2 Reformen des Gallienus Das wichtigste Ziel, das Gallienus als Kaiser erreichen wollte, war die Zentralisierung der Staatsgewalt sowie eine generelle Erneuerung des Römischen Reiches. Dies erhofte er anhand mehrer Reformen zu realisieren, indem er zunächst die politische Macht von der militärischen trennte.8 Er entfernte die Senatoren aus den wichtigsten Verwaltungsämtern und aus den führenden Positionen beim Militär.9 Kamen früher die legati legionum aus den Reihen pozneje kot samostojni cesar, Publij Licinij Egnacij Galien (260–268).3 Zaradi lažjega reševanja problemov, ki so pestili province, sta si cesarja razdelila upravna območja. Cesar Valerijan se je na vzhodu spopadel s perzijsko nevarnostjo, Galien pa je postal vladar nad evropskim delom cesarstva in v afriških provincah. Zosim poroča,4 da je Galien skupaj z evropsko polovico cesarstva dobil tudi del vojske. Poleg stalnih obmejnih enot, pretorijanskih kohort in Druge partske legije iz Albe (Castra Albana, dan. Albano Laziale), so jo sestavljali tudi oddelki recijskih legij z območja mest Castra Regina (dan. Regensburg) in Karnunt (dan. Deutschaltenburg-Petronell): legio III Italica, II Italica, X Gemina in XIV Gemina.5 Kot prvo nalogo je Galien prevzel zaščito donavske in renske meje pred vdori germanskih plemen.6 Do leta 257 mu je uspelo zavarovati Balkanski polotok, pozneje je preproste naloge prepustil svojim generalom in sinovoma, sam pa se je posvetil problemom ob donavski meji.7 2 Galienove reforme Ko je postal cesar, sta bili za Galiena v ospredju prizadevanj centralizacija in obnova rimskega cesarstva. To je poskušal doseči s številnimi reformami, s katerimi je ločil politično oblast od vojaške.8 Z nekaterih ključnih mest državne uprave in vodilnih položajev v vojski je najprej izločil senatorje.9 Prej so bili legijski legati iz vrst senatorjev, Galien je uvedel prefekte, ki so izhajali iz viteškega stanu.10 Poimenovanje legatus legionis se od leta 260 ne pojavlja več, namesto tega lahko na napisih najdemo poimenovanja praefectus legionis (z dodatkom a(gens) v(ices) l(egati)) ali v(ir) e(gregius)).11 S to potezo je senatorjem zmanjšal moč tudi na upravnem področju, saj niso mogli načelovati provincam, v katerih se je nahajala vojska, in so bili 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 318 Alföldy 1989, 328–333. Kienast 1990, 212–214. Kienast 1990, 215–227. Zosimos 1, 30, 1. Alföldi 1959, 15 (= Alföldi 2001, 174). Goltz, Hartmann 2008, 238. Bratož 2007, 323–329; Goltz, Hartmann 2008, 239–240, 242, 246. Die überwiegende Mehrzahl der Forscher setzt die gallienischen Reformen ist das Jahr 260 (Plaum 1976, 109; De Blois 1976, 39), wobei Gallienus einige Neuerungen schon vor der Gefangennahme Valerians einführte (Goltz, Hartmann 2008, 277–279). Et patres quidem praeter commune Romani malum orbis stimulabat proprii ordinis contumelia, quia primus ipse metu socordiae suae, ne imperium ad optimos nobilium transferretur, senatum militia vetuit et adire exercitum. (Sex. Aurelius Victor 33, 33). Übersetzung: »Und natürlich hat die Senatoren neben der gemeinsamen misslichen Situation des Imperiums die Beleidigung ihres Standes beunruhigt, weil er (= 7 8 9 10 11 Kienast 1990, 215–227. Zosim 1, 30, 1. Alföldi 1959, 15 (= Alföldi 2001, 174). Goltz, Hartmann 2008, 238. Bratož 2007, 323–329; Goltz, Hartmann 2008, 239–240, 242, 246. Najbolj uveljavljena letnica reform je leto 260 (Plaum 1976, 109; De Blois 1976, 39), čeprav je Galien nekatere novosti vpeljal še pred Valerijanovo ugrabitvijo (Goltz, Hartmann 2008, 277–279). Et patres quidem praeter commune Romani malum orbis stimulabat proprii ordinis contumelia, quia primus ipse metu socordiae suae, ne imperium ad optimos nobilium transferretur, senatum militia vetuit et adire exercitum. (Sex. Aurelius Victor 33, 33). Prevod: »In gotovo je senatorje poleg skupne nesreče rimskega sveta vznemirjala razžalitev njihovega stanu, ker je najprej on (= Galien) v strahu pred svojo nepremišljenostjo, da se oblast ne bi prenesla na najboljše izmed plemstva, senatu prepovedal opravljanje vojaških karier in vstop v vojsko.« Plaum 1976, 109; Bratož 2007, 328; Goltz, Hartmann 2008, 280–281. De Blois 1976, 39 in 47; Campbell 2005, 117–118; Goltz, Hartmann 2008, 280. der Senatoren, so tauschte sie Gallienus nun gegen die praefecti ein, die dem Ritterstand angehörten.10 Der Terminus legatus legionis ist nach dem Jahre 260 nicht mehr präsent. Stattdessen inden wir in den Inschriften den praefectus legionis – mit dem Zusatz a(gens) v(ices) l(egati) – und den v(ir) e(gregius).11 Damit schränkte er die Machtstellung der Senatoren in der Reichsverwaltung drastisch ein. Sie konnten nicht mehr die Leitung von Heeresprovinzen übernehmen und wurden damit von den strategisch bedeutsamen Provinzen ferngehalten.12 Die kaiserlichen Provinzen, die während der Prinzipatszeit noch unter der Führung senatorischer legati Augusti pro praetore standen, wurden im Zuge der gallienischen Reformen den ritterlichen Statthaltern übertragen, den so genannten a(gentes) v(ices) p(raesidis) oder vice prasidis bzw. später nur praesides.13 In ihren Händen lag nun die gesamte administrative, inanzielle und jurisdiktionelle Gewalt. Als Gouverneure wussten sie, was das Heer benötigte und welche Maßnahmen für den Schutz der Provinzen notwendig waren.14 Die Provinzverwaltung wurde zentralisiert. Auf der anderen Seite hat Gallienus auch dem Heer, das die Spitze des Ritterstandes repräsentierte, zu mehr Einluss verholfen. Insbesondere die Oiziere in den Donauprovinzen bekamen jetzt mehr Macht,15 was sie gelegentlich als Usurpatoren auszunutzen verstanden. In einem nächsten Schritt hat sich Gallienus der Strukturreform des Heeres gewidmet. Bis zu seiner Alleinherrschaft war die Verteidigung des Römischen Reiches auf den Limes beziehungsweise auf dessen Hinterland konzentriert. Im Notfall konnten die Legionen rasch auf das bedrohte Territorium vorrücken. Wegen der Truppenkonzentration auf nur wenige Standorte waren die Grenzen des Imperiums allerdings auch leichter zu überschreiten als bisher. Gallienus entnahm jeder Legion 1000 Infanteristen und formte aus zwei solcher Verbände eine jeweils neue Truppeneinheit,16 die vexillationes, die selbständig agieren und im Kampf gegen Usurpatoren eingesetzt werden konnten. Einige dieser Verbände wurden selbst in die gefährlichsten Gebiete entsandt und begleiteten (als comitati) den Kaiser selbst.17 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Gallienus) aus Furcht der eigenen Unüberlegtheit, dass die Macht nicht an die besten Adeligen übergehen würde, den Senatoren verboten, militärische Stellen zu bekleiden und in die Kasernen einzutreten.« Plaum 1976, 109; Bratož 2007, 328; Goltz, Hartmann 2008, 280–281. De Blois 1976, 39 und 47; Campbell 2005, 117–118; Goltz, Hartmann 2008, 280. Bratož 2007, 328. Diese gallienische Reform gilt nicht in allen Provinzen. Die ritterlichen Statthalter wurden nur in den bedrohten Provinzen eingesetzt, so auch in den beiden Pannonien (De Blois 1976, 51–52). Grosse 1920, 8; Petersen 1955, 47; Goltz, Hartmann 2008, 280–281. De Blois 1976, 50 und 52. Bratož 2007, 328. Plaum 1976, 109–110. Goltz, Hartmann 2008, 277–278. tako izrinjeni s strateško pomembnih območij.12 Cesarske province, ki so jih v času principata vodili senatski legati Augusti pro praetore, so od Galienovih reform upravljali viteški upravitelji, imenovani a(gens) v(ices) p(raesidis) ali vice prasidis oz. pozneje samo praesides.13 Ti so imeli tako administrativno, inančno in sodno oblast, zaradi svojega vojaškega znanja pa so takšni upravitelji tudi najbolje vedeli, kaj vojska potrebuje in kaj je potrebno za zaščito provinc.14 Uprava v provincah se je centralizirala. Na drugi strani je Galien s to potezo povečal moč vojaškemu sloju, ki je sestavljal vrh viteškega stanu. Zlasti oicirji v podonavskih provincah so s tem dosegli visok položaj, 15 velik vpliv in moč, kar so izkoristili kot uzurpatorji. V naslednjem koraku se je Galien lotil prenove v strukturi vojske. Do nastopa njegove vlade je bila obramba rimske države osredotočena na limesu ali nekje v bližini limesa, da je lahko v času nevarnosti kar se da hitro posegla na ogroženo območje. Oddelki vojske so bili na ta način preveč zgoščeni in postavljeni le na izbrane obrambne točke, zato je sovražnik lahko zlahka prestopil meje imperija. Galien je vsaki legiji odvzel po 1000 mož pehote ter iz dveh ustanovil novo enoto.16 Ti oddelki (vexillationes) so delovali samostojno in bili namenjeni za boj proti uzurpatorjem, posamezne enote je cesar poslal na vojaška krizna območja, kot comitatus pa so spremljali tudi njega.17 Jedro Galienove vojske je bila konjenica.18 Ustanovil je močno in samostojno konjenico, s katero je na eni strani lahko hitro menjaval bojišča, hkrati pa je imel v zaledju dovolj enot, ki so varovale šibke točke v obrambi.19 Veksilacijam so načelovali viteški oicirji, od markomanskih vojn naprej imenovani praepositus ali dux.20 Na čelo konjenice je Galien postavil viteškega generala Avreola. Glavni sedež teh enot je bil tabor v Mediolanu (dan. Milano).21 Viteški poveljnik je imel več usposabljanja in znanja kot senatski poveljnik pred njim, pripravljen je bil na hitre odločitve v času krize ter bil sposoben voditi številčnejšo vojsko.22 Torej je jasno, zakaj je bila za Galiena pomembna 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Bratož 2007, 328. Ta Galienova reforma sicer ni veljala v vseh provincah. Vitezi so kot upravitelji bili postavljeni smo v najbolj ogroženih provincah, tako tudi v obeh Panonijah (De Blois 1976, 51–52). Grosse 1920, 8; Petersen 1955, 47; Goltz, Hartmann 2008, 280–281. De Blois 1976, 50 in 52. Bratož 2007, 328. Plaum 1976, 109–110. Goltz, Hartmann 2008, 277–278. Leta 258 se na novcih iz kovnice v Colonia Agrippinensis (dan. Köln) pojavlja napis cum exerc(itu) suo (= s svojo vojsko), kar bi kazalo na že reformirno vojsko. Potemtakem je imela na novo ustanovljena vojska svoj ognjeni krst že v spopadih z Germani na Renu (De Blois 1976, 27 in 205) oziroma proti Ingenuu (Alföldi 1967, 361). Goltz, Hartmann 2008, 277–279. De Blois 1976, 27–28. Saxer 1967, 122. Goltz, Hartmann 2008, 277–278. Campbell 2005, 118. 319 Der Kern des (neuen) gallienischen Heeres bildete die Kavallerie.18 Gallienus gründete eine starke und selbstständige Kavallerie, mit deren Hilfe er schnell zu einzelnen Schauplätzen eilen konnte. Zugleich standen im Hinterland genügend Truppen zur Verteidigung der übrigen Zonen bereit.19 Die Befehlsgewalt über die Vexillationen lag in den Händen der ritterlichen Oiziere, die ab den Markomannenkriegen den Titel praepositus oder dux trugen.20 An die Spitze der Kavallerie stellte Gallienus seinen ritterlichen General Aureolus. Als Hauptquartier für diese Reitertruppen wurde nun das Lager in Mediolanum (Mailand) auserkoren.21 Die ritterlichen Kommandeure verfügten über eine bessere Ausbildung als vor ihnen die senatorischen. In Krisenzeiten konnte sie schnell Entscheidungen trefen und ein zahlenmäßig größeres Heer befehligen.22 Dies macht verständlich, warum es dem Gallienus wichtig schien, die Senatoren aus den militärischen Aufgabenbereichen zu entfernen. Die Truppen sollten fortan nur von den erfahrensten Feldherren geführt werden,23 die über entsprechende logistische, strategische und taktische Kenntnisse verfügten! Die Veränderungen in der Heeresstruktur verlangten freilich auch ein höheres Budget. Gallienus versuchte dem Problem mit neuen Münzemissionen (den so genannten Legions-Antoninianen) zu begegnen,24 deren Legierung einen geringeren Silberanteil aufwies. Dass er damit die Inlation anheizte, versteht sich von selbst.25 Die Herrschaft des Gallienus unterschied sich sehr von der seines Vaters. Valerian hat als vehementer Gegner des Christentums dessen Verfolgung in Gang gesetzt, während sie Gallienus mit einem eigenen Edikt beendete. Seine Bemühungen für die kulturelle Entwicklung sind heute unter dem Namen »Gallienische Renaissance« bekannt. Er war ein Verehrer der griechischen Kultur, wurde in Athen unter die Archonten aufgenommen und sogar in die Eleusinischen Mysterien eingeweiht. Auch unterhielt er enge Kontakte zu den führenden Intellektuellen seiner Zeit. Seine Zeitgenossen, vor allem Senatoren, waren ihm wegen seiner Reformen nicht sehr zugetan. Die Einigung des Imperiums, um die er sich fast 15 Jahre bemüht hatte, vermochten erst Aurelian und Diokletian herbeizuführen.26 odstranitev senatorjev iz vojaških zadev: takšne enote so morali voditi izkušeni vojskovodje,23 ki so imeli logistično, strateško in taktično znanje! Sprememba v strukturi vojske pa je pomenila večjo potrebo po denarju. Galien je težavo poskušal odpraviti tako, da je odredil nove emisije novcev (t. i. legijski antoniniani),24 v katerih je delež srebra v zlitinah zmanjšal. S tem problema ni rešil, ampak je njegovo dejanje državo pripeljalo do velike inlacije.25 Galienovo vladanje se je zelo razlikovalo od vladanja njegovega očeta Valerijana. Valerijan je kot vnet nasprotnik krščanstva spodbudil preganjanje kristjanov, ki ga je Galien odpravil z ediktom. Njegovo prizadevanje za razvoj kulture je zdaj znano pod imenom galienska renesansa. Podpiral je grško kulturo, se dal sprejeti med arhonte v Atenah in posvetiti v elevzinske misterije. Vzdrževal je tudi tesne prijateljske stike z vodilnimi intelektualci svoje dobe. Sodobniki, zlasti senatorji, mu zaradi njegovih reform niso bili naklonjeni, enotnost imperija, za katerega se je trudil skoraj 15 let, pa sta dosegla šele Avrelijan in Dioklecijan.26 3 Galien kot samostojni vladar v podonavskih provincah Leto 260 je pomenilo prelomnico v Galienovem življenju. Valerijan je v sasanidskem ujetništvu umrl in Galien je postal samostojni vladar. Že na začetku vladanja se je moral spopasti s številnimi uzurpatorji (domnevno okrog 30), nenehne napetosti z germanskimi plemeni pa so ga prisilile v stalno bojevanje. Pri rekonstrukciji dogodkov v podonavskih provincah med letoma 260 in 268 nam pomagajo novci in napisi na kamnitih spomenikih, ki pričajo o premikih in dejavnostih njegovih legij in veksilacij. Posebno pomembna sta posvetilna napisa, ki ju bomo v nadaljevanju komentirali. Na posvetilnem kamnu (sl. 1), ki so ga leta 1992 odkrili pri gradbenih delih v Augsburgu,27 je vklesano, da so vojaki 23 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 320 26 Auf den in dass Jahr 258 datierten Münzen der Münzstätte der Colonia Agrippenensis (Köln) kann man die Umschrit cum exerc(itu) suo (= mit seinem Heer) lesen, was auf ein schon reformiertes Heerwesen schließen lässt. Somit könnte das neu aufgestellte Heer die Feuertaufe bereits mit den Kämpfen gegen die Germanen (De Blois 1976, 27 und 205) bzw. gegen Ingenuus (Alföldi 1967, 361) erlebt haben. Goltz, Hartmann 2008, 277–279. De Blois 1976, 27–28. Saxer 1967, 122. Goltz, Hartmann 2008, 277–278. Campbell 2005, 118. Plaum 1976, 109–110. Alföldi 1959, 13 (= Alföldi 2001, 173). Bratož 2007, 329. Bratož 2007, 329; Goltz, Hartmann 2008, 295. 24 25 26 27 Plaum 1976, 109–110. Alföldi 1959, 13 (= Alföldi 2001, 173). Bratož 2007, 329. Bratož 2007, 329; Goltz, Hartmann 2008, 295. AE 1993, 1231; lupa 6338; HD044953. Prvotno je bil na kamnu napis, posvečen Severu Aleksandru (222–235); ohranjeni sta prvi dve vrstici. Ostanek prvotnega napisa so pozneje izbrisali, čezenj pa vklesali besedilo, ki slavi zmago nad Jutungi. Branje prvega napisa: In h(onorem) d(omus) d(ivinae) // [[pro sal(ute) imp(eratoris]] Sev[[er]]i / [[Alexandri Aug(usti]] / -----. Prevod: »V počastitev božanski cesarski hiši za blagostanje cesarja Severa Aleksandra Avgusta.« Branje drugega napisa: In h(onorem) d(omus) d(ivinae) // deae sanctae Victoriae / ob barbaros gentis Semnonum / sive Iouthungorum die /5 VIII et VII Kal(endarum) Maiar(um) caesos / fugatosque a militibus prov(inciae) / Raetiae sed et Germanicianis / itemque popularibus excussis / multis milibus Italorum 3 Gallienus als Alleinherrscher in den Donauprovinzen Abbildung 1. Weihinschrit aus Augsburg (Augusta Vindelicorum), die den Sieg über Juthungen und Semnonen bejubelt (AE 1993, 1231; Foto nach Bakker 1993, 370, Abb. 1). Slika 1. Posvetilni napis iz Augsburga (Augusta Vindelicorum), ki slavi Galienovo zmago nad Jutungi in Semnoni (AE 1993, 1231; foto po Bakker 1993, 370, sl. 1). Das Jahr 260 bedeutete einen Wendepunkt im Leben des Gallienus. Denn nach dem Tode Valerians in sassanidischer Gefangenschaft stieg er zum Alleinherrscher auf. Schon am Beginn seiner Regierung musste er sich gegen zahlreiche Usurpatoren (es sollen bis zu 30 gewesen sein!) behaupten. Die ständigen Spannungen mit den germanischen Völkern zwangen ihn zu permanenten Abwehrkämpfen. Für die Rekonstruktion der Ereignisse in den Donauprovinzen zwischen den Jahren 260 und 268 sind vor allem Münzen und Inschriften von hohem Aussagewert. Sie geben uns Informationen über die Dislokationen und Aufmärsche sowohl einzelner Legionen wie auch Vexillationen. Besondere Bedeutung kommt dabei zwei Inschriften zu, die nachstehend beschrieben werden. Der ersten Weihinschrift (Abb. 1), die im Jahre 1992 bei Bauarbeiten in Augsburg gefunden wurde,27 entnehmen wir, dass römische Soldaten aus Rätien und Germanien gemeinsam mit einer kleineren Gruppe von »Landsleuten«28 die Juthungen und Semnonen besiegt und dadurch mehrere 27 28 AE 1993, 1231; lupa 6338; HD044953. Ursprünglich stand auf dem Stein eine Widmung an Severus Alexander (222–235). Von ihr sind nur die ersten zwei Zeilen erhalten geblieben. Der Rest dieser ersten Inschrit wurde später getilgt und danach ein neuer Text eingemeißelt, der den Sieg über die Juthungen bejubelt. Die Lesung der ersten Inschrit lautet: In h(onorem) d(omus) d(ivinae) // [[pro sal(ute) imp(eratoris]] Sev[[er]]i / [[Alexandri Aug(usti]] / ------. Übersetzung: »Zu Ehren des göttlichen Kaiserhauses (und) für das Wohl des Kaisers Severus Alexander Augustus.« Die Lesung der zweiten Inschrit: In h(onorem) d(omus) d(ivinae) // deae sanctae Victoriae / ob barbaros gentis Semnonum / sive Iouthungorum die /5 VIII et VII Kal(endarum) Maiar(um) caesos / fugatosque a militibus prov(inciae) / Raetiae sed et Germanicianis / itemque popularibus excussis / multis milibus Italorum captivor(um) /10 compos votorum suorum / [[M(arcus) Simplicinius Genialis v(ir) p(erfectissimus) a(gens) v(ices) p(raesidis) / cum eodem exercitu]] / libens merito posuit / dedicata III idus Septemb(res) imp(eratore) d(omino) n(ostro) /15 [[Postumo Au]] g(usto) et [[Honoratiano co(n)s(ulibus)]]. Übersetzung: »Zu Ehren des göttlichen Kaiserhauses (und) für die geheiligte Göttin Victoria, weil die Barbaren des Stammes der Semnonen oder auch Juthungen am 8. und 7. Tag vor den Kalenden des Mai (24. und 25. April) niedergemacht und in die Flucht geschlagen wurden von den Soldaten der Provinz Rätien, aber auch von in Germanien stationierten (Soldaten) sowie Landsleuten, wobei ihnen viele tausende gefangene Italer entrissen wurden. Mächtig seiner Gelübde hat Marcus Simplicinius Genialis, Ritter, handelnd in Stellvertretung des Statthalters, mit demselben Heer freudig und nach Gebühr (diesen Altar) aufgestellt. Geweiht am 3. Tag vor den Iden des September (11. September), als der Herrscher unser Herr Postumus Augustus und Honoratianus (?) Konsuln waren.« Der Stein ist im Römischen Museum Augsburg (inv. Nr. 1200) aubewahrt. Das Wort populares erklärt Bakker als eine Art Bürgerwehr/ Landsturm (Bakker 1993, 377). Diese Abteilung wurde wahrscheinlich nicht in das römische Heer einbezogen, sondern sorgte mitunter auch für die Sicherheit der Zivilsiedlungen (Witschel 1999, 227–228). iz Recije in Germanije skupaj z manjšo skupino domačinov28 premagali Jutunge in Semnone ter rešili več tisoč ugrabljenih Rimljanov. Kot posvetitelj napisa se omenja Mark Simplicinij Genialis (M. Simplicinius Genialis), ki je kot rimski vitez29 tedaj upravljal provinco Recijo. Posvetilo boginji Viktoriji – v čast cesarske hiše – je postavil po pridobljeni zmagi nad omenjenimi plemeni, v času, ko 28 29 captivor(um) /10 compos votorum suorum / [[M(arcus) Simplicinius Genialis v(ir) p(erfectissimus) a(gens) v(ices) p(raesidis) / cum eodem exercitu]] / libens merito posuit / dedicata III idus Septemb(res) imp(eratore) d(omino) n(ostro) /15 [[Postumo Au]]g(usto) et [[Honoratiano co(n)s(ulibus)]]. Prevod: »V počastitev božanske cesarske hiše, sveti boginji Viktoriji (v zahvalo), da so vojaki province Recije ter germanske enote, kakor tudi domačini 9. in 7. dne pred majskimi kalendami (24. in 25. april) pobili in pregnali barbarska plemena Semnonov in Jutungov, pri čemer je bilo izpuščenih več 1000 ujetih Rimljanov. M. Simplicinij Genialis, vitez v službi namesto upravitelja, ki se mu je uresničila želja in je (posvetilno aro) po pravici in rad postavil (skupaj) s svojo vojsko. (Posvetilna ara) je bila posvečena 3. dan pred septembrskimi idami (11. september), ko sta bila konzula imperator naš gospod Postum Avgust in Honoratijan (?).« Kamen hrani Rimski muzej v Augsburgu (Römisches Museum Augsburg), inv. št. lap. 1200. Besedo populares Bakker razlaga kot bojno enoto, sestavljeno iz domačinov (Bakker 1993, 377). Ta enota verjetno ni bila vključena v rimsko vojsko, ampak naj bi med drugim skrbela za varnost lokalnih civilnih naselbin (Witschel 1999, 227–228). Vir perfectissimus agens vices praesidis. Gre za službo upravitelja, ki jo je M. Simplicinius Genialis opravljal kot vitez, in ne kot senator, kot je bilo običajno do Galienovega časa (glej zgoraj). 321 tausend Italiker aus ihrer Gefangenschaft befreit haben. Als Stifter des Siegesdenkmals wird ein Marcus Simplicinius Genialis genannt, der damals als römischer Ritter29 die Provinz Rätien verwaltete. Die Weihung an die Göttin Victoria erfolgte – zu Ehren des Kaiserhauses übrigens – anlässlich des am 11. September 260 erzielten Sieges über die erwähnten Stämme, unter den Konsuln M. Cassianius Latinius Postumus (Gegenkaiser zwischen 260–269)30 und Honoratianus (?).31 L. Bakker,32 der das Inschriftenmonument als erster veröfentlichte und es in einen breiteren historischen Kontext stellte, meint, dass die Juthungen die Grenzen des Imperiums nicht erst dieses Jahr überschritten hätten, sondern bereits im Jahr zuvor. Ähnlich versucht auch T. Stickler die Ereignisse zu interpretieren, der schreibt, dass die Juthungen die römische Verteidigung schon im Jahre 259 durchbrochen hätten. Ihr Raubzug führte sie aus Rätien durch die engen schweizerischen Alpenpässe nach Italien.33 Wo genau sich zu dieser Zeit Gallienus aufhielt, ist unklar. Er dürfte kaum in Italien gewesen sein, denn wir wissen nichts von dortigen Abwehrkämpfen.34 T. Stickler35 vermutet an Hand von Münzfunden, dass er aus Germanien herbei geeilt sei. Nach K. Strobel36 und M. Jehne37 wiederum sei er aus Pan29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 322 Vir perfectissimus agens vices praesidis. Damit ist die Stelle des Statthalters gemeint, die M. Simplicinius Genialis als Ritter und nicht als Senator ausübte (siehe oben). Bratož 2007, 328. Bakker datiert die Inschrit nur in das Jahr 260, weil neben der Erwähnung des Namens Postumus keine Iteration vorkommt. Seiner Meinung nach wurde Postumus im Jahre 261 zum zweiten Mal zum Konsuln ernannt (Bakker 1993, 378). Dieser Vermutung stimmen auch M. Jehne, T. Stickler, K. Strobel und H. Lavagne zu. Eine andere Interpretation präsentiert I. König, der vermutet, dass Bakker für seine These nicht genügend Argumente vorbringen kann. Da neben dem Konsulat keine Iteration aufscheint, könnte die Inschrit dennoch in das Jahr 261 datiert werden, d. h. vor Antritt des zweiten Konsulats (König 1997, 345–348). Zur Datierung des Siegesaltars aus Augsburg siehe auch Goltz, Hartmann 2008, 245–246, Anm. 125. Ein interessantes Problem steht hinter dem Name des zweiten Konsuls Honoratianus (?). Obwohl eradiert, ist der Name dennoch lesbar. Über Honoratianus haben wir keine genaueren Angaben (Bakker 1993, 378; König 1997, 345–348). Auch A. Degrassi führt seinen Namen nicht auf (Degrassi 1952). Bakker 1993, 369–386. Stickler 1995, 241. Zosimos schreibt, dass sich Gallienus zu dieser Zeit jenseits der Alpen aufgehalten habe und in die Kämpfe mit Germanen verwickelt gewesen sei (Zosimos 1, 37, 2). T. Stickler hat sich bei der Datierung der genauen Reinfolge der Ereignisse mit den Münzen aus der mediolanischen Münzstätte beholfen, auf denen die Beinamen pia und idelis überliefert sind, welche die Legionen wahrscheinlich nach ihren erfolgreichen Kämpfen erworben haben. Die Ehrentitel V piae V ideles bekamen die Legionen nach dem Sieg gegen den Alemannen und VI piae VI ideles mit dem Sieg über Ingenuus. So könnte Gallienus aus Italien nach Pannonien einmarschiert sein, um gegen Ingenuus in die Schlacht zu ziehen (Stickler 1995, 239, Anm. 55 und 241, Anm. 67). Strobel 1998, 87. Den Titel VI piae VI ideles verbindet M. Alföldi mit dem Sieg gegen Alemannen. (Alföldi 1959, 17 = Alföldi 2001, 177). M. Jehne lehnt die Möglichkeit eines Kampfes mit den Germanen, so die Vermutung des Zosimos, ab, weil dem Gallienus sta bila konzula Postum (M. Cassianius Latinius Postumus, proticesar 260–269)30 in Honoratijan (?), 11. septembra 260.31 L. Bakker,32 ki je kamen objavil prvi in ga skušal postaviti v širši zgodovinski kontekst, meni, da Jutungi meje rimskega imperija niso prečkali tega leta, ampak so to storili že leto prej. Podobno interpretira potek dogodkov T. Stickler, ki domneva, da so Jutungi že leta 259 prodrli skozi rimsko obrambo, vpadli v Italijo prek Recije in skozi ozke švicarske alpske prehode.33 Kje je bil medtem Galien, ni jasno. V tem času se s svojo vojsko gotovo ni zadrževal v Italiji, saj se mu jedra imperija pred Jutungi ni posrečilo zaščititi.34 T. Stickler35 na podlagi numizmatičnih najdb domneva, da je pripotoval iz Germanije, K. Strobel36 in M. Jehne37 pa, da je prihitel iz Panonije. Zaradi njegove odsotnosti so Jutungi tako lahko pol leta »brezskrbno« plenili po imperiju. Do (prvega) spopada je prišlo konec leta 259 (ali v začetku 260?) pri Milanu, a Jutungi niso bili premagani. Skupaj z ujetniki so se začeli umikati čez ozke alpske prehode nazaj proti severu. Nekje v okolici Augsburga (če sklepamo, da je bil tam posvečen napis) je Galien sovražna plemena v dvodnevnem boju, 24. in 25. aprila 260, dokončno premagal.38 Zanimivo je, da se na napisu kot zmagovalec nad germanskimi plemeni Galien poimensko ne omenja, temveč je v 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 Bratož 2007, 328. Bakker napis datira samo v leto 260, saj se pri omembi konzulata zraven Postumovega imena ne pojavi iteracija. Po njegovem mnenju je Postum leta 261 postal konzul že drugič (Bakker 1993, 378). Z njegovo domnevo se strinjajo tudi M. Jehne, T. Stickler, K. Strobel in H. Lavagne. Drugačno razlago ponuja I. König; domneva, da Bakker za takšno sklepanje nima dovolj močnih argumentov. Ker se pri konzulatu ne pojavlja iteracija, bi lahko napis bil postavljen tudi v letu 261, pred nastopom drugega konzulata (König 1997, 345–348). Glede datacije kamna iz Augsburga tudi Goltz, Hartmann 2008, 245–246, op. 125. Zanimiv problem je ime drugega konzula, Honoratijana (?). Čeprav je ime izbrisano, je kljub temu berljivo. Vseeno o konzulu nimamo natančnejših podatkov (Bakker 1993, 378; König 1997, 345–348). Imena prav tako ni mogoče najti pri A. Degrassiju (Degrassi 1952). Bakker 1993, 369–386. Stickler 1995, 241. Zosim piše, da se je Galien v tem času nahajal onstran Alp in bil vpleten v boje z Germani (Zosim 1, 37, 2). T. Stickler si pri natančnem zaporedju dogodkov pomaga z novci iz milanske kovnice, na katerih je napis pia in idelis, znak zvestobe, ki so ga legije verjetno dobile po uspešnem boju. Oznako V piae V ideles so pridobile verjetno z zmago nad Alemani, oznako VI piae VI ideles pa z zmago nad Ingenuom. Torej naj bi Galien iz Germanije pripotoval v Italijo in se od tam vračal v Panonijo, da bi obračunal z Ingenuom (Stickler 1995, 239, op. 55 in 241, op. 67). Strobel 1998, 87. Naziv VI piae VI ideles M. Alföldi povezuje z zmago nad Alemani (Alföldi 1959, 17 = Alföldi 2001, 177). M. Jehne zavrača možnost bojev z Germani, kot piše Zosim, saj bi za Galiena morala biti varnost Rima pomembnejša kot boji na meji. Verjetnejša razlaga po njegovem mnenju je, da je bil Galien v tem času zaposlen z uzurpacijo Ingenuua v Panoniji, ki pa je ni mogel pravočasno rešiti (Jehne 1996, 191–192 in 196). Goltz, Hartmann 2008, 245. nonien anmarschiert. Aufgrund seiner Abwesenheit konnten die Juthungen ein halbes Jahr »unbehelligt« plündern. Zur ersten Auseinandersetzung in der Nähe von Mailand kam es schon Ende des Jahres 259 (oder Anfang des Jahres 260?), doch wurden dort die Juthungen nicht geschlagen. Mit ihren Gefangenen zogen diese anschließend über die Alpenpässe zurück nach Norden. Irgendwo in der Nähe von Augsburg (wenn wir davon ausgehen, dass der Ort der Weihung wirklich hier zu suchen ist) konnte dann Gallienus die feindlichen Stämme in einem zweitägigen Kampf, vom 24. auf den 25. April 260, endgültig besiegen.38 Bemerkenswert ist, dass nicht Gallienus namentlich als Sieger über die germanischen Stämme in Erscheinung tritt, sondern sein größter Gegner Postumus als Konsul Erwähnung indet. Da zwischen dem Ende des siegreichen Kampfes und der Weihung des Siegesaltars eine zeitliche Lücke von zirka einem halben Jahr (April-September 260) klaft, liegt der Schluss nahe, dass Postumus inzwischen die Macht über Rätien an sich gerissen hat. Den hron bestieg er jedenfalls erst nachdem Valerian in Gefangenschaft geraten war. L. Bakker datiert das Ereignis in die erste Hälfte des Jahres 260. Bis zur Entdeckung des Siegesaltars wurde mehrfach darüber debattiert, welche Gebiete Postumus kontrolliert und ob Rätien zu seinem Gallischen Sonderreich gehört haben könnte.39 Das Siegesmonument aus Augsburg wurde zweifellos unter dem Usurpator Postumus in der rätischen Hauptstadt errichtet. Dies bedeutet, dass Postumus die Kontrolle über die ganze Provinz bis hin zur östlichen Grenze am Inn ausübte, Noricum jedoch sowie andere Provinzen entlang der Donau zum Machtbereich des Gallienus gehörten.40 Nebenbei musste Postumus (wenigstens für einige Zeit) auch die Alpenpässe kontrolliert haben, denn sie bildeten die natürliche Barriere zwischen den beiden Machtgebieten.41 K. Strobel versucht den Ablauf der Ereignisse anhand der Rasuren auf der Siegesinschrift zu klären: Zuerst sei (erfolglos) der Name des Postumus getilgt worden. Im Jahre 262 hätte man auf Beschluss des Stadtrates den Namen des Usurpators eradieren wollen, zu einem Zeitpunkt, als sich Gallienus zum ersten Mal gegen ihn wandte. Noch immer ist der Stadtrat auf der Seite des Gallienus gestanden und habe die Weihung einzig aus Treue zu seinem Kaiser geführt. Erst später seien die Zeilen 11, 12 und 15 gelöscht worden, als nach der Wiederherstellung der Provinzadministration im Jahre 26542 sowohl der Stifter 38 39 40 41 42 die Sicherheit Roms wichtiger erschienen sei als die Kämpfe in den Grenzgebieten. Er schlägt eine bessere Erklärung vor: Gallienus sei in dieser Zeit in Pannonien mit der Usurpation des Ingenuus beschätigt gewesen, die er aber nicht rechtzeitig habe beenden können (Jehne 1996, 191–192 und 196). Goltz, Hartmann 2008, 245. Bakker 1993, 381; Stickler 1995, 246–247; Jehne 1996, 187 und 203–204; Goltz, Hartmann 2008, 274. Bakker 1993, 381. Demo 1982, 317; Bakker 1993, 381; Jehne 1996, 202; Goltz, Hartmann 2008, 274–275, Anm. 242. Jehne 1996, 202. konzulski dataciji naveden njegov največji sovražnik Postum. Ker je od omenjenega boja do posvetitve spomenika minilo skoraj pol leta (april–september 260), je moral v tem času Postum prevzeti oblast nad Recijo. Na prestol se je povzpel vsekakor potem, ko je Valerijan padel v ujetništvo, ki ga L. Bakker postavlja v prvo polovico leta 260. Do odkritja napisa se je veliko pisalo o tem, katera območja je nadzoroval Postum in ali je Recija sodila k njegovemu galskemu imperiju.39 Oltar iz Augsburga je bil posvečen pod uzurpatorjem Postumom v glavnem mestu province Recije, torej je Postum imel oblast nad celotno provinco Recijo do vzhodne meje na reki Inn, Norik in druge province vzdolž Donave pa so bile pod Galienovo oblastjo.40 Poleg tega je Postum imel (vsaj nekaj časa) tudi nadzor nad alpskimi prehodi, ki so bili naravna ovira med območjema.41 K. Strobel razvoj dogodkov med drugim argumentira s pomočjo razur na kamnu: prvotno naj bi bilo (neuspešno) izbrisano Postumovo ime. Po sklepu mestnega sveta naj bi ga namreč želeli izbrisati leta 262, ko se je Galien prvič uspešno spopadel s proticesarjem. Še vedno naj bi bili na Galienovi strani in dejanje izvedli kot znak zvestobe svojemu cesarju. Drugo brisanje naj bi doletelo vrstice 11, 12 in 15, ko sta po ponovni vzpostavitvi provincialne administracije leta 26542 damnatio memoriae podlegla posvetitelj napisa Genialis in tudi Postumov sokonzul Honoratijan. Napis je ostal kot spomin na Galienovo zmago nad barbari leta 260.43 Že leta 1899 je bil na Dunaju odkrit posvetilni napis Jupitru, Neptunu in drugim vodnim božanstvom (sl. 2), o katerem je bilo že marsikaj napisano, a ga je G. Alföldy44 39 40 41 42 43 44 Bakker 1993, 381; Stickler 1995, 246–247; Jehne 1996, 187 in 203–204; Goltz, Hartmann 2008, 274. Bakker 1993, 381. Demo 1982, 317; Bakker 1993, 381; Jehne 1996, 202; Goltz, Hartmann 2008, 274–275, op. 242. Jehne 1996, 202. Strobel 1998, 88. Alföldy 2011, 1–22. Napis se glasi: [I(ovi)] o(ptimo) m(aximo), Neptuno [Aug(usto)] // [S]alaceae (!), Nimph[is (!) Flu]- / [v]io Acauno dis [deab]/[us]q(ue) omnib(us) v[exill(arii) leg(ionis)] /5 [VI]II Aug(ustae) sub c[ura M(arci)?] / A[u]re[l(ii)] Secun[dini (centurionis)] / [p]r(aepositi) tralati (!) a le[g(ione) X g(emina) VII] / [p(ia)] V[II] f(ideli) in leg(ionem l[I Italicam] / [[Gallienam VII p(iam) VII f(idelem)]] /10 Aurel(io) Monta[no] / [v(ices)] a(gente) leg(ati) leg(ionis) s(upra) s(criptae) [et --- Sa]/t[u] rn[i]n[o et ---] / [e]t Aurel(io) [--- et ---] / [.]NAVMA[--77(=centurionibus) et --- opt(ione)] /15 eq(uitum) f[ec(erunt) Mariniano et] / Paterno co(n)[s(ulibus) ---] / Maias. (CIL III 1435927, ILS 9268, lupa 4779). Prevod: »Jupitru, največjemu in najboljšemu, vzvišenemu Neptunu, Salaciji, Nimfam, reki Akavnu ter vsem bogovom in boginjam. Veksilarijci legije Osme Avguste so bili pod vodstvom centuriona Marka (?) Avrelija Sekundina premeščeni iz legije Desete dvojne, ki je imela sedemkrat naslov predana in zvesta, v legijo Drugo italsko galiensko, ki je dobila sedemkrat naslov predana in zvesta. Zgoraj omenjeni legiji (= Deseti dvojni) je poveljeval Avrelij Montan, ki je bil v službi namesto legijskega legata... (Oltar je bil postavljen)... maja, ko sta bila konzula Marinian in Paternus.« Hranijo ga na Dunaju (Römermuseum Hoher Markt, inv. št. 631). 323 Abbildung 2. Weihinschrit für Juppiter und andere Gottheiten aus Wien (Vindobona; CIL III 1435927; Foto nach Alföldy 2011, Taf. 4). Slika 2. Posvetilni napis Jupitru, Neptunu in drugim vodnim božanstvom z Dunaja (Vindobona; CIL III 1435927; foto po Alföldy 2011, t. 4). Genialis als auch der Mitkonsul (des Postumus) Honoratianus der damnatio memoriae anheim ielen. Fortan galt die Inschrift allein als Siegesmonument des Gallienus über die Barbaren aus dem Jahre 260 n. Chr.43 Bereits im Jahre 1899 wurde in Wien eine Weihung für Jupiter und vier Wassergottheiten (Abb. 2) entdeckt. G. Alföldy legte dazu vor Kurzem eine Neuinterpretation vor.44 Als Stifter der Inschrift tritt eine vexillatio der legio VIII Augusta gemeinsam mit den Truppen der legiones X Gemina und II Italica auf. Die Weihung muß im April oder Mai des Jahres 268 erfolgt sein. Im Jahre 260 ist, noch vor der Machtübernahme des Postumus, diese Vexillatio von ihren Hauptlager in Argentorate (Starsbourg) nach Illyricum (nach Sirmium; Sremska Mitrovica) abkommandiert worden, um dort Gallienus bei der Bekämpfung des Regalianus zu unterstützen.45 Im Jahr darauf nahm sie im nördlichen Balkanraum am bellum Serdicense teil, wo sie die Anhänger des Gegenkaisers Macrianus und seines gleichnamigen Sohnes bekämpfen sollte.46 Ihr Hauptlager befand sich zu dieser Zeit im Sirmium. In Folge der balkanischen Bürgerkriegswirren und der Gefahr eines Einbruches der germanischen Stämme über den pannonischen Limes, zog sich die Vexillation nach Vindobona zurück. In ihr früheres Hauptlager nach Argentorate konnte sie ja nicht mehr zurückkehren, weil dieses im Jahre 260 von Postumus erobert worden war. So verblieb sie bis zum Jahre 268 in Vindobona. Zu Beginn desselben Jahres wurde sie nach Lauriacum (Lorch) abberufen,47 weil man mit einem neuen Angrif der Germanen rechnete. Bereits zuvor hatten nämlich die Juthungen und Alemannen Italien bedroht. Die Verstärkung der Grenzarmee am norischen Donaulimes war im Jahre 268 für diese Provinz gewiss sehr hilfreich. 43 44 45 46 324 47 Strobel 1998, 88. Alföldy 2011, 1–22. Die Inschrit lautet: [I(ovi)] o(ptimo) m(aximo), Neptuno [Aug(usto)] // [S]alaceae (!), Nimph[is (!) Flu]-/[v]io Acauno dis [deab]/[us]q(ue) omnib(us) v[exill(arii) leg(ionis)] / 5 [VI]II Aug(ustae) sub c[ura M(arci)?] / A[u]re[l(ii)] Secun[dini (centurionis)] / [p]r(aepositi) tralati (!) a le[g(ione) X g(emina) VII] / [p(ia)] V[II] f(ideli) in leg(ionem l[I Italicam] / [[Gallienam VII p(iam) VII f(idelem)]] / 10 Aurel(io) Monta[no] / [v(ices)] a(gente) leg(ati) leg(ionis) s(upra) s(criptae) [et --Sa]/t[u]rn[i]n[o et ---] / [e]t Aurel(io) [--- et ---] / [.]NAVMA[--77(=centurionibus) et --- opt(ione)] / 15 eq(uitum) f[ec(erunt) Mariniano et] / Paterno co(n)[s(ulibus) ---] / Maias. (CIL III 1435927, ILS 9268, lupa 4779). Übersetzung: »Juppiter, dem Besten und Größten, dem kaiserlichen Neptun, der Salacea, den Nymphen, dem Flussgott Acaunus und allen Göttern und Göttinnen. Vexillarii der legio VIII Augusta unter dem Befehl des centurio Marcus (?) Aurelius Secundinus wurden von der legio X Gemina VII piae VII ideles in die legio II Italica Galliena VII piae VII ideles transveriert. Das Kommando über die oben erwähnte Legion (= X Gemina) führte Aurelius Montanus, der sein Amt anstelle des legatus legionis ausübte... (Die Weihung des Altars wurde) ... im Monat Mai (vollzogen) unter den Konsuln Marinianus und Paternus. « Der Altar ist in Römermuseum Hoher Markt (Inv. Nr. 631) aubewahrt. Oprean 2004, 14. Šašel 1961, 3–30 (= Šašel 1992, 360–378); Alföldy 2011, 16. Alföldy 2011, 18. nedavno ponovno objavil in predlagal novo interpretacijo. Napis je postavila veksilacija legije Osme Avguste skupaj z enotami Desete dvojne in Druge italske aprila ali maja leta 268. Leta 260, še pred oklicem Postuma, je bila veksilacija legije Osme Avguste iz svojega stalnega tabora v mestu Argentorate (dan. Strasbourg) poslana v Ilirik (v Sirmium, dan. Sremska Mitrovica), da bi tam pomagala Galienu v boju proti Regalianu.45 Leta 261 se je na severnem delu Balkanskega polotoka udeležila bitke, poimenovane bellum Serdicense, v kateri je hotela premagati pripadnike proticesarja Makriana in njegovega istoimenskega sina.46 Stalni tabor je v tem času imela v Sirmiju. Ker se je na Balkanskem polotoku začela državljanska vojna, čez panonski limes pa je bilo pričakovati vdor germanskih plemen, se je veksilacija premaknila v Vindobono. V svoj stalni tabor v Argentorate ni mogla oditi, saj ga je l. 260 zavzel Postum, zato je v Vindoboni ostala do l. 268. Spomladi tega leta je bila premaknjena v Lauriacum (dan. Lorch),47 saj so se Rimljani zbali ponovnega vpada Germanov. Malo prej so namreč Jutungi in Alemani že ogrožali Italijo. Okrepitev mejne vojske na noriško-donavskem območju je bila torej leta 268 (datum napisa) vsekakor koristna. Postumova nadvlada v Reciji je bila le kratkotrajna, saj so se morale razmere leta 264, ko se je Galien odpravil proti Grčiji, vsaj delno umiriti. Leta 265 sta s Postumom sklenila mir, Galien si je v tem letu pridobil Recijo, a do odločilnega boja je prišlo leta 268. Nekdanji Galienov poveljnik 45 46 47 Oprean 2004, 14. Šašel 1961, 3–30 (= Šašel 1992, 360–378); Alföldy 2011, 16. Alföldy 2011, 18. Die Herrschaft des Postumus über Rätien blieb nur von kurzer Dauer. So konnte Gallienus nach Stabilisierung der Lage im Jahre 264 nach Griechenland reisen. Im Jahre 265 schlossen Gallienus und Postumus Frieden; und noch im selben Jahr eroberte Gallienus Rätien zurück. Die Kampfhandlungen zwischen den beiden erreichten allerdings erst im Jahre 268 ihren Höhepunkt. Gallienus ehemaliger General Aureolus wechselte auf die Gegenseite, sodass Gallienus zuerst ihn ausschalten musste. Gallienus umzingelte mit seiner Armee den abtrünnigen General und schloss ihn in Mediolanum ein. Dort allerdings iel Gallienus während der Belagerung einer Verschwörung seiner eigenen Generäle zu Opfer.48 4 Das römisches Heer in Poetovio 4.1 In der Zeit vom 1. bis zum 2. Jh. n. Chr. Die Anwesenheit von Truppen ist für Poetovio schon nach der römischen Okkupation im Jahre 15 v. Chr. erwiesen. Die erste namentlich bekannte Legion, die in Poetovio stationiert war, war die legio VIII Augusta. Sie ließ sich hier wahrscheinlich am Beginn des norisch-panonischen Aufstandes (6–9 n. Chr.)49 nieder und blieb bis zum Jahr 45 n. Chr. Anschließend verlegte sie ihren Stützpunkt nach Novae in Moesien (in der Nähe der bulgarischen Stadt Svištov). Diese Dislokation verband E. Ritterling mit der Verstärkung des moesischen Heeres, konkret mit dem Kampf gegen die thrakischen Stämme.50 Im Jahre 46 n. Chr. ist die Legion schon als Teil des moesischen Heeres bekannt.51 An ihre Stelle trat am Ende des Jahres 45 oder zu Beginn des darauf folgenden Jahres die legio XIII Gemina aus Vindonissa (Windisch).52 Auch diese Legion ist in Poetovio an Hand von Monumentalinschriften und Ziegelstempeln, die auf eine intensive Bautätigkeit schließen lassen, nachweisbar. Tacitus erwähnt, dass sich im poetoviensischen Lager der legio XIII Gemina im August des Jahres 69 n. Chr. die Generäle der Donaulegionen versammelten, um über eine gemeinsame Unterstützung für Vespasian zu beraten.53 Die Legion verblieb dann noch etwa 50 Jahre in derselben Stadt, bis sie schließlich Ende der Herrschaft von Domitian nach Vindobona (Wien) verlegt wurde.54 4.2 Das Heer in Poetovio zur Zeit des Gallienus Obwohl es so aussieht, als hätten die Ereignisse der 60er Jahre des 3. Jhs. das slowenische Gebiet nicht berührt, bezeugen die Inschriften aus dem Regionalmuseum Ptuj (Po48 49 50 51 52 53 54 Bratož 2007, 323–329; Goltz, Hartmann 2008, 288–289. Saria 1951, 1171; Jordan, Šašel Kos, Wallace 1985, 87; Horvat et al. 2003, 156. Ritterling 1925, 1647–1648. CIL III 3272. Saria 1951, 1171. Historiae 3.1: Poetovionem in hiberna tertiae decimae legionis convenerant. Übersetzung: »Sie haben sich in Poetovio, im Winterlager der legio XIII (Gemina) getrofen.« Šašel 1979, 1–7. Mráv 2000, 80–81. Avreol je prestopil na Postumovo stran, zato se je Galien najprej lotil njega. Z vojsko je obkolil odpadlega poveljnika in ga zaprl v mesto Mediolanum, vendar je Galien med obleganjem padel kot žrtev zarote svojih generalov v lastnem poveljniškem štabu.48 4 Rimska vojska v Petovioni 4.1 Vojska v Petovioni v 1. in 2. st. n. št. Vojaška navzočnost v Petovioni je sledila verjetno že rimski osvojitvi leta 15. pr. n. št. Prva znana legija, nameščena v Petovioni, je bila legio VIII Avgusta. V mesto je morda prišla na začetku noriško-panonskega upora (6–9 n. št.).49 Legija je v Panoniji ostala do leta 45, ko je bila premeščena ob spodnji tok Donave, v kraj Novae v Meziji (blizu dan. mesta Svištov v Bolgariji). Ta premik je E. Ritterling povezal z okrepitvijo vojske v provinci Meziji zaradi vojne s tračanskimi plemeni.50 Leta 46 n. št. je že omenjena kot del mezijske vojske.51 Na njeno mesto je na koncu leta 45 ali na začetku leta 46 n. št. iz Vindonise (Vindonissa, dan. Windisch) prišla legio XIII Gemina.52 Tudi ta legija je v mestu dokazljiva z napisi in tudi z žigi na opekah, ki pričajo o intenzivni gradbeni dejavnosti vojakov. Tacit omenja, da so se v taboru legije Trinajste dvojne v Petovioni avgusta leta 69 n. št. sestali vrhovni poveljniki donavskih legij, da bi se posvetovali o podpori Vespazijanu.53 Legija je v mestu ostala približno 50 let, proti koncu Domicijanove vlade pa je bila premeščena v Vindobono (dan. Dunaj).54 4.2 Vojska v Petovioni v Galienovem obdobju Čeprav se na prvi pogled zdi, da se dogodki v 60. letih 3. st. niso dotaknili slovenskega ozemlja, napisni kamni iz Pokrajinskega muzeja Ptuj dokazujejo, da je bila Galienova vojska (vsaj za nekaj let) tudi v Petovioni. Zanima nas, zakaj so bile te enote stacionirane v Petovioni in kakšna je bila njihova vloga v provinci Panoniji. 4.2.1 Panonske legije Leta 1912 je bil pri rušenju male vojašnice na Ptuju najden del napisa, ki je zdaj izgubljen. Na kamnu so omenjene štiri panonske legije, ki poimensko niso navedene. V obeh Panonijah so se od 2. st. naprej omenjale naslednje legije: 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 Bratož 2007, 323–329; Goltz, Hartmann 2008, 288–289. Saria 1951, 1171; Jordan, Šašel Kos, Wallace 1985, 87; Horvat et al. 2003, 156. Ritterling 1925, 1647–1648. CIL III 3272. Saria 1951, 1171. Historiae 3.1: Poetovionem in hiberna tertiae decimae legionis convenerant. Prevod: »Zbrali so se v Petovioni, v prezimovališču legije Trinajste (dvojne).« Šašel 1979, 1–7. Mráv 2000, 80–81. 325 krajinski muzej Ptuj) auch für Poetovio die Anwesenheit der gallienischen Armee – wenigstens für einige Jahre. Es stellt sich nun die Frage, warum diese Truppen hier stationiert waren und welche Rolle sie für Pannonien spielten. Prva in Druga pomožna v Spodnji Panoniji ter Deseta in Štirinajsta dvojna v Zgornji Panoniji.55 4.2.1 Die Pannonischen Legionen Im Jahre 1912 wurde beim Abreißen der kleinen Kaserne in Ptuj ein inzwischen verschollenes Inschriftfragment gefunden. Darauf sind vier pannonische Legionen erwähnt, allerdings ohne deren Beinamen. In den beiden pannonischen Provinzen standen seit dem 2. Jh. folgende Legionen: die legio(nes) I und II Adiutrix in Unterpannonien die legio(nes) X und XIV Gemina in Oberpannonien.55 5 [----] [---milites? le]g(ion-) IIII P̣ạṇṇ[on(iarum)] [--- qui su]nt in vexil(atione) [--- sub] cura Aeḷ (ii) [---]i v(iri) e(gregii) duci[s] [---]+++[---]56 Die lückenhafte epigraphische Notiz bezieht sich vermutlich nicht auf die Legionen in ihrer Gesamtheit, sondern nur auf einzelne Vexillationen, die für eine bestimmte Zeit ausgesondert und später wieder zu ihnen zurückgekehrt sind. Warum aber befanden sich diese Vexillationen gerade zu dieser Zeit in Poetovio? E. Ritterling57 und M. Abramić58 dachten, dass sie auf der Seite des Gallienus gegen die Usurpatoren Ingenuus und Regalianus gekämpft hätten, oder dass sie in der Stadt stationiert gewesen seien, um die Handelsstraße nach Italien (Poetovio-Emona-Aquileia) zu sichern. C. H. Oprean hält die vier pannonischen Vexillationen und die beiden dakischen Truppen, die auf anderen Inschriften (siehe Kap. 4.2.2) erwähnt sind, für gleichfalls in Poetovio anwesend und setzt sie in die Zeit unmittelbar nach der Usurpation der beiden Gegenkaiser, als Gallienus Pannonien und die Bernsteinstraße zu schützen suchte.59 L. De Blois hingegen möchte die Vexillationen und die beiden dakischen Legionen mit dem Einfall der Quaden, Sarmaten und Roxolanen im Jahre 260 oder mit dem Aufstand des Macrianus im Jahre 261 in Verbindung brin- 55 56 57 58 326 59 Die legio I Adiutrix hatte ihr Hauptlager seit 117/118 in der Stadt Brigetio (Komárom), die legio II Adiutrix war ab 103/6 in Aquincum (Budapest) stationiert, die legio X Gemina war seit dem Jahre 107 in Vindobona (Wien) und die legio XIV Gemina seit dem Jahr 114 in Carnuntum (Deutschaltenburg-Petronell). Abramić 1931, 185; Mocsy 1962, 615–616; Ritterling 1925, 1341–1342 und 1392–1393 (legio I Adiutrix), 1445–1446 (legio II Adiutrix), 1683 (legio X Gemina), 1738–1739 (legio XIV Gemina). AE 1934, 223; AIJ 362; Abramić 1931, 185; Saxer 1967, 57. Übersetzung: »...der vier pannonischen Legionen; … die in einer vexillatio; ... unter Führung des Ritters, des Generals Aelius ...« Ritterling 1925, 1340. Abramić 1931, 185–186. Oprean 2004, 14 5 [----] [---milites? le]g(ion-) IIII P̣ạṇṇ [on(iarum)] [--- qui su]nt in vexil(atione) [--- sub] cura Aeḷ (ii) [---]i v(iri) e(gregii) duci[s] [---]+++[---].56 Na napisu verjetno ni omenjena celotna legija ampak oddelki, ki so bili odvzeti legijam in pozneje združeni. Toda zakaj so omenjene veksilacije v tem času v Petovioni? E. Ritterling57 in M. Abramić58 sta domnevala, da so se te veksilacije bojevale na Galienovi strani proti uzurpatorjema Ingenuu in Regalianu ali pa so bile nameščene v mestu, da bi zaščitile glavno vpadnico v Italijo (Petoviona–Emona– Akvileja). C. H. Oprean štiri panonske veksilacije skupaj z dačanskimi enotami, omenjenimi na drugih napisih (glej pogl. 4.2.2), povezuje s časom neposredno po uzurpaciji obeh proticesarjev, ko je Galien poskušal dodatno zaščititi panonsko območje in z njim tesno povezano pot v Italijo.59 L. De Blois je nasprotno povezoval panonske veksilacije in obe dačanski legiji z vpadom Kvadov, Sarmatov in Roksolanov leta 260 ali z uporom Makriana leta 26160 (glej spodaj interpretacijo napisa in poskus rekonstrukcije dogodkov; pogl. 5). 4.2.2 Dačanski legiji Leta 1913 je Vinko Skrabar na Zgornjem Bregu na Ptuju odkril t. i. tretji mitrej s številnimi kamnitimi spomeniki s posvetili.61 Na petih marmornih oltarjih sta omenjeni dve dačanski legiji, V Macedonica in XIII Gemina,62 njun poveljnik in pripadniki pisarne obeh legij.63 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 Prva pomožna je imela svoj stalni tabor od leta 117/118 v mestu Brigetio (dan. Komárom), Druga pomožna je bila od leta 103/6 v Akvinku (dan. Budimpešta), Deseta dvojna po letu 107 v Vindoboni (dan. Dunaj) in Štirinajsta dvojna od leta 114 v Karnuntu (dan. Deutschaltenburg-Petronell). Abramić 1931, 185; Mocsy 1962, 615–616; Ritterling 1925, 1341–1342 in 1392–1393 (Prva pomožna), 1445–1446 (Druga pomožna), 1683 (Deseta dvojna), 1738–1739 (Štirinajsta dvojna). AE 1934, 223; AIJ 362; Abramić 1931, 185; Saxer 1967, 57. Prevod: »...štirih panonskih legij, ki so v veksilaciji... Pod vodstvom viteza, poveljnika Elija...«. Ritterling 1925, 1340. Abramić 1931, 185–186. Oprean 2004, 14 De Blois 1976, 32. Abramić 1925, 172. Na Ptuju je bil odkrit tudi oltar s posvetilom Diani (Deanae), ki ga je postavil centurion legije Trinajste dvojne. Datiran je prav tako v 3. st. (ILJug 1134; Alföldy 1965, 106–107). V članku The late Roman Army in Pannonia Kovács med spomeniki 3. st. napisov z omembo dačanskih legij sploh ne omenja (Kovács 2004, 115–122). gen.60 (Siehe unten die Interpretation der Inschrift und den Versuch der Rekonstruktion der Ereignisse, Kap. 5). 4.2.2 Die dakischen Legionen Abbildung 3. Altar des Flavius Aper aus Ptuj (AIJ 313; Foto Fotothek des Instituts für Archäologie ZRC SAZU). Slika 3. Oltar s Ptuja s posvetilom Flavija Apra (AIJ 313; foto Fototeka Inštituta za arheologijo ZRC SAZU). Im Jahre 1913 hat Vinko Skrabar in Zg. Breg in Ptuj das so genannte dritte Mithräum mit zahlreichen Steindenkmälern ausgegraben.61 Auf insgesamt fünf Marmoraltären sind zwei dakische Legionen erwähnt: die legio V Macedonica und die legio XIII Gemina,62 dazu deren Befehlshaber und die Oizialen der beiden Legionen.63 4.2.2.1 Drei Altäre des Flavius Aper Auf dem ersten Weihemonument64 (Abb. 3) ist Mithras dargestellt, wie er neben dem brennenden Altar die Freundschaft mit dem Sonnengott besiegelt. In der Rechten hält er ein Stück des getöteten Stiers, von dem ein Rabe frisst. An den Füßen des Mithras ist noch ein Teil der Stierkeule zu sehen. An den vier Ecken des Aufsatzes sind Stierköpfe angebracht. Auf der linken Nebenseite sind die Wafen der Mithras abgebildet (Bogen, Köcher und Dolch). Die rechte Nebenseite zeigt Mithras, wie er mit einem Pfeil gegen den Felsen schießt, aus dem Wasser sprudelt. In seiner Begleitung beinden sich zwei männliche Gestalten, von denen die eine versucht, das ließende Wasser einzufangen; die andere umarmt die Beine des Mithras. Die Weihinschrift beindet sich an der Vorderseite des Altars: D(eo) S(oli) I(nvicto) M(ithrae). Pro sal(ute) d(omini) n(ostri) Gallieni, p(ii) f(elicis) invicti Aug(usti). Fl(avius) Aper, v(ir) e(gregius), l(ibens) m(erito).65 Vom zweiten Altar66 (Abb. 4) sind nur die unteren Randfragmente erhalten. Auch die Inschrift ist unvollständig, und von der ikonographischen Darstellung ist nur ein Teil eines menschlichen Körpers zu sehen, wahrscheinlich jener des Cautopates, der eine abgesenkte Fackel hält: 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 De Blois 1976, 32. Abramić 1925, 172. In Ptuj wurde auch ein Altar mit der Weihung an die Göttin Diana (Deanae) gefunden, den ein Zenturio der legio XIII Gemina geweiht hatte. Er ist ebenso ins 3. Jh. datiert. (ILJug 1134; Alföldy 1965, 106–107). In dem Artikel The late Roman Army in Pannonia hat Kovács unter den Steindenkmälern des 3. Jhs. die Inschriten mit der Nennung der dakischen Legionen gar nicht erwähnt (Kovács 2004, 115–122). Abramić 1925, 178 und 179; AE 1936, 53; AE 1960, 351; AIJ 313; lupa 9343; HD024288. Der Stein ist im dritten Mithräum in Ptuj, inv. Nr. RL 293 aubewahrt. Übersetzung: »Dem unbesiegbaren Sonnengott Mithras zum Heil unseres Herrn Gallienus, des frommen, glückbringenden und unbesiegbaren Kaisers. Flavius Aper, der Kommandant (hat das Gelübde) nach erwiesener Wohltat gerne (erfüllt)«. Abramić 1925, 183; AE 1936, 57; AE 1960, 351; AIJ 317; lupa 9347; HD024300; Saxer 1967, 56. Der Stein ist im dritten Mithräum in Ptuj, inv. Nr. RL 297 aubewahrt. 4.2.2.1 Trije oltarji s posvetilom Flavija Apra Na prvem oltarju64 (sl. 3) je upodobljen Mitra, ki s sončnim bogom nad gorečim oltarjem sklepa prijateljstvo. V desnici drži bodalo s koščkom mesa zaklanega bika, ki ga žre krokar. Pri nogah Mitre se še vidi ostanek stegna ubitega bika. Na vogalih akroterija so bukraniji. Na levi stranski ploskvi je upodobljeno Mitrovo orožje (lok, tul za puščice in bodalo), na desni ploskvi Mitra, ki s puščico strelja proti skali, iz katere teče voda. Poleg Mitre sta še dva moška: eden poskuša deročo vodo zajeti, drugi Mitri objema kolena. Posvetilni napis je na sprednji strani: D(eo) S(oli) I(nvicto) M(ithrae). Pro sal(ute) d(omini) n(ostri) Gallieni p(ii) f(elicis) invicti Aug(usti). Fl(avius) Aper v(ir) e(gregius) l(ibens) m(erito).65 64 65 Abramić 1925, 178 in 179; AE 1936, 53; AE 1960, 351; AIJ 313; lupa 9343; HD024288. Hrani se v tretjem ptujskem mitreju, inv. št. RL 293. Prevod: »Sončnemu bogu, nepremagljivemu Mitri, je za zdravje našega nepremagljivega, zvestega dolžnosti in srečnega avgusta Galiena poveljnik Flavij Aper izpolnil (zaobljubo) rad in po pravici.« 327 Abbildung 4. Altar des Flavius Aper aus Ptuj (AIJ 317; Foto Fotothek des Instituts für Archäologie ZRC SAZU). Slika 4. Oltar s Ptuja s posvetilom Flavija Apra (AIJ 317; foto Fototeka Inštituta za arheologijo ZRC SAZU). Abbildung 5. Altar des Flavius Aper aus Ptuj (AIJ 316; Foto Fotothek des Instituts für Archäologie ZRC SAZU). Slika 5. Oltar s Ptuja s posvetilom Flavija Apra (AIJ 316; foto Fototeka Inštituta za arheologijo ZRC SAZU). 5 -----[leg(ionum) V] M(acedonicae) êt XỊỊ[I] [G(eminae) G]ạllienarûm. [Fl]ạvius Aper, v(ir) e(gregius), [pra]epositus [---].67 Der dritte Altar68 (Abb. 5) trägt die Inschrift auf dem Sockel. Oberhalb der Inschrift ist er in Form eines Felsens gearbeitet und hat eine konkave Hinterseite. Aus dem Felsen wird Mithras geboren. Zwei Jünglinge in persischer Kleidung (Cautes und Cautopates) begleiten die Szene. Mithras trägt in der rechten Hand einen Dolch in der Linken eine Fackel. Über ihm ist eine bärtige Gottheit dargestellt, unter ihr liegt ein Dolch. Auf der linken Seite kann man eine schwebende Victoria erkennen. Die Inschrift lautet: D(eo) S(oli) I(nvicto) M(ithrae). Pro sal(ute) oicialiûm Apri prâepositi legg(ionum) V M(acedonicae) êt XIII Gem(inae) Galli(enarum).69 Über Lucius Flavius Aper, dessen Name auf allen drei Altären vorkommt, besitzen wir verhältnismäßig wenige Informationen.70 Im ganzen römischen Imperium wurden nur fünf Steindenkmäler mit seinem Namen gefunden: Neben den poetovienser Fundstücken gibt es noch einen Beleg aus Aquincum (Budapest)71 und einen aus dem nahe gelegenen Bölcske.72 Auf zwei Inschriften aus Ptuj ist er als Kommandant (praepositus) erwähnt, wohingegen ihn die Inschriften aus Aquincum und Bölckse als Statthalter der Provinz Pannonia Inferior, mit dem Titel praeses provinciae Pannoniae inferioris bezeugen. Wiederholt wurde diskutiert, ob zwischen Flavius Aper und dem gleichnamigen Gouverneur Unterepannoniens – Lucius Flavius Aper – Identität bestünde (J. Fitz,73 Á. Dobó74) oder nicht (H. Petersen).75 Unserer 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 328 Übersetzung: »Dem unbesiegbaren Sonnengott Mithras zum Heil... der gallienischen Legionen V Macedonica und XIII Gemina. Flavius Aper der Kommandant der Legionen V Macedonica und XIII Gemina hat (den Altar geweiht).« Abramić 1925, 181–183; AE 1936, 54; AE 1960, 351; AIJ 316; lupa 9346; HD024291; Saxer 1967, 56. Der Stein ist im dritten Mithräum in Ptuj, inv. Nr. RL 296 aubewahrt. Übersetzung: »Dem unbesiegbaren Sonnengott Mithras. Zum Heil der Stabsbeamten des Aper, des Kommandanten der zwei gallienischen Legionen: V Macedonica und XIII Gemina.« PIR2 1943, 135; Fitz 1976, 72–73. Kovács, Szabó 2009, 45–46; CIL III 15156; lupa 5168. Die Inschrit datiert in die Jahre 268 bis 270, mit Sicherheit noch vor der Inschrit aus Bölckse anzusetzen. Szabó, Tóth 2003, 116–118; AE 2003, 1417; lupa 10296; HD045578. Die Entstehung der zweiten Inschrit ist in die Jahre 271 oder 272, d. h. in die Zeit des Kaisers Aurelian zu datieren. Fitz 1994, 1052. Dobó 1968, 101–102. Petersen unterscheidet zwischen dem praeses L. Flavius Aper, den er in die Zeit des Carus oder Diokletian, stellt und dem vir egregius und praepositus Flavius Aper, aus der Ära Gallienus (Petersen 1955, 51). Drugi oltar66 (sl. 4) ima deloma ohranjen spodnji rob, na drugih straneh pa je povsod odlomljen. Napis je zato le deloma ohranjen, od upodobitve pa je viden samo del postave, domnevno Kavtopata, ki v rokah drži spuščeno baklo: 5 66 67 -----[leg(ionum) V] M(acedonicae) êt XI ̣I ̣[I] [G(eminae) G]ạllienarûm. [Fl]ạvius Aper, v(ir) e(gregius), [pra]epositus [---].67 Abramić 1925, 183; AE 1936, 57; AE 1960, 351; AIJ 317; lupa 9347; HD024300; Saxer 1967, 56. Hrani se v tretjem ptujskem mitreju, inv. št. RL 297. Prevod: »Sončnemu bogu, nepremagljivemu Mitri je za zdravje ... Galienovih legij Pete makedonske in Trinajste dvojne. (Oltar je postavil) poveljnik legij Pete makedonske in Trinajste dvojne Flavij Aper.« Meinung nach handelt es sich um dieselbe Person. Lucius Flavius Aper trägt auf den Inschriften unterschiedliche Titel, je nachdem, welche Stufe seiner Karriere er zu diesen Zeitpunkt gerade erreicht hatte: Zuerst war er Kommandant (vir egregius, praepositus) der beiden dakischen Legionen,76 bis er im Jahre 268/269 Titus Clementius Silvius,77 den Statthalter von Unterenpannonien, ablöste und als Ritter (vir perfectissimus) die Verwaltung (praeses) dieser Provinz übernahm. 4.2.2.2 Die Weihinschrift zum Wohle des Kanzleipersonals der legio V und XIII Auch auf diesem Steindenkmal78 (Abb. 6) indet sich die übliche Stiertötungsszene. Der Oberkörper des Mithras und der Kopf des Hundes fehlen. Die Inschrift lautet: 5 D(eo) S(oli) I(nvicto) M(ithrae). Pro {sa}salut̂ e canalic(u)lari êt actariorûm êt codicarior(um) êt librariorûm legg(ionum) V M(acedonicae) êt XIII G(eminae) Gallienarum.79 Es handelt sich um eine äußerst aufschlussreiche Inschrift; nicht nur weil hier die verschiedenen Titel der Kanzleibedienstenten vorkommen, die im 3. Jh. in Verwendung standen, sondern weil auch deren Hierarchie ersichtlich wird. Letztere sind nämlich in absteigender Reihenfolge aufgelistet.80 Die Weihinschrift kennt keinen Stifter. Denkbar wäre, dass die genannten Chargen selbst diesen Altar dediziert haben, und zwar für ihr eigenes Wohlergehen. Als erster Begünstigter wird ein canalic(u)larius erwähnt. Die Etymologie des Wortes ist unklar: Vielleicht hat seine Funktion mit einem Wassertechniker (canalis, in der Tretji oltar68 (sl. 5) ima napis na podstavku. Nad napisom je oltar izklesan v obliki skale, ki ima zadnjo stran konkavno. Iz skale rojevajočemu se Mitri pomagata dečka v perzijski opravi (Kavt in Kavtopat). Mitra drži v desnici bodalo, v levici baklo. Nad njim je upodobljeno bradato božanstvo, pod njim je vidno bodalo. Na levi lebdi Viktorija z vencem. Napis se glasi: D(eo) S(oli) I(nvicto) M(ithrae). Pro sal(ute) oicialiûm Apri prâepositi legg(ionum) V M(acedonicae) êt XIII Gem(inae) Galli(enarum).69 O Luciju Flaviju Apru, katerega ime se pojavlja na vseh treh oltarjih, imamo razmeroma malo podatkov.70 V celotnem imperiju je bilo odkritih samo pet spomenikov z njegovim imenom: poleg teh s Ptuja še na napisu iz Akvinka (Aquincum, dan. Budimpešta)71 in z najdišča Bölcske.72 Na dveh ptujskih napisih je označen kot vojaški poveljnik (praepositus), na napisih iz Akvinka in Bölcske kot upravitelj v provinci Spodnji Panoniji (praeses provinciae Pannoniae inferioris). Mnenja o tem, ali sta vojaški poveljnik Flavij Aper in istoimenski upravitelj Spodnje Panonije Lucij Flavij Aper ista oseba (J. Fitz,73 Á. Dobó74) ali ne (H. Petersen),75 so različna; mi se nagibamo k prvi domnevi. Lucij Flavij Aper je na spomenikih poimenovan z različnimi naslovi, pač glede na različne karierne stopnje, ki jih je dosegel: sprva je bil vojaški poveljnik (vir egregius, praepositus) obeh dačanskih legij,76 268/269 pa je zamenjal Tita Klementija Silvija (T. Clementius Silvius),77 upravitelja Spodnje Panonije, in sam prevzel vodenje province kot upravitelj viteškega ranga (vir perfectissimus, praeses). 68 69 76 77 78 79 80 Dobó meint, dass Aper zwischen den Jahren 262–267 die Befehlsgewalt über die beiden dakischen Legionen besessen habe. Im Gegensatz dazu datiert Fitz das Kommando über die dakischen Vexillationen in die Jahre 264–267 (Fitz 1976, 73 und 78; Fitz 1994, 1052). T. Clementius Silvius kommt auf zwei Inschriten aus Aquincum vor, die in das Jahr 267 datierbar sind: CIL III 3424 (= lupa 9727) und CIL III, 10424 (= lupa 4110; HD060424). Abramić 1925, 180; AE 1936, 56; AE 1960, 351; AIJ 314; lupa 9344; HD024297: Saxer 1967, 56. Der Stein ist im dritten Mithräum in Ptuj, inv. Nr. RL 294 aubewahrt. Übersetzung: »Dem unbesiegbaren Sonnengott Mithras. Für das Heil des Amtsvorstehers, der Rechnungsführern, den hohen und niedrigen Militärsekretäre der gallienischen Legionen V Macedonica und XIII Gemina.« Es ist schwierig, diese Titel adäquat zu übersetzen. Auf keinen Fall sollte man sie mit den heutigen Dienststellen in Verbindung bringen. K. Stauner schlägt als die einfachste Lösung folgendes vor: Wenn eine direkte Übersetzung nicht möglich ist, sollte man den Posten als »Schreibsoldat« bezeichnen, in der Folge aber den (jeweiligen) Tätigkeitsbereich genauer erläutern (Stauner 2004, 117–118). 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 Abramić 1925, 181–183; AE 1936, 54; AE 1960, 351; AIJ 316; lupa 9346; HD024291; Saxer 1967, 56. Hrani se v tretjem ptujskem mitreju, inv. št. RL 296. Prevod: »Sončnemu bogu, nepremagljivemu Mitri. Za zdravje pisarne poveljnika legije Pete makedonske in Trinajste dvojne Apra.« PIR2 1943, 135; Fitz 1976, 72–73. Kovács, Szabó 2009, 45–46; CIL III 15156; lupa 5168. Napis je datiran v čas med 268 in 270, vsekakor pa pred nastankom napisa, ki je bil najden v kraju Bölcske. Szabó, Tóth 2003, 116–118; AE 2003, 1417; lupa 10296; HD045578. Nastanek drugega napisa je datiran v Avrelijanov čas, leto 271 ali 272. Fitz 1994, 1052. Dobó 1968, 101–102. Petersen loči med L. Flavijem Aprom, ki je bil praeses, in ga postavlja v čas Kara ali Dioklecijana, ter med Flavijem Aprom, ki je bil vir egregius in poveljnik v času Galiena (Petersen 1955, 51). Dobó meni, da je imel Aper poveljstvo nad obema dačanskima legijama med leti 262–267. Fitz nasprotno datira poveljstvo nad dačanskima veksilacijama v leta 264–267 (Fitz 1976, 73 in 78; Fitz 1994, 1052). T. Clementius Silvius se omenja na dveh napisih iz Akvinka, datiranih v leto 267: CIL III 3424 (= lupa 9727) in CIL III, 10424 (= lupa 4110; HD060424). 329 Abbildung 6. Weihinschrit zum Wohle des Kanzleipersonals aus Ptuj (AIJ 314; Foto Fotothek des Instituts für Archäologie ZRC SAZU). Slika 6. Oltar s posvetilom pisarjev s Ptuja (AIJ 314; foto Fototeka Inštituta za arheologijo ZRC SAZU). Bedeutung Kanal, Graben, Rohr) zu tun, oder der Terminus leitet sich von canicula in der Bedeutung Feder her. хανίхλειον war in der Spätantike und in der byzantinischen Zeit die Bezeichnung für Schreibzeug. Aus diesem wird ̔ο του̑ ϰανιϰλείον bzw. ̔ο έπί του̑ ϰαυ̑ιϰλείου abgeleitet, was in der Übersetzung so viel wie »Schreibzeugbewahrer« heißt.81 Für diese Funktion kennt man nur sechs Belege, von denen M. Clauss drei (AE 1910, 77; CIL VI 1110 und AIJ 314) mit Sicherheit in die zweite Hälfte des 3. Jhs. datiert. Vielleicht könnte man aus derselben Epoche noch zwei weitere hinzufügen: CIL VI 231 und AE 1892, 105.82 Die letztgenannte Inschrift (AE 1975, 52) ist zeitlich ohnehin nicht näher bestimmbar.83 Der Titel canalicularius stammt aus dem 3. Jh, als in der Verwaltungsorganisation des Imperiums größere Veränderungen stattfanden. Wie M. Clauss84 schreibt, wurde dieses Amt von Gallienus eingeführt. Wenn es hier an erster Stelle genannt wird, dann wohl deswegen, weil es den höchsten Kanzleiposten innerhalb der militärischen Verwaltung (auch bei den Vexillationen, wie aus der Inschrift aus Poetovio hervorgeht!) bezeichnet. In dieser Hinsicht könnte man diesen Begrif mit »Amtsvorsteher« übersetzen.85 Die zweite Stelle nehmen die actuarii ein. Auch die Etymologie dieses Begrifes scheint nicht völlig geklärt. Er könnte aus acta, -orum (Urkunde, Dokument) oder actus, -us (Bewegung) abgeleitet sein. Ebenso wenig ist geklärt, ob actarius respektive actuarius ein und dieselbe oder zwei unterschiedliche Funktionen zum Ausdruck bringt. Act(u)arii treten in der Militärverwaltung wie auch im Privatbereich in Erscheinung. Im privaten Sektor handelt es sich entweder um Fachleute für das Rechnungswesen oder um Kopisten von Gerichtsreden bzw. (philosophischen) Vorträgen. Im Militärdienst schließlich benennt act(u)arius die zweithöchste Dienststelle im Büro des Militärkommandanten, direkt nach dem cornicularius oder canalicularius. Sie ist für die römischen Legionen, Auxilia und Alen belegt. Im späten Kaisertum sorgten die act(u)arii für die (administrative) Zuteilung von Naturalien an die Soldaten.86 Als dritte Gruppe nennt die Inschrift die codicarii, die als „Sekretäre“ im Büro des Tribunen zu verstehen sind. Auch diese Funktion taucht erst mit den gallienischen Reformen auf. Die Benennung leitet sich vom Wort codex ab, was auf eine Ablösung der Papyrusrolle durch das „Buch“ hindeuten würde. Der Begrif codicarius bezeichnet also einen Schreiber, der wahrscheinlich selbst die Codices herstellte.87 81 82 83 84 85 86 330 87 Saria 1940, 83. Clauss 1973, 41–43. Stauner 2004, 125. Clauss 1973, 44–45; Stauner 2004, 125–126. Stauner 2004, 125–126. Stauner 2004, 129–131. Stauner 2004, 131–132. 4.2.2.2 Oltar, postavljen za blagor pisarjev pisarne legij Pete makedonske in Trinajste dvojne Na naslednjem spomeniku78 (sl. 6) je upodobljen Mitra, ki ubija bika. Zgornji del Mitrovega telesa in glava psa sta odlomljeni. Napis se glasi: 5 D(eo) S(oli) I(nvicto) M(ithrae). Pro {sa}salut̂ e canalic(u)lari êt actariorûm êt codicarior(um) êt librariorûm legg(ionum) V M(acedonicae) êt XIII G(eminae) Gallienarum.79 Napis je zelo pomemben, saj nam ni ohranil samo vrste poimenovanj vojaške pisarne, ki so bili v uporabi v 3. st., temveč sporoča tudi hierarhični položaj pisarjev znotraj pisarne. Poklici v pisarni poveljnika so omenjeni od najvišjega do najnižjega položaja.80 V posvetilu ni omenjen posvetitelj oltarja, zato domnevamo, da so pisarji postavili oltar zase. 78 79 80 Abramić 1925, 180; AE 1936, 56; AE 1960, 351; AIJ 314; lupa 9344; HD024297; Saxer 1967, 56. Hrani se v tretjem ptujskem mitreju, inv. št. RL 294. Prevod: »Sončnemu bogu, nepremagljivemu Mitri. Za zdravje predstojnika pisarne, računovodij, višjih in nižjih vojaških tajnikov Galienovih legij Pete makedonske in Trinajste dvojne.« Takšne položaje v teh pisarnah je zelo težko prevajati, nikakor se jih pa ne sme primerjati in prevajati s sodobnimi uradniškimi službami. K. Stauner kot najenostavnejšo rešitev predlaga naslednje: če prevod ni mogoč, se ga prevaja kot An vierter und letzter Stelle inden wir die librarii, welcher Terminus Schreiber im öfentlichen und privaten Bereich bezeichnet. Letztere waren also Privatschreiber und Sekretäre, wohingegen sie in den städtischen Büros als Schreibkräfte der verschiedenen Magistrate fungierten. Auch für das Militär waren diese Leute von großer Wichtigkeit. Dort arbeiteten sie in den Oiziersstuben als Sekretäre, schrieben für ihre Vorgesetzten Briefe und erstellten als Buchhalter und Rechnungsführer unter anderem auch die Morgenappelle, sammelten zudem Berichte und andere Tagesprotokolle. Insgesamt oblag ihnen die Verwaltung der Militärakten, Dienstpläne, Urlaube und Geldzahlungen. Ob dieser ihrer vielfältigen Aufgabenbereiche hatten sie eine umfangreiche Einsicht in die Tätigkeit der Soldaten wie auch in die Finanzgebarung der einzelnen Truppenkörper.88 4.2.2.3 Weihaltar der tesserarii und der custodes armorum Der letzte und fünfte Altar89 (Abb. 7) zeigt in den Akroterien zwei Löwen mit einem Widderkopf zwischen den Vorderpranken. Auf der rechten Nebenseite erscheint der mit einer Strahlenkrone ausgestattete Sonnengott Sol. Über seiner linken Schulter trägt er einen Mantel, in der Linken hält er eine Sonnenkugel, in der Rechten eine Peitsche. Im Hintergrund sehen wir eine Quadriga. Auf der linken Nebenseite ist ein bekrönter Genius dargestellt; dieser hält in der rechten Hand eine Schale, deren Inhalt (Weihrauch) er in das Feuer streut. In seiner Linken hält er ein Füllhorn. Die Inschrift lautet: 5 D(eo) S(oli) I(nvicto) M(itrae). Pro salute tesserarior(um) êt custod(um) armor(um) legg(ionum) V M(acedonicae) et XIII Gemin(a)e Gallienârum.90 Die Inschrift nennt uns also zwei militärische Chargen, die im Heer eine große Bedeutung hatten. Die erstgenannten tesserarii galten als die Befehlsvermittler für die Kommandanten, die einzelnen Abteilungen wie auch für die Soldaten. Jede Zenturie verfügte über solchen tesserarius.91 Sein Name leitet sich vom lateinischen Begrif tessera (Täfelchen) ab, auf dem der Tagesbefehl notiert war. Als niedere Oiziere konnten die tesserarii gelegentlich auch einzelne Abteilungen einer Legion führen. Zudem übernahmen sie diverse Aufgaben in militärischen und zivilen Büros.92 88 89 90 91 92 Stauner 2004, 132–133. Abramič 1925, 180–181. AE 1936, 55; AE 1960, 351; AIJ 315; lupa 9345; HD024294; Saxer 1967, 56. Der Stein ist im dritten Mithräum in Ptuj, inv. Nr. RL 295 aubewahrt. Übersetzung: »Dem unbesiegbaren Sonnengott Mithras. Für das Heil der tesserarii und Wafenschmiede der legio V Macedonica und XIII Gemina.« Clauss 1999, 87. Lammert 1934, 854–855. Abbildung 7. Weihaltar der tesserarii und der custodes armorum aus Ptuj (AIJ 315; Foto Fotothek des Instituts für Archäologie ZRC SAZU). Slika 7. Oltar s posvetilom teserarijev in orožarjev s Ptuja (AIJ 315; foto Fototeka Inštituta za arheologijo ZRC SAZU). Kot prvi se omenja canalic(u)larius. Etimologija besede je nejasna: morda bi lahko službo povezali z uradnikom oz. tehnikom, ki je imel opravka z vodo (iz canalis v pomenu jarek, prekop, cev), ali pa je poimenovanje izpeljano iz besede canicula v pomenu pero, saj je izraz ϰανίϰλειον v pozni antiki in v bizantinskem času označeval pisarniški pribor. Iz tega izhaja poimenovanje ὁ του̑ ϰανιϰλείον oz. ὁ έπί του̑ ϰαυ̑ιϰλείου, ki v prevodu pomeni »čuvaj pisalnih pripomočkov«.81 Med rimskimi napisi je bilo najdenih samo šest primerkov s takšnim poimenovanjem, tri (AE 1910, 77, CIL VI 1110 in AIJ 314) med njimi M. Clauss zanesljivo datira v drugo polovico 3. st., morda bi lahko v isti čas datirali še dva druga (CIL VI 231 in AE 1892, 105),82 zadnjega napisa (AE 1975, 52) pa ni mogoče časovno opredeliti.83 Poimenovanje canalicularius se je pojavilo v času sprememb v notranji organizaciji imperija. Kot meni M. Clauss,84 je to službo uvedel Galien v času svojih reform. Po hierarhični lestvici je služba zapisana na prvem mestu in tako pomeni najvišjo službo v vojaški upravi (tudi pri veksilacijah, kot je vidno iz petovionskega napisa!). Poimenovanje bi lahko označevalo »predstojnika pisarne«.85 81 82 83 84 85 vojak-pisar, v nadaljevanju pa se njegovo področje dela natančneje opredeli z opisom. (Stauner 2004, 117–118). Saria 1940, 83. Clauss 1973, 41–43. Stauner 2004, 125. Clauss 1973, 44–45; Stauner 2004, 125–126. Stauner 2004, 125–126. 331 Die nachgereihten custodes armorum schließlich führten die Aufsicht über die Wafenkammern der Legion. Jede Zenturie besaß einen solchen Dienstposten.93 5 Rekonstruktion der Ereignisse zwischen den Jahren 260 und 268 n. Chr. Die Steindenkmäler aus Poetovio bezeugen die Anwesenheit von Soldaten der dakischen Legionen V Macedonica und XIII Gemina auf dem heutigen Gebiet Sloweniens. B. Saria94 wie auch A. Alföldi95 meinten, dass in selbiger Region die Legionen jeweils in ihrer vollen Truppenstärke präsent gewesen wären, während E. Ritterling96 und W. Reidinger97 an der hese festhielten, dass sich hierorts nur kleinere Abteilungen (Vexillationen) derselben Legionen aufgehalten hätten. Auch im heute mazedonischen Lychnidus (Ohrid) standen zur Zeit des Gallienus zwei Legionen: die legio II Parthica und III Augusta.98 Die militärische Präsenz in Lychnidus wie auch in Poetovio ist nicht verwunderlich, zumal beide Städte im Hinterland der gefährdeten Grenzregionen eine wichtige strategische Rolle gespielt haben.99 Mit welchen konkreten Ereignissen oder militärischen Aktionen kann man sie in Verbindung setzten? Dienten sie hier nur der Verteidigung der Reichsgrenze oder wurden sie auch zum Zwecke eines militärischen Angrifs des Gallienus zusammengezogen? Anhand von Münzfunden, Bautätigkeiten, Steindenkmälern und literarischen Quellen kann man folgenden Ablauf der Ereignisse rekonstruieren: Nach der Machtübernahme der Usurpatoren unternahm Gallienus alle Anstrengungen, die Kontrolle über das Imperium und insbesondere über Illyricum zu behalten. Einige Monate vor seiner Alleinherrschaft wurde im Donaugebiet (Sirmium) Ingenuus zum Gegenkaiser ausgerufen. Über ihn errang der gallienische General Aureolus in der Gegend von Mursa oder Sirmium (?) einen Sieg. Im Jahre 260 wurde in Oberpannonien oder in Moesien Publius Cassius Regalianus als Gegenkaiser ausgerufen. Auch seine Herrschaft dauerte nur kurz, denn schon nach einigen Wo93 94 95 96 97 98 332 99 Clauss 1999, 37. Saria 1924, 249–252. Alföldi 1967, 101. Ritterling 1925, 1340, 1580 und 1721f. Reidinger 1956, 143. I(ovi) o(ptimo) m(aximo) / pro salute et incolumi/tate imp(eratoris) Caes(aris) P. Licini / [E]gna[ti] Gallieni Aug(usti) / vexill(ationes) leg(ionum) II Parth(icae) / III Aug(ustae) sub cura / Aur(elii) Augustiani ducis / iustissimi et / C. [E]uf (---) (?) Synforian[i] / praep(ositi) vexillatio-/[num ---]. Übersetzung: »Iuppiter, dem Besten und Größten für das Heil und die Unversehrtheit des Imperators und Kaisers Publius Licinius Egnatius Gallienus Augustus haben die Vexillationen der legio II Parthica und III Augusta unter der Leitung ihres höhst gerechten Anführers Aurelius Augustianus und des Caius Euf… (?) Synforianus, des Kommandanten der Vexillationen...(diesen Altar gestietet)« (ILJug 1234; AE 1934, 193; Šašel 1961, 22–23 = Šašel 1992, 377–378). De Blois 1976, 31. Za »predstojnikom pisarne« je na napisu izraz actuarius. Tudi etimologija besede act(u)arius ni popolnoma jasna. Lahko je izpeljana iz besede acta, -orum (listina, dokument) ali actus, -us (gibanje). Prav tako ni jasno, ali gre pri oznakah actarius in actuarius za isto službo z različnim načinom zapisovanja, ali za dve različni mesti. Računovodje (act(u)arii) nastopajo v vojaški in tudi v civilni službi. Na civilnem področju se pojavljajo v funkciji izvedencev za računovodstvo ali kot zapisovalci pri sodnih govorih ali (ilozofskih) predavanjih. Na vojaškem področju je act(u) arius zasedal drugo mesto v pisarni vojaškega poveljnika takoj za funkcijo cornicularius ali canalicularius. Omenja se pri legijah, pomožnih enotah in alah. V poznem cesarstvu se act(u)arii omenjajo kot vojaki, odgovorni za delitev živil med vojake svoje enote.86 Kot naslednji se omenjajo codicarii, ki so bili nekakšni tajniki v pisarnah vojaških tribunov. Tudi ta funkcija se pojavlja šele z Galienovimi reformami. Njihovo ime se morda lahko izpelje iz besede codex, kar bi kazalo na zamenjavo papirusnega zvitka s kodeksom. Codicarius je verjetno označeval pisarja, ki je pisal na novi material in ga verjetno tudi sam izdeloval.87 Librarius (zadnja funkcija na petovionskem oltarju) je opravljal službo zapisovalca oz. prepisovalca na javnem in tudi na zasebnem področju. Pri družinah je prepisoval knjige ali pisma in postal nekak tajnik, kot prepisovalec oz. oskrbnik državnih aktov pa je bil zaposlen pri različnih magistratih. Njegovo delo v vojski je bilo zaradi širokega področja delovanja nenadomestljivo. Kot tajniki so službovali pri poveljnikih in zanje pisali pisma, kot knjigovodje ali računovodje pa so zapisovali, prepisovali in zbirali dnevnike jutranjih apelov, poročil in drugih dnevnih protokolov, skrbeli so za vojaške listine, urnike, dopuste in denar, tako da so imeli pregled nad opravili vojakov in tudi nad njihovimi inancami.88 4.2.2.3 Oltar s posvetilom teserarijev in orožarjev Zadnji, peti oltar89 (sl. 7) ima v akroterijih upodobljenega leva z ovnovo glavo med sprednjima šapama. Na desni stranski ploskvi je upodobljen Sol s sončno krono, čez levo ramo mu visi plašč, v levici drži sončno kroglo, v dvignjeni desnici ima bič. Za njim se vidi kvadriga. Na levi stranski plošči je upodobljen Genij s krono, ki v desnici drži posodo za žrtvovanje, njeno vsebino stresa nad ognjem, v levici pa drži rog izobilja. Napis se glasi: 86 87 88 89 Stauner 2004, 129–131. Stauner 2004, 131–132. Stauner 2004, 132–133. Abramić 1925, 180–181; AE 1936, 55; AE 1960, 351; AIJ 315; lupa 9345; HD024294; Saxer 1967, 56. Hrani se v tretjem ptujskem mitreju, inv. št. RL 295. chen wurde er von Gallienus besiegt.100 Welche Legionen oder Vexillationen haben nun an beiden Seiten gekämpft? Die literarischen Quellen berichten, dass die Mehrheit der Pannonier deshalb, weil sie Gallienus während der germanischen Einfälle im Jahre 258 in Stich gelassen hatten, in den Jahren 260 oder 261 auf die Seite der Gegenkaiser übergetreten seien.101 Aber vielleicht haben sie schon vorher an der Seite des Ingenuus gekämpft. Dafür spricht unter anderem auch eine Notiz in der Historia Augusta, die besagt, dass sich Gallienus nach seinem Sieg über Ingenuus blutig an den Soldaten als auch an den Bewohnern Moesiens,102 ja vermutlich auch an den Pannoniern gerächt habe.103 Möglicherweise haben die pannonischen Einheiten auch auf der Seite des Regalian gekämpft. Letztendlich wurde Regalian in Oberpannonien zum Gegenkaiser ausgerufen.104 Jedenfalls standen die pannonischen Einheiten dem Macrianus (Usurpator zwischen August 260 und Oktober 261) zur Seite.105 Denn Zonaras berichtet, dass sie ihm bis zu Letzt treu geblieben seien.106 Also kämpften die pannonischen Einheiten gegen Gallienus vielleicht schon an der Seite des Ingenuus oder Regalianus, mit sicherheit aber an der Seite des Macrianus. 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 Bratož 2007, 327; Goltz, Hartmann 2008, 262–265, siehe Anm. 203. De Blois 1976, 5. HA Tyr. trig. 9, 3–4. Sed Gallienus, ut erat nequam et perditus, ita etiam, ubi necessitas coegisset, velox, fortis, vehemens, crudelis, denique Ingenuum conlictu habito vicit eoque occiso in omnes Moesiacos tam milites quam cives asperrime saeviit. nec quemquam suae crudelitatis exsortem reliquit, usque adeo asper et truculentus ut plerasque civitates vacuas a virili sexu relinqueret. Fertur sane item Ingenuus civitate capta in aquam se mersisse atque ita vitam inisse, ne in tyranni crudelis potestatem veniret. Übersetzung: »Aber Gallienus war, obwohl nichtsnutzig und verkommen, sofern nötig, geschickt, mutvoll, feurig, unbarmherzig; letztendlich hat er Ingenuus besiegt, mit welchem er im Kampf lag, und hat sich, nachdem er ihn getötet hatte, grausam an allen Moesiern, sowohl an den Soldaten als auch an den Einwohnern, gerächt. Er blieb niemandem etwas schuldig. Er war so hart und grimmig, dass er die meisten Einwohner ohne Männer hinterließ. Es wird berichtet, dass sich Ingenuus, nachdem die Stadt erobert worden war, ins Wasser geworfen und so sein Leben beendet habe, damit er nicht unter der harten tyrannischen Gewalt leben müsse.« Der Passus beschreibt die Rechenschat über die Moesier. Aber wahrscheinlich hat sich Gallienus auch an den Pannonier gerächt, so mal Ingenuus Statthalter Pannoniens war, und wurde in Sirmium von den Soldaten, die in Moesien und in Pannonien stationiert waren, auch zum Gegenkaiser ausgerufen (Brecht 1999, 284 und 290; Paschoud 2011, 10–11 und 84–88). Auf diesen Passus hat mich freundlicherweise Herr Prof. Dr. R. Bratož hingewiesen, wofür ich ihm an dieser Stelle meinen Dank aussprechen möchte. Bratož 2007, 327. Goltz, Hartmann 2008, 260 und 265–266. Zonaras 12, 24. Zonaras benennt die Pannonier gemäß der griechischen Verwendung irrig als Poeni (cf. Grassl 1990, 539–544; Brecht 1999, 270–271). 5 D(eo) S(oli) I(nvicto) M(itrae). Pro salute tesserarior(um) êt custod(um) armor(um) legg(ionum) V M(acedonicae) et XIII Gemin(a)e Gallienârum.90 Na tem oltarju se omenjata dve vojaški funkciji, ki sta bili v vojski zelo pomembni. Teserariji so poveljnikove ukaze prenašali k poveljnikom posameznih enot ali pa kar naravnost k vojakom. V vsaki centuriji legije je bil po en teserarij.91 Ime so dobili po tablici (tessera), na kateri je bilo zapisano povelje. Ker je teserarij sodil k nižjim oicirjem, je imel možnost, da je občasno vodil oddelek legije ali pa prevzel naloge v vojaški ali civilni pisarni.92 Orožarji (custodes armorum) so skrbeli za orožje legije. V vsaki centuriji je bil po en orožar.93 5 Rekonstrukcija dogodkov med letoma 260 in 268 Petovionski napisi pričajo o tem, da so bili na Slovenskem vojaki dačanskih legij Pete makedonske in Trinajste dvojne. B. Saria94 in A. Alföldi95 sta menila, da je šlo za celotno legijo, E. Ritterling96 in W. Reidinger97 pa zagovarjala tezo o navzočnosti manjše enote; tudi v Lihnidu (Lychnidus, dan. Ohrid) v Makedoniji sta bili v času Galiena le veksilaciji dveh legij, Druge partske in Tretje Avguste.98 Da je bila vojaška posadka v Lihnidu in tudi v Petovioni, ni nič presenetljivega, saj sta bili obe mesti strateški točki v zaledju ogroženih mejnih ozemelj.99 S katerim dogodkom ali vojaško dejavnostjo ju lahko povežemo? Sta bili tam za obrambo ali sta bili le zbirno mesto za naslednji Galienov napad? Na podlagi novčnih najdb, gradbenih dejavnosti, 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 Prevod: »Sončnemu bogu, nepremagljivemu Mitri. Za zdravje teserarijev in orožarjev legij Pete makedonske in Trinajste dvojne.« Clauss 1999, 87. Lammert 1934, 854–855. Clauss 1999, 37. Saria 1924, 249–252. Alföldi 1967, 101. Ritterling 1925, 1340, 1580 in 1721ss. Reidinger 1956, 143. I(ovi) o(ptimo) m(aximo) / pro salute et incolumi/tate imp(eratoris) Caes(aris) P. Licini / [E]gna[ti] Gallieni Aug(usti) / vexill(ationes) leg(ionum) II Parth(icae) / III Aug(ustae) sub cura / Aur(elii) Augustiani ducis / iustissimi et / C. [E]uf (---)(?) Synforian[i] / praep(ositi) vexillatio-/[num---]. Prevod: »Jupitru, največjemu in najboljšemu, za blagostanje in zdravje cesarja Publija Licinija Egnacija Galiena Avgusta so veksilacije legij Druge partske in Tretje Avguste pod vodstvom zelo pravičnega poveljnika Avrelija Avgustijana in Gaja Euf… (?) Sinforijana, načelnika veksilacij...« (ILJug 1234; AE 1934, 193; Šašel 1961, 22–23 = Šašel 1992, 377–378). De Blois 1976, 31. 333 Die Inschrift aus Poetovio nennt neben den vier pannonischen Legionen auch den Namen ihres Oberkommandierenden. Auf Grund des lückenhaften Textes kennen wir nur seinen Gentilnamen – Aelius.107 Aus der Inschrift geht weiters hervor, dass er ritterlichen Standes (vir egregius) und Kommandierender der Vexillationen (dux) war. Der Ritterstand gewann nach der Einführung der gallienischen Reformen an Bedeutung. Die Befehlshaber dieser Vexillationen trugen seither den Titel dux. J. Fitz geht noch ein Schritt weiter und vermutet hinter Aelius den Publius Aelius Aelianus.108 Seiner Meinung nach habe dieser zwischen 262 (gallienischen Reformen)109 und der Inschrift aus Aquincum aus dem Jahr 267 folgende Posten bekleidet: 262–264 – Kommandeur über die pannonischen Vexillationen; 265–267 – Praefecuts legionis legionis II Adiutricis bzw. protector Gallieni Augusti nostri in Aquincum.110 Ab dem Jahre 267 trat Clementius Valerius Marcellinus an seine Stelle.111 Wenn Fitz Recht behält, dass die oben angesprochene Identität der beiden Personen zutrift, dann deckt sich dies insofern mit dem epigraphischen Hinweis, als der Titel protector nur den praefecti legionis verliehen wurde.112 Hinsichtlich ihrer Chronologie problematisch bleiben jedoch die Kommandos über die Vexillationen vor dem Jahre 267, zu denen Fitz keine überzeugenden Argumente vorbringt. Für die Karriere des Aelius gibt die Inschrift aus Aquincum lediglich das Jahr 267 als Obergrenze, alle anderen Jahreszahlen bleiben hypothetisch. Falls die gallienische Kavallerie schon gegen die Germanen am Rhein und gegen Ingenuus gekämpft hätte, dann könnte man das Reformedikt des Gallienus bereits vor 261 ansetzten.113 Unserer Meinung nach besteht freilich zwischen dem in Poetovio bezeugten Aelius und dem des P. Aelius Aelianus aus Aquincum keine Identität. Als Terminus post quem für den verlorenen Inschriftstein aus Poetovio (mit den Titeln dux und vir egregius) ergibt sich somit das Jahr 260. napisnih kamnov in pisnih virov je možno rekonstruirati naslednji potek dogodkov. Ko so začeli na oblast prihajati uzurpatorji, je Galien zbral vse moči, da bi obdržal svoj imperij in hkrati ohranil nadzor nad Ilirikom. Nekaj mesecev pred nastopom Galienove samostojne vlade je bil v Podonavju (Sirmiju) za proticesarja oklican Ingenuus, ki ga je pri Mursi ali Sirmiju(?) premagal Galienov vojskovodja Avreol. Leta 260 je bil v Zgornji Panoniji ali Meziji za proticesarja oklican Publij Kasij Regalian (P. Cassius Regalianus). Tudi njegovo vladanje je bilo kratkotrajno, saj ga je že po nekaj tednih Galien premagal.100 S katerimi legijami ali veksilacijami sta se obe strani bojevali? Pisni viri kažejo, da je večina Panoncev zato, ker jih je Galien ob germanskih vpadih leta 258 pustil na cedilu, leta 260 ali 261 prestopila na stran proticesarjev.101 Morda so se bojevali že na strani Ingenua. V prid tej domnevi je med drugim podatek v delu Historia Augusta, v katerem je zapisano, da je Galien, potem ko je premagal Ingenua, krvavo obračunal z vojaki in prebivalci Mezije102 in domnevno tudi s Panonci.103 Morda so se panonske enote bojevale tudi na strani Regaliana, navsezadnje je bil Regalian za proticesarja oklican v Zgornji Panoniji.104 Vsekakor pa so bile panonske enote na strani Makriana (uzurpator med avgustom 260 in oktobrom 261),105 saj Zonaras piše, da so mu bile do konca zveste.106 Torej so se panonske enote morda bojevale proti Galienu na strani Ingenua in Regaliana in gotovo na strani Makriana. 100 101 102 103 Wenn wir weiter der Frage nachgehen wollen, auf welcher Seite die pannonischen Vexillationen standen, bieten sich nur zwei Antworten: entweder sie unterstützten Gallienus oder sie kämpften gegen ihn. Für letzteres sprechen die oben erwähnten Quellen, die berichten, dass die Pannonier bis 107 108 109 110 111 112 334 113 Das Fragezeichen, das PLRE zum fragmentarisch erhaltenen Gentilnamen stellt, ist eigentlich unnötig, weil die Ergänzung des Gentilnamens als Aelius ohnehin sehr wahrscheinlich ist (PLRE 1, 1971, 18–19). Fitz 1976, 73–74; Fitz 1994, 1070–1071. T. Nagy, der in seinem Artikel die Inschrit aus Poetovio gar nicht in Betracht gezogen hat, datiert das Kommando des Aelianus über die legio II Adiutrix in den Zeitraum zwischen die Jahre 261/262 (Edikt des Gallienus) und dem Jahre 267, wo in Aquincum bereits Clementius Valerius Marcelinus bezeugt ist (Nagy 1965, 300). CIL III 3529 = lupa 3002; AE 1965, 9 = lupa 5966; HD017263. CIL III 3424 = lupa 9727. Nagy 1965, 304. Siehe Anm. 18. 104 105 106 Bratož 2007, 327; Goltz, Hartmann 2008, 262–265, glej op. 203. De Blois 1976, 5. HA Tyr. trig. 9, 3–4. Sed Gallienus, ut erat nequam et perditus, ita etiam, ubi necessitas coegisset, velox, fortis, vehemens, crudelis, denique Ingenuum conlictu habito vicit eoque occiso in omnes Moesiacos tam milites quam cives asperrime saeviit. nec quemquam suae crudelitatis exsortem reliquit, usque adeo asper et truculentus ut plerasque civitates vacuas a virili sexu relinqueret. Fertur sane item Ingenuus civitate capta in aquam se mersisse atque ita vitam inisse, ne in tyranni crudelis potestatem veniret. Prevod: »Toda Galien, kot je bil nekoristen in brezupen, je bil vendar – ko je to zahtevala nuja – spreten, drzen, ognjevit in krut; končno je premagal Ingenua, s katerim je bil v vojni, in se potem, ko ga je ubil, okrutno znesel nad vsemi Mezijci, tako vojaki kot prebivalci. Nikomur ni nič ostal dolžen. Tako oster in srdit je bil, da je večino prebivalstva pustil brez mož. Govori se, da se je Ingenuus, potem ko je bilo mesto osvojeno, vrgel v vodo in na ta način končal življenje, da ne bi prišel pod kruto tiransko oblast.« Odlomek opisuje maščevanje nad Mezijci, vendar se je Galien maščeval verjetno tudi nad Panonci, saj je bil Ingenuus upravitelj Panonije in so ga v Sirmiju povzdignile v proticesarja enote, stacionirane v Meziji in Panoniji (Brecht 1999, 284 in 290; Paschoud 2011, 10–11 in 84–88). Na podatek me je ljubeznivo opomnil red. prof. dr. R. Bratož, za kar se mu na tem mestu najlepše zahvaljujem. Bratož 2007, 327. Goltz, Hartmann 2008, 260 in 265–266. Zonaras 12, 24. Zonaras Panonce v skladu s prakso grških zgodovinarjev zmotno poimenuje Peonci (prim. Grassl 1990, 539–544; Brecht 1999, 270–271). 261 die Gegenkaiser unterstützten. Wir halten es aber für wahrscheinlicher, dass die Vexillationen an der Seite des Gallienus gekämpft haben, zumal die Kaiser des 3. Jh. Vexillationen verschiedener Legionen an mehreren Orten des Balkanraumes und Pannoniens stationiert hatten. Die Inschriften bezeugen uns seit dem Beginn des 3. Jh. Vexillationen der legio IV Germanica, VIII Augusta, XXIII Primigenia, I Minerva und XXX Ulpia aus Aquincum,114 sowie in der gallienischen Periode die Vexillationen der germanischen und britannischen Legionen aus Sirmium.115 Unter den dort überlieferten Legionen fehlen allerdings die Vexillationen der vier pannonischen Legionen aus der poetovienser Inschrift! Der Aufstand des Macrianus und seiner Söhne wurde im Jahr 261 im Zuge des bellum Sardicense niedergeschlagen. Damit in Verbindung stehen die Vexillationen, die auf der Inschrift aus Lychnidus116 und aus Vindobona117 erwähnt sind. In Poetovio waren zwischen den Jahren 258–261 die pannonischen Vexillationen wohl auch zur Überwachung der Bernsteinstraße und des Zuganges nach Italien stationiert. Dies könnte insofern für Gallienus von Bedeutung gewesen sein, als in dieser Zeit sein Gegenspieler Postumus kurzfristig die Kontrolle über die für Vorstöße (aus Rätien) nach Italien wichtigen Alpenpässe118 errungen hatte. Wahrscheinlich hat sich Gallienus nach dem Jahr 262 ganz auf den Kampf gegen Postumus konzentriert.119 Dazu fehlte ihm vorher wegen des Juthungeneinfalls nach Italien die Zeit. Als Verteidigungsmaßname verlegte er die beiden dakischen Vexillationen der legio V Macedonica und XIII Gemina nach Poetovio, welcher Ort für die Überwachung der Bernsteinstraße120 und somit für einen schnellen Einmarsch nach Italien wie auch nach Gallien als strategisch vorteilhaft erschien.121 Die legio V Macedonica hatte seit Mark Aurel (161–180) ihr Hauptlager in Potaissa (Turda), die legio XIII Gemina aber in Apulum (Alba Iulia im heutigen Rumänien) aufgeschlagen. Eine Vexillation der legio XIII Gemina ist nach 260 für Ad Mediam (Mehadia im 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 CIL III 104713; AE 1972, 378; ILS 1153; lupa 10593; HD009487. De Blois setzt die Inschrit irrig in die Zeit des Gallienus (De Blois 1976, 32, Anm. 44). CIL 3228; ILS 546; lupa 11536; Fitz 1976, 13. J. Šašel datiert die Vexillationen der britannischen und germanischen Legionen spätestens in das Jahr 260, weil das britannische, germanische und hispanische Heer danach mit dem Heer des Postumus vereint wurde. Ihre Anwesenheit verbindet er aber mit dem Alemanneneinfall beziehungsweise mit der Niederwerfung des Ingenuus- oder des Postumusaufstandes (Šašel 1961, 14 = Šašel 1992, 371). Siehe Anm. 98. Siehe oben Kap. 3 Siehe die Inschrit aus Augsburg, Kap. 3. K. Dietz spricht sich für zwei Phasen des Kampfes gegen Postumus aus: Die erste sollte gleich nach der Ermordung des Saloninus (260) begonnen haben, die zweite setzt er an Hand der Münzfunde in die Jahre 263–267 (Dietz 2012, 39). Fitz 1982, 66. Oprean 2004, 14. Iz prepisa izgubljenega petovionskega napisa lahko poleg podatka o navzočnosti štirih panonskih veksilacij preberemo tudi, da je bil njihov poveljnik neki Elij (Aelius).107 Ker je bil kamen na tem mestu poškodovan, je od poveljnikovega imena ohranjeno samo gentilno ime. Dalje beremo, da je bil Elij vitez (vir egregius) in poveljnik veksilacij (dux). Vitezi so v vojski pridobili pomen prav v času po Galienovih reformah, poveljnik veksilacij pa se je v tem obdobju imenoval dux. J. Fitz je šel še korak dalje in domneval, da gre za Publija Elija Elijana (P. Aelius Aelianus).108 Njegovo najverjetnejšo karierno pot je umestil v čas med začetkom Galienovih reform109 (postavlja jih v leto 262) in napisom iz Akvinka, datiranim v leto 267: 262–264 – poveljeval panonskim veksilacijam; 265–267 – poveljnik legije Druge pomožne oz. cesarjev spremljevalec (protector Gallieni Augusti nostri) v Akvinku.110 To službo je opravljal vsaj do leta 267, saj se v tem letu kot njegov naslednik že omenja Klementij Valerij Marcelin (Clementius Valerius Marcellinus).111 Če sprejmemo Fitzovo domnevo, da gre pri Eliju iz Petovione in Publiju Eliju Elijanu za isto osebo, potem je pravilno zabeležil zaporedje njegove službene poti, saj so legijski poveljniki (praefecti legionis) prejeli naslov cesarjevega spremljevalca (protector) šele za tem, ko so že bili poveljniki legije.112 Problematične se nam zdijo Fitzove kronološke opredelitve poveljevanja veksilacijam pred letom 267, saj zanje nima argumentov. Na osnovi napisov je vsekakor zanesljiva samo zgornja meja Elijanovega službovanja v Akvinku leta 267, druge letnice je J. Fitz postavil hipotetično. Če velja domneva, da se je Galienova konjenica bojevala že proti Germanom na Renu in proti Ingenuu, lahko Galienov edikt postavimo že pred leto 261.113 Po našem mnenju Elija s petovionskega napisa ne smemo enačiti s P. Elijem Elijanom, temveč gre za dve različni osebi. Zato bi lahko izgubljeni petovionski kamen datirali v čas, ko so Galienove reforme že bile uveljavljene (omemba dux in vir egregius na napisu), torej po letu 260. Če poskušamo dalje ugotoviti, na kateri strani so se panonske veksilacije bojevale, pa ostaneta še vedno dve možnosti: ali na Galienovi strani ali pa proti njemu. V prid domnevi, da so bile panonske veksilacije Galienu sovražne, so zgoraj omenjeni viri, ki nam razkrivajo, da so bili Panonci na strani proticesarjev vsaj do leta 261. Verjetnejša je razlaga, 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 Vprašaj, ki se pojavlja v PLRE pri fragmentarno ohranjenem gentilnem imenu, morda ni potreben, saj je dopolnitev gentilicija kot Aelius najverjetnejša (PLRE 1, 1971, 18–19). Fitz 1976, 73–74; Fitz 1994, 1070–1071. T. Nagy, ki v svojem članku petovionskega napisa ne upošteva, Elijanovo načeljevanje legije Druge pomožne širše datira med leto 261/262, v čas, ko je Galien izdal svoj edikt, in do leta 267, ko se na napisu iz Akvinka že omenja Klementij Valerij Marcelin (Nagy 1965, 300). CIL III 3529 = lupa 3002; AE 1965, 9 = lupa 5966 = HD017263. CIL III 3424 = lupa 9727. Nagy 1965, 304. Glej op. 18. 335 heutigen Rumänien) belegt.122 Diese Stadt war wegen der Verbindungsstraße zwischen Moesien und Dakien von strategischer Bedeutung. Für Poetovio sind mit Sicherheit Vexillationen der beiden Legionen vor dem Jahr 269 nachweisbar. Denn die Weihinschriften aus dem dritten Mithräum zeigen, dass die Einheiten hier längere Zeit stationiert waren. Die oben genannten Bürochargen bezeugen die Aufstellung der epigraphischen Denkmäler zur Zeit der gallienischen Reformen. Drei von fünf Weihaltären nennen Lucius Flavius Aper als Kommandanten, über den man nur soviel sagen kann, dass er vor dem Jahre 269 den Oberbefehl über die Truppen innehatte. In diesem Jahr inden wir ihn dann als Statthalter Unterpannoniens ausgewiesen. Eine genauere Datierung der fünf Inschriften aus dem dritten Mithräum ist nicht möglich. Die Aktivitäten der beiden dakischen Vexillationen kann man sogar noch weiter verfolgen. Aus den norditalischen Städten Dertona (Tortona) und Ticinum (Pavia) sind Grabdenkmäler bekannt, auf denen Soldaten der legio XIII Gemina samt ihren Familienmitgliedern genannt werden.123 C.H. Oprean vermutet deshalb, dass die Vexillationen Poetovio verlassen hätten, um nach Italien zu ziehen.124 Nach der Reorganisation der kaiserlichen Münzstätte unter Aurelian im Jahre 274, wurde diese aus Mediolanum nach Ticinum verlegt, wo die Vexillationen neben den Verkehrswegen auch die Munzprägestätte überwachten. Ein weiterer Grund für die Dislokation kann in der Bedrohung der Reichsgrenze durch die Alemannen gesehen werden.125 Wir denken, dass Gallienus denselben Fehler nicht ein zweites Mal begehen wollte, nämlich den Einmarsch nach Italien zu ermöglichen, wie dies im Jahre 260 zur Zeit des Kampfes gegen die Usurpatoren geschehen war. Nach dem Wafenstillstand mit Postumus waren die Konlikte zwischen Gallienus und Postumus allerdings noch nicht vorbei. Postumus weilte damals wahrscheinlich in seinem gallischen Sonderreich,126 vielleicht auch in Gallien selbst, wo es im Jahre 268 zum Endkampf zwischen ihm und Gallienus kam. Die dakischen Einheiten wurden nicht nur zur Verteidigung Italiens und der Kontrolle der Einfallswege in die Poebene in den Westen verlegt, sondern wohl auch deswegen, um für einen eventuellen Angrif des Postumus aus Gallien gewappnet zu sein. Nach Gallienus Tod verliert sich die Spur der beiden dakischen Vexillationen. Die Lage in Dakien hat sich auch in der Zeit der Herrschaft Claudius II. (268–270)127 nicht verbessert. Vermutlich sind deshalb die Truppen nicht dorthin zurückgekehrt. Im Jahr 271 aber stehen die beiden da so bile panonske veksilacije na Galienovi strani, saj so cesarji 3. st. namestili veksilacije različnih legij po raznih krajih Balkanskega polotoka in Panonije. Na napisih iz začetka 3. st. so omenjene veksilacije legij Četrte germanske, Osme Avguste, Triindvajsete Primigenije, Prve Minervine in Tridesete Ulpije v Akvinku114 ter veksilacije germanskih in britanskih legij v Sirmiju iz Galienovega časa.115 Med naštetimi legijami ni veksilacij panonskih legij, omenjenih na izgubljenem petovionskem napisu. Upor Makriana in njegovih sinov je bil zadušen leta 261 v spopadu (bellum Sardicense), s katerim lahko povežemo veksilacije, ki se omenjajo na napisih iz Lihnida116 in iz Vindobone.117 V Petovioni bi lahko bile veksilacije panonskih legij nameščene zaradi nadzora jantarjeve poti in dostopa v Italijo. To bi bilo lahko za Galiena pomembno, ker je v istem času Postum nekaj časa obvladoval alpske prehode, pomembne pri prodoru iz Recije v Italijo.118 V tej luči bi lahko bila razumljiva navzočnost veksilacij tudi v Petovioni v času 258–261. Verjetno se je Galien po letu 262 popolnoma posvetil boju s Postumom,119 saj za to zaradi vdora Jutungov v Italijo prej ni imel časa. Svojo obrambo je reorganiziral tako, da je v Poetoviono, ki je bila pomembna nadzorna točka na poti iz Panonije v Italijo120 in hkrati odskočna deska za hiter poseg v Italijo in tudi v Galijo, namestil enoti dačanskih legij Pete makedonske in Trinajste dvojne.121 Legija Peta makedonska je imela od vladanja Marka Avrelija (161–180) svoj stalni tabor v mestu Potaissa (dan. Turda), Trinajsta dvojna pa v mestu Apulum (dan. Alba Iulia v Romuniji). Oddelek legije Trinajste dvojne se je po letu 260 pojavil v mestu Ad Mediam (dan. Mehadia v Romuniji).122 To mesto je moralo biti pomembna strateška točka, kjer so oddelki ohranjali vez med Mezijo in Dacijo. Vsekakor sta se oddelka obeh dačanskih legij v Petovioni pojavila pred letom 269. Votivni spomeniki iz tretjega mitreja kažejo na dlje časa trajajočo nastanitev oddelkov. Poimenovanja za vojake-pisarje, ki se pojavljajo na njih, potrjujejo, da so bili oltarji postavljeni v času Galienovih reform. Na treh od 114 115 116 117 118 119 122 123 124 125 126 336 127 Saria 1924, 249. I. Piso vermutet, dass in Ad Mediam die ganze Legion stationiert war (Piso 2000, 224). Mennella 2000, 645–653. Oprean 2004, 16–17. Mennella 2000, 645. Goltz, Hartmann 2008, 274. Kienast 1990, 228–229. 120 121 122 CIL III 104713; AE 1972, 378; ILS 1153; lupa 10593; HD009487. De Blois napis napačno uvrsti v Galienov čas (De Blois 1976, 32, op. 44). CIL 3228; ILS 546; lupa 11536; Fitz 1976, 13. J. Šašel veksilacije britanskih in germanskih legij datira v leto 260 in nikakor ne pozneje, saj so bile britanska, germanska in hispanska vojska pozneje združene v Postumovi galski vojski, njeno navzočnost pa povezuje z alemanskim vdorom ali z zadušitvijo Ingenuovega in Regalianovega upora (Šašel 1961, 14 = Šašel 1992, 371). Glej op. 98. Glej pogl. 3. Glej pogl. 3: napis iz Augsburga. K. Dietz zagovarja dve fazi boja proti Postumu: prva naj bi se zgodila kmalu po Saloninovi smrti (260), druga pa je na podlagi numizmatičnih najdb postavljena med leti 263–267 (Dietz 2012, 39). Fitz 1982, 66. Oprean 2004, 14. Saria 1924, 249. I. Piso domneva, da je bila v mestu Ad Mediam celotna legija (Piso 2000, 224). Legionen schon in der neuen Provinz Dacia Ripensis. Die legio XIII Gemina hatte ihr Standlager in Ratiaria (westlich des Dorfes Archar im heutigen Bulgarien) aufgeschlagen, die legio V Macedonica im früheren Lager vom Oescus (Gigen im Norden Bulgariens).128 petih napisov je omenjen poveljnik Lucij Flavij Aper, za katerega je jasno samo to, da je panonskim veksilacijam poveljeval pred letom 269, saj se tega leta že omenja kot upravitelj Spodnje Panonije. Natančneje petih napisov iz tretjega mitreja ne moremo datirati. 6 Resumee Obema dačanskima veksilacijama lahko sledimo še naprej. Iz severnoitalskih mest Dertona (dan. Tortona) in Ticinum (dan. Pavia) so znani nagrobniki, ki omenjajo vojake Trinajste dvojne skupaj z njihovimi družinami.123 C. H. Oprean zato predvideva, da sta veksilaciji Petoviono zapustili in se preselili v Italijo.124 Po reorganizaciji cesarske kovnice pod Avrelijanom leta 274 se je kovnica iz Mediolana premaknila v Ticinum in so veksilacije morale nadzorovati pot in okolico kovnice. Ena od možnih razlag za premik je tudi ponovna grožnja Alemanov na meji imperija.125 Menimo, da Galien ni hotel ponoviti napake in ponovno doživeti vdora barbarov v Italijo (kot se je zgodilo leta 260), medtem ko se je sam bojeval proti uzurpatorjem. Po premirju s Postumom se njuni konlikti niso končali. Postum je bil v tem času verjetno v svojem galskem imperiju,126 morda prav v Galiji, kjer je leta 268 prišlo do zadnjega obračuna med njim in Galienom. Dačanske veksilacije niso bile premeščene v Italijo samo zaradi njene obrambe in nadzora nad potjo v Padsko nižino, ampak morda tudi zato, da bi lahko hitro ukrepale ob morebitnem Postumovem napadu iz Galije. Als Mitte des 3. Jh. Gallienus zum Kaiser ausgerufen worden war, erreichte die seit dem Beginn des 3. Jh. schwelende Reichskrise ihren Höhepunkt. Gallienus setzte in seiner achtjährigen Herrschaftsepoche zahlreiche Reformen um. Diese brachten für die Reichsadministration, Reichspolitik, für die Religion und vor allem für das Militär weit reichende Veränderungen. Als wichtigster Schritt kann die Trennung der zivilen von der militärischen Administration angesehen werden. So verloren die Senatoren das Kommando über das Heer und die Provinzen. An ihre Stelle traten nun die Ritter. Gallienus zog aus den Legionen kleinere Einheiten ab, die nunmehr mit der beweglichen Kavallerie den Kern des Heeres bildeten. Diese Truppen konnten wegen der niedrigeren Anzahl an Soldaten schnell zwischen den Kriegsschauplätzen manövrieren und waren somit in der Lage das Reich vor den zunehmenden Barbareneinfällen als auch gegen die von den Provinzen aus agierenden Usurpatoren zu verteidigen. Zu Beginn des 20. Jh. wurden in Ptuj (Poetovio) sechs Inschriften aus der Zeit des Gallienus gefunden. Das Fragment mit Nennung von vier pannonischen Legionen lässt sich an Hand des dort erwähnten Kommandanten Aelius in die Jahre ab 260 datieren. Obwohl dort von Legionen die Rede ist, wird man eher an deren Vexillationen zu denken haben, nämlich solchen der legio I und II Adiutrix aus Unterpannonien und der legio X und XIV Gemina aus Oberpannonien. Ihre genaue Rolle in dieser oberpannonischen Grenzstadt ist nicht restlos zu klären. Vielleicht kämpften sie auf Seite der Usurpatoren, wie in der Historia Augusta beschrieben: Gallienus soll sich nach dem Sieg über Ingenuus an den Soldaten aus Moesien und Pannonien blutig gerächt haben. Zur selben Zeit wurde Regalian in Oberpannonien zum Gegenkaiser ausgerufen, das Heer jedoch hielt bis 261 dem Macrian die Treue. Unter diesem Aspekt könnte man die Inschrift als Indiz dafür sehen, dass in Poetovio zwischen den Jahren 258-261 dem Gallienus feindlich gesinnte Truppen stationiert waren. Oder es waren doch die gallienischen Truppenverbände, die vor Ort sowohl den Schutz der Stadt als auch den Schutz der Bernsteinstraße übernommen haben. Auch ist es schwer zu sagen, wie lange diese Einheiten in der Stadt geblieben sind: sind sie mit ihrem Kommandanten Aelius nach Aquincum gezogen, oder sind sie vielleicht unter einem neuen Oberkommandierenten in Poetovio verblieben? Möglicherweise haben die Einheiten der legio V Macedonica und der legio XIII Gemina, die auf Sled obeh dačanskih veksilacij se po Galienovi smrti ponovno izgubi. Stanje v Daciji se tudi v času vladanja Klavdija II. (268–270)127 ni izboljšalo in se tja verjetno nista vrnili. Leta 271 sta bili obe matični legiji že v na novo urejeni provinci Dacia Ripensis. Legija Trinajsta dvojna je bila nastanjena v taboru v mestu Ratiaria (zahodno od dan. vasi Archar v Bolgariji), legija Peta makedonska pa v svojem starem taboru v kraju Oescus (zdaj vas Gigen na severu Bolgarije).128 6 Zaključek Sredi 3. st., ko je bil Galien povzdignjen v cesarja, je rimski imperij dosegel vrh krize, ki se je vlekla že od začetka stoletja. Galien je v svojem osemletnem vladanju uvedel številne reforme, ki so bistveno spremenile dotedanje razmere na področju administracije, politike, verstva in predvsem vojske. Ključni korak je bila ločitev politične oblasti od vojaške. Senatorji so izgubili poveljstvo nad vojsko in provincami, na njihova mesta pa so bili postavljeni vitezi. Galien je legijam odvzel manjše enote, ki so skupaj s spretno in gibljivo konjenico tvorile jedro vojske. Te so lahko zaradi manjšega števila vojakov hitreje menjavale bojišča 123 124 125 126 127 128 Ritterling 1925, 1581 und 1720. 128 Mennella 2000, 645–653. Oprean 2004, 16–17. Mennella 2000, 645. Goltz, Hartmann 2008, 274. Kienast 1990, 228–229. Ritterling 1925, 1581 in 1720. 337 den fünf Inschriften des dritten Mithräums erwähnt sind, die vier pannonischen Vexillationen ersetzten. Umgekehrt konnten aber auch, sofern es sich um kleinere Truppenverbände handelte, die vier pannonischen Vexillationen als auch die beiden dakischen Einheiten gleichzeitig in Poetovio stationiert gewesen sein. Denn die dakischen Truppen waren zur Verteidigung der Einfallstraße nach Italien hierher beordert worden, vielleicht auch in Erwartung eines nächsten Angrifes des Postumus. Insgesamt bezeugen die Inschriften die Anwesenheit von Kanzleichargen der beiden dakischen Legionen als auch ihres Kommandanten Lucius Flavius Aper. Er führte bis 269 den Oberbefehl über die legio V Macedonica und die XIII Gemina, im welchem Jahr er auf Inschriften aus Aquincum bereits als Statthalter Unterpannoniens ausgewiesen ist. Auch deren Vexillationen könnten unter der Führung eines nachfolgenden Kommandeurs länger in der Stadt geblieben sein. Zwischen den Jahren 268 bis 274 erfolgte dann ihre Verlegung nach Italien, wo in den Städten Dertona und Ticinum mehrere Soldatengrabsteine ihre Anwesenheit bezeugen. Danksagung Zuerst möchte ich mich herzlich bei Marjeta Šašel Kos bedanken, die mir bei der Entstehung des Artikels mit nützlichen Ratschlägen zur Seite stand, mir mit der wichtigsten Literatur ausgeholfen und meine Ausführungen mit nützlichen Informationen und kritischen Bemerkungen begleitet hat. Dank schulde ich auch Jana Horvat, die mich bei der Abfassung des Artikels tatkräftig unterstützt hat. Danken möchte ich auch Rajko Bratož, der mich sowohl bei der Literatursuche unterstützte als auch auf viele Quellentexte hingewiesen hat. Dank gebührt zudem Milan Lovenjak, für seine Hilfe bei der Übersetzung von Inschriften und literarischen Quellen. Die Erstellung des deutschsprachigen Manuskriptes hat in dankenswerter Weise Manfred Hainzmann begleitet. in s tem ščitile državo pred vpadi barbarov čez meje imperija ali uzurpatorji, ki so na oblast prihajali v provincah. Na začetku 20. st. je bilo na Ptuju najdenih šest napisnih kamnov iz Galienovega obdobja. Fragment napisnega kamna z omembo štirih panonskih legij bi lahko na osnovi na njem omenjenega poveljnika in viteza Elija datirali v čas po letu 260. Kljub omembi legij verjetno ni šlo za celotne legije, ampak za manjše enote vseh štirih panonskih legij: Prve in Druge pomožne iz Spodnje Panonije ter legije Desete in Štirinajste dvojne iz Zgornje Panonije. Njihovo vlogo v mestu je težko opredeliti. Morda so se bojevale na strani uzurpatorjev, saj Historia Augusta poroča, da se je Galien, potem ko je premagal Ingenua, maščeval in pobil vojake Mezije in Panonije. Poleg tega je bil Regalian za proticesarja oklican v Zgornji Panoniji, vojska pa je ostala zvesta Makrianu do leta 261. V tem primeru bi bil napis edini dokaz o navzočnosti Galienu sovražne vojske v Petovioni in bi ga datirali med 258 in 261. Ali pa so bile enote na Galienovi strani in so varovale pot iz Panonije v Italijo oziroma mesto Poetovio? Prav tako je težko reči, kako dolgo so ostale na tem mestu: ali so odšle skupaj s poveljnikom v Akvink ali so ostale v mestu pod drugim poveljnikom? Enote dveh dačanskih legij Pete makedonske in Trinajste dvojne, ki so omenjene na petih kamnih iz tretjega mitreja, so morda nadomestile oddelke štirih panonskih legij. Če je šlo za manjše enote, pa bi bile lahko panonske veksilacije in obe dačanski veksilaciji v Petovioni istočasno. V Petovioni jih je Galien namestil za zaščito vpadnice v Italijo, morda pa so se pripravljale na naslednji Postumov napad. Na teh napisih so vklesana poimenovanja za vojake-pisarje, omenjeni sta obe Galienovi dačanski legiji in njun poveljnik Lucij Flavij Aper. Legiji Peti makedonski in Trinajsti dvojni je poveljeval pred letom 269, saj se na napisih iz Akvinka v tem letu že navaja kot upravitelj Spodnje Panonije. Legije bi lahko ostale v mestu še naprej pod drugim poveljnikom. Med leti 268–274 so se verjetno premaknile v severno Italijo, saj v mestih Dertona in Ticinum najdemo številne nagrobnike, ki omenjajo vojake obeh enot. Zahvale Übersetzung: Anja Ragolič Sprachkorrektur: Manfred Hainzmann Rada bi se zahvalila Marjeti Šašel Kos, ki mi je ob nastajanju članka pomagala s koristnimi nasveti, me usmerjala pri iskanju literature ter s številnimi pogovori in kritičnimi pripombami prispevala uporabne informacije. Najlepša hvala Jani Horvat, ki me je bodrila pri pisanju članka in prispevala koristne pripombe glede strukture članka, Rajku Bratožu, ki mi je svetoval pri literaturi in me hkrati opozoril na pomembne vire, ter Milanu Lovenjaku, ki mi je pomagal pri prevodih napisov in virov. Za branje prevoda in številne koristne pripombe bi se najlepše zahvalila Manfredu Hainzmannu. 338 LITERATURVERZEICHNIS / LITERATURA ABRAMIĆ, M. 1925, Poetovio. Führer durch die Denkmäler der römischen Stadt. – Wien. ABRAMIĆ, M. 1931, Novi natpisi iz Poetovija. – Časopis za zgodovino in narodopisje 26, 177– 202. AE: L’Année épigraphique. AIJ: V. Hoiller, B. Saria, Antike Inschriften aus Jugoslavien I. Noricum und Pannonia Superior. – Zagreb 1938. ALFÖLDI, A. 1967, Studien zur Geschichte der Weltkrise des 3. Jahrhundert n. Chr. – Darmstadt. ALFÖLDI, M. R. 1959, Zu den Militärreformen des Kaisers Gallienus. – In/V: Limes studien, Vorträge der 3. Internationalen Limes-Kongresses in Rheinfelden, Schriften des Institutes für Ur- und Frühgeschichte der Schweiz 14, Basel, 13–18 [= Gloria romanorum, Schriften zum Spätantike, Zum 75. Geburtstag der Verfasserin am 6. Juni 2001, Historia, Einzelschriften 153, Stuttgart 2001, 173–177]. ALFÖLDY, G. 1965, Epigraphica. – Situla 8, 93–112. DIETZ, K. 2012, Zum Kampf zwischen Gallienus und Postumus. – In/V: T. Fischer (Hrsg./ur.), Die Krise des 3. Jahrhunderts n. Chr. und das Gallische Sonderreich, Akten des interdisziplinären Kolloquiums Xanten 26. bis 28. Februar 2009, Wiesbaden, 29–62. DOBÓ, Á. 1968, Die Verwaltung der römischen Provinz Pannonien von Augustus bis Diocletianus. Die provinziale Verwaltung. – Amsterdam. FITZ, J. 1976, La Pannonie sous Gallien. – Collection Latomus 148, Bruxelles. FITZ, J. 1982, Das Jahrhundert der Pannonier. (193–284). – Budapest. FITZ, J. 1994, Die Verwaltung Pannoniens in der Römerzeit 3. – Budapest. GOLTZ, A., HARTMANN, U. 2008, Valerianus und Gallienus. – In/V: K.-P. Johne (Hrsg./ur.), Die Zeit der Soldatenkaiser, Krise und Transformation der Römischen Reiches im 3. Jahrhundert n. Chr. (235–284) 1, Berlin, 223–295. ALFÖLDY, G. 1989, Die Krise des römischen Reiches. – Stuttgart. ALFÖLDY, G. 2011, Eine umstrittene Altarinschrift aus Vindobona. – Tyche 26, 1–22. BAKKER, L. 1993, Raetien unter Postumus – Das Siegesdenkmal einer Juthungenschlacht im Jahre 260 n. Chr. aus Augsburg. – Germania 71, 369–386. BRATOŽ, R. 2007, Rimska zgodovina. Prvi del. Od Začetkov do nastopa cesarja Dioklecijana. – Zbirka Zgodovinskega časopisa 33, Ljubljana. BRECHT, S. 1999, Die römische Reichskrise von ihrem Ausbruch bis zu ihrem Höhepunkt in der Darstellung byzantinischer Autoren. – Althistorische Studien der Universität Würzburg 1, Rahden. CAMPBELL, B. 2005, he army. – In/V: A. K. Bowman, P. Garnsey, A. Cameron (Hrsg./ur.), he Cambridge Ancient History 12, Cambridge, 110–136. CIL: Corpus inscriptionum Latinarum. CLAUSS, M. 1973, Untersuchungen zu den Principales des römischen Heeres von Augustus bis Diokletian. Cornicularii, speculatores, frumentarii. – Bochum. GRASSL, H. 1990, Pannonii – Pannonioi – Paiones: Zur Frage der Identiikation antiker Völkernamen. – In/V: H. Vetters, M. Kandler (Hrsg./ur.), Akten des 14. Internationalen Limeskongresses 1986 in Carnuntum, Der römische Limes in Österreich 36/2, Wien, 539–544. GROSSE, R. 1920, Römische Militärgeschichte von Gallienus bis zum Beginn der byzantinischen hemenverfassung. – Berlin. HD: Epigraphische Datenbank Heidelberg (http://www.uni-heidelberg.de/institute/sonst/adw/edh/). HORVAT, J., LOVENJAK, M., DOLENC VIČIČ, A., LUBŠINA-TUŠEK, M., TOMANIČ-JEVREMOV, M., ŠUBIC, Z. 2003, Poetovio. Development and Topography. – In/V: M. Šašel Kos, P. Scherrer (Hrsg./ur.), he autonomous towns of Noricum and Pannonia / Die autonomen Städte in Noricum und Pannonien, Pannonia 1, Situla 41, Ljubljana, 153–189. ILJug: A. Šašel, J. Šašel, Inscriptiones Latinae, quae in Iugoslavia inter annos MCMLX et MCMLXX repertae et editae sunt. – Situla 19, Ljubljana 1978 in/und A. Šašel, J. Šašel, Inscriptiones Latinae, quae in Iugoslavia inter annos MCMII et MCMXL repertae et editae sunt. – Situla 25, Ljubljana 1986. ILS: Inscriptiones Latinae selectae. – Berlin 1892–1916. CLAUSS, M. 1999, Lexikon lateinischer militärischer Fachausdrücke. – Schriften des Limesmuseums Aalen 52, Stuttgart. DE BLOIS, L. 1976, he Policy of the Emperor Gallienus. – Studies of the Dutch Archaeological and Historical Society 7, Leiden. DEGRASSI, A. 1952, I fasti consolari dell’impero Romano. – Sussidi eruditi 3, Roma. DEMO, Ž. 1982, Münzfunde aus der Zeit Gallienus im Gebiet zwischen den Flüssen Sava und Drava. – Arheološki vestnik 33, 258–498. JEHNE, M. 1996, Überlegungen zu der Rekonstruktion zur Chronologie der Jahre 259–261 n. Chr. – Bayerische Vorgeschichtsblätter 61, 185–206. JORDAN, D. R., ŠAŠEL KOS, M., WALLACE, M. B. 1985, A Greek Metrical Epitaph from Poetovio for a Soldier from Bithynia. – Zeitschrift für Papyrologie und Epigraphik 60, 85–89. KIENAST, D. 1990, Römische Kaisertabelle. Grundzüge einer römischen Kaiserchronologie. – Darmstadt. 339 KÖNIG, I. 1997, Die Postumus-Inschrift aus Augsburg. – Historia 46/3, 341–354. KOVÁCS, P. 2004, he late Roman Army in Pannonia. – Acta antiqua Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae 44, 115–122. KOVÁCS, P., SZABO, A. 2009, Tituli Aquincenses I. – Budapestini. LAMMERT, F. 1934, Tesserarius. – In/V: RE VA/1, 854–855. LAVAGNE, H. 1995, Une nouvelle inscription d’Augsbourg et les causes de l’usurpation de Postume. – Comptes-rendus des séances de l’Académie des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres, 431–446. PLRE 1: A. H. Jones, J. R. Martindale, J. Morris, he Prosopography of the Later Roman Empire 1. – London, New York, Melbourne 1971. RE: G. Wissowa et al. (Hrsg./ur.), Paulys Real-Encyclopädie der classischen Altewrtumswissenschaft, Stuttgart 1893–1995. REIDINGER, W. 1956, Die Statthalter des ungeteilten Pannonien und Oberpannoniens von Augustus bis Diokletian. – Antiquitas 1, Abhandlungen zur alten Geschichte 2, Bonn. RITTERLING, E. 1925, Legio. – In/V: RE XII/2, 1186–1837. SARIA, B. 1924, Zur Geschichte der Provinz Dacien. – Strena Buliciana, 249–252. LUPA: Ubi erat lupa (http://www.ubi-erat-lupa.org/). SARIA, B. 1940, Canalicularius. – In/V: RE Suppl. VII, 83–84. MENNELLA, G. 2000, Legionari del Donau a Dertona e Ticinum: una nuova testimonianza. – In/V: Y. Le Bohec, C. Wolf (Hrsg./ur.), Les legions de Rome sous le Haut-Empire II, Actes du congrès de Lyon (17-19 septembre 1998), Paris, 645–651. MOCSY, A. 1962, Pannonia. – In/V: RE Suppl. IX, 516–776. MRÁV, Z. 2000, Building inscription of Trajan from Poetovio. – In/V: G. Németh, P. Forisek (Hrsg./ur.), Epigraphica I, Studies on Epigraphy, Hungarian Polis Studies 6, Debrecen, 77–94. NAGY, T. 1965, Commanders of the Legions in the Age of Gallienus. – Acta Archaeologica Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae 17, 289–307. OPREAN, C. H. 2004, Dacia, Pannonia and Raetia in the time of Gallienus. A comparative approach. – In/V: Époque romaine / he Roman Age, Section 13 of the Acts of the XIVth UISPP Congress, University of Liège, Belgium, 2–8 September 2001, BAR International Series 1312, Oxford, 13–18. PASCHOUD, F. 2011, Histoire Auguste. Tome IV, 3e partie, vies des trente tyrans et de claude. – Paris. PETERSEN, H. 1955, Senatorial and Equestrian Governors in the hird Century A. D. – he Journal of Roman Studies 45, 47–57. PFLAUM, H. G. 1976, Zur reform des Kaisers Gallienus. – Historia 25, 109–117. PIR2: Prosopographia Imperii Romani. – Berolini 1943 [2. Ausgabe / 2. izdaja]. PISO, I. 2000, Les légions dans la province de Dacie. – In/V: Y. Le Bohec, C. Wolf (Hrsg./ur.), Les legions de Rome sous le Haut-Empire I, Actes du congrès de Lyon (17–19 septembre 1998), Paris, 205–225. 340 SARIA, B. 1951, Poetovio. – In/V: RE XXI/1, 1167–1184. SAXER, R. 1967, Untersuchungen zu den Vexillationen des römischen Kaiserheeres von Augustus bis Diokletian. – Epigraphische Studien 1, Beihefte der Bonner Jahrbücher 18, Köln, Graz. STAUNER, K. 2004, Das oizielle Schriftwesen des römischen Heeres von Augustus bis Gallienus (27 v. Chr.–268 n. Chr.). Eine Untersuchung zu Struktur, Funktion und Bedeutung der oiziellen militärischen Verwaltungsdokumentation und zu deren Schreibern. – Bonn. STICKLER, T. 1995, Iuthungi sive Semnones. Zur Rolle der Juthungen bei den römisch-germanischen Auseinandersetzungen am Raetischen Limes in der Zeit zwischen Gallienus und Aurelian. – Bayerische Vorgeschichtsblätter 60, 231–249. STROBEL, K. 1998, Raetia amissa? Raetien unter Gallienus: Provinz und Heer im Licht der neuen Augsburger Siegesinschrift. – In/V: C. Bridger, K.-J. Gilles (Hrsg./ur.), Spätrömische Befestigungsanlagen in den Rhein- und Donauprovinzen, BAR International Series 704, Oxford, 83–93. SZABÓ, Á., TÓTH, E. (Hrsg./ur.) 2003, Bölcske. Römische Inschriften und Funde. – Budapest. ŠAŠEL, J. 1961, Bellum Serdicense. – Situla 4, 3–30 [= Opera selecta, Situla 30, Ljubljana 1992, 360–368]. ŠAŠEL, J. 1979, Avgust 69: vojaški puč v Poetovioni. – Kronika, Časopis za slovensko krajevno zgodovino 1, 1–7. WITSCHEL, Ch. 1999, Krise, Rezession, Stagnation? Der Westen des römischen Reiches im 3. Jahrhundert n. Chr. – Frankfurter althistorische Beiträge 4, Frankfurt am Main. ROMAN FORT AT HRUŠICA: FINDINGS OF INVESTIGATIONS AFTER 1979 RIMSKA UTRDBA NA HRUŠICI, IZSLEDKI IZKOPAVANJ PO LETU 1979 Drago Svoljšak Drago Svoljšak Abstract Izvleček his paper contributes a detailed description of the smallscale excavations conducted in the Late Roman fort at Hrušica (Ad Pirum) and its immediate vicinity after 1979. he investigations at the south-west corner of the defence walls revealed two towers; the earlier one of a sub-square ground plan built contemporaneously with the defence walls and the later one of a pentagonal plan. An important inding of the trial trenching to the west of the fort is that the slope leading down towards the town of Ajdovščina (Castra) was rather steep in Roman times. V članku so podrobno opisana po letu 1979 izvedena sondiranja poznorimske utrdbe na Hrušici (Ad Pirum) in v njeni neposredni okolici. Raziskave na območju jugozahodnega stolpa so pokazale, da sta bila na tem mestu zgrajena dva stolpa: starejši, pribl. kvadratne oblike, ki je bil zgrajen istočasno z obodnim obzidjem, in mlajši, ki je peterokoten. Sondiranje zahodno od trdnjave je jasno pokazalo, da je v rimski dobi teren zahodno od trdnjave izrazito padal v smeri proti Ajdovščini (Castra). Keywords: Hrušica, Ad Pirum, Late Roman fort, excavations, defence walls tower Ključne besede: Hrušica, Ad Pirum, poznorimska utrdba, izkopavanja, stolp obrambnega obzidja 1 Uvod 1 Introduction he Roman fort of Ad Pirum (ig. 1), situated at the Hrušica Pass, was the site of extensive archaeological excavations conducted until 1979 by the National Museum of Slovenia and headed by Peter Petru, between 1971 and 1973 also in collaboration with the University of Munich (team headed irst by Joachim Werner and later by hilo Ulbert).1 After 1979, this strategically important fort of the Claustra Alpium Iuliarum system2 only saw minor, rescue archaeological excavations that have not yet been adequately published. In spite of their small scale, they nevertheless importantly contribute to the understanding of the fort and are therefore presented in this contribution. Excavations were conducted in the following areas (ig. 2): - in the area of the south-west tower and adjacent southern defence walls in 1997; - on the route of the Roman road to the west of the fort, at the crossing of modern roads from Bukovje to Črni vrh and from Kalce to Col in 1996; - in the interior of the Stara pošta inn (previously Lanthieri’s Manor) in 1992; 1 2 Ulbert 1981. Šašel, Petru 1971. Leta 1979 so bila v rimski trdnjavi Ad Pirum na Hrušici (sl. 1) zaključena velika arheološka izkopavanja Narodnega muzeja Slovenije, ki jih je vodil Peter Petru in pri katerih je 1971–1973 sodelovala Univerza iz Münchna (vodja Joachim Werner oz. hilo Ulbert).1 Kasneje so bila v tej strateško pomembni trdnjavi sistema Claustra Alpium Iuliarum2 opravljena manjša zaščitna arheološka izkopavanja, ki so kljub omejenosti raziskanega prostora pomembna za razumevanje trdnjave in zato predstavljena v tem prispevku. Izkopavanja so potekala na več območjih (sl. 2): - na območju jugozahodnega stolpa in južnega obzidja ob njem leta 1997; - na trasi ceste zahodno od trdnjave v križišču cest Bukovje–Črni Vrh–Kalce–Col leta 1996; - v notranjosti gostilne Stara pošta (prej Lanthierijev dvorec) leta 1992; - na delu zahodnega trdnjavskega obzidja v letih 1989, 1990 in 1993. 1 2 Ulbert 1981. Šašel, Petru 1971. 341 Figure 1. Hrušica (Ad Pirum). Aerial view over the fort (photo J. Hanc). Slika 1. Hrušica (Ad Pirum). Pogled na trdnjavo iz zraka (foto J. Hanc). - in a part of the western defence walls in 1989, 1990 and 1993. 2 Izkopavanja jugozahodnega stolpa in južnega obzidja ob njem 2 Excavations at the south-west tower and adjacent southern defence walls Celo obodno obzidje s stolpi, prečni zid in kraka zapornih zidov na severu oz. jugu trdnjave je od 1938 do 1940 konserviral italijanski arheolog Giovanni Battista Brusin, ki je poskrbel tudi za izris tlorisa trdnjave.3 Obzidje je očistil in ga odprl do prvega pojava obeh ohranjenih robov, preveč podrte dele je pozidal in nato celo zgornjo površino obzidja prekril z zdrobljeno rimsko apneno malto. Nanjo je pozidal pribl. 20‒50 cm debel zaščitni plašč iz kamnov (dobil jih je v ruševini rimskega obzidja) in cementne malte. Plašč je rahlo napet, da voda dobro odteka in je od originalnega (rimskega) dela obzidja dobro ločen z že omenjenim slojem zdrobljene apnene malte. Vseh podrobnosti pa pri tem posegu ni ustrezno raziskal, nekatere je, nevede, tudi zabrisal. Ruševine ob obzidju je poravnal, iz notranjosti jih je celo odstranil, tako da zdaj travnik sega čisto do obzidja, na zunanji strani pa je ruševine zravnal v nekaj metrov široko teraso. he whole perimeter of the defence walls, but also the transverse wall and the two sections of the barrier walls to the north and south of the fort, respectively, were subjected to conservation work performed between 1938 and 1940 by the Italian archaeologist Giovanni Battista Brusin, who also drew the ground plan of the fort.3 Conservation comprised cleaning the walls and removing the earth that had accumulated on top of them until reaching both faces of the wall, rebuilding the poorly preserved sections, and covering the whole upper surface of the preserved walls with a layer of crushed Roman lime mortar. his layer was inally covered with a roughly 20–50 cm thick protective coat of cement mortar and stones (obtained from the debris of the Roman walls). his coat has a slightly curved upper surface so as to ensure water running of it. It is clearly distinguishable from the original (Roman) walls due to the above-mentioned layer of crushed lime mortar. However, Brusin did not investigate all the details adequately and some, unknowingly, he even obscured. Furthermore, he levelled the debris along the walls on the exterior into a several-metre-wide terrace and even removed the debris in the interior so that the grass now reaches all to the walls. Brusin’s coat of mortar in the south-west corner of the defence walls began showing distinct signs of decay. his led Takšno je bilo stanje tudi v jugozahodnem vogalu obzidja, kjer pa je zob časa Brusinov maltni plašč občutno načel. Zato je leta 1997 Zavod za varstvo kulturne dediščine Slovenije, OE Nova Gorica, načrtoval novo konsolidacijo tega dela obzidja, ki je terjala predhodno arheološko raziskavo.4 Arheološkemu oddelku Narodnega muzeja Slovenije je tako novogoriški zavod zaupal izvedbo zaščitnih arheoloških izkopavanj, ki so bila izvedena med 10. septembrom 3 342 3 Brusin 1959, 39. 4 Brusin 1959, 39. Osmuk 1998. Figure 2. Hrušica (Ad Pirum). Plan of the fort with trenches excavated between 1973 and 1979 (marked with Roman numerals and letters; those excavated by the National Museum of Slovenia in blue and those in collaboration with the University of Munich in red) and all later interventions. Ground plans of existing buildings are drawn in brown (adapted ater Ulbert 1981, Beilage 1). Slika 2. Hrušica (Ad Pirum). Načrt trdnjavskega tlorisa z izkopnimi polji od 1973 do 1979 (rimske številke in črke se nanašajo na številčenje sond: modre na izkopavanja NMS, rdeče na izkopavanja Univerze v Münchnu in NMS) in vsemi poznejšimi posegi. Tlorisi obstoječih stavb so vrisani z rjavo (dopolnjeno po Ulbert 1981, priloga 1). 343 Figure 3. Hrušica (Ad Pirum). South-west corner of the fort, ground plan. Roman ground surface is visible to the south of the defence walls and the towers. Scale = 1 : 50 (drawing I. Murgelj). Slika 3. Hrušica (Ad Pirum). Jugozahodni vogal trdnjave, tloris. Južno od obzidja in stolpov je nivo antične hodne površine. M = 1 : 50 (risba I. Murgelj). 344 345 Figure 4. Hrušica (Ad Pirum). Passage through the southern defence walls, view from the south. The passage is partially covered by the debris of the defence walls protected with a coat of mortar (photo D. Svoljšak). Slika 4. Hrušica (Ad Pirum). Prehod v južnem obzidju, pogled z juga. Prehod deloma še prekriva ruševina obzidja, zaščitena z maltnim plaščem (foto D. Svoljšak). the regional oice of the Institute for the Protection of Cultural Heritage of Slovenia (Zavod za varstvo kulturne dediščine Slovenije) in Nova Gorica to plan a consolidation of the defence walls in this part. It was planned for 1997 and was preceded by an archaeological investigation.4 he regional institute in Nova Gorica entrusted the archaeological excavations to the Archaeological Department of the National Museum of Slovenia. he excavations, conducted from 10 September to 10 October 1997,5 were focused on the south-west tower of the defence walls, the adjacent passage through the southern defence walls and a small part of the slope between the plateau of the fort and the terrace below it (ig. 3).6 2.1 Excavation indings in 10. oktobrom 1997.5 Izkopavanja so zajela jugozahodni stolp obzidja, ob njem ležeči prehod v južnem obzidju in majhen del pobočja med platojem utrdbe in teraso pod njim (sl. 3).6 2.1.1 Passage through the southern defence walls 2.1 Izsledki izkopavanj Excavations revealed that the roughly 42 m long southern defence walls were pierced by a passage, located close to the south-west tower (igs. 3, 4).7 he passage does not run fully perpendicularly to the defence walls; its western side lies in the south, 1.8 m from the corner between the southern defence walls and the south-west tower and, in 4 5 6 7 346 Osmuk 1998. Drago Svoljšak (head), Ida Murgelj (drawings), Roman Hribar and ive manual assistants. Supervised by Nada Osmuk, Institute for the Protection of Cultural Heritage, Regional Ofice Nova Gorica. The measuring system of the 1997 excavation was adapted to the course of the defence walls in this part of the fort. The grid was set perpendicularly to the southern defence walls and the reference line set between points x = –4, y = –16 and x = 4, y = 12 of the 1971–1973 coordinate system on the defence walls. The new datum point (T. 0) was set on a line that deviated 130º southwards from the reference line, while it lay 15 m westwards of the point x = –4, y = –16. The excavation area was divided into 4 × 4 m large grid squares. The benchmark was determined at 867 m a.s.l. The passage was included into the description and plan of the Hrušica fort published in 1971 (Leben, Šašel 1971, 94, note 2, ig. 8). In his manuscript description of the whole defence walls (kept in the archives of the Archaeological Department in the National Museum of Slovenia), Peter Petru mentions ‘a 1.8 m wide passage through the defence walls, located 5 metres east of the south-west tower’. The mentioned width does not correspond with the actual width of the passage, also incorrect is its position within the defence walls. According to Thilo Ulbert, who used Brusin’s plan of the fort (adding contour lines and exact locations of the buildings forming the hamlet of Hrušica), the part of the fort to the south of the road leading through it revealed no gates or passages apart from the east and west gates (Ulbert 1981, 18, Beilage 1). As indicated above, Brusin (1959) did not detect the passage in the southern walls, though he did document a similar passage through the northern walls, beside the tower on Listnik, which he included in his plan of the fort and also in his conservation eforts. Traces of a passage in the southern defence walls are also mentioned by N. Osmuk (1998). 2.1.1 Prehod v južnem obzidju Izkopavanja so pokazala, da je bil v okoli 42 m dolgem južnem delu trdnjavskega obzidja vzhodno od jugozahodnega stolpa skozi obzidje speljan prehod (sl. 3, 4).7 V obzidju leži rahlo postrani v smeri SV–JZ, tako da je bil od notranjega vogala stolpa na južni strani odmaknjen 1,8 m, na severni strani pa 1,9 m. Prehod je izviren sestavni del obodnega trdnjavskega obzidja. Na sočasnost gradnje prehoda in obzidja kaže predvsem 5 6 7 Drago Svoljšak (vodja), Ida Murgelj (risba) in Roman Hribar, s pomočjo petih kopačev. Nadzor: Nada Osmuk, ZVKDS, OE Nova Gorica. Merilni sistem izkopnega polja 1997 je bil prilagojen poteku obzidja v tem delu trdnjave. Koordinatna mreža je bila postavljena pravokotno na obzidje. Izhodiščna linija izkopnega polja 1997 je bila črta med točkama x = –4, y = –16 in x = 4, y = 12 koordinatnega sistema 1971–1973 na obzidju. Novo izhodišče (T. 0) je bilo na črti, ki je bila od izhodiščne črte odklonjena za 130º proti jugu. Od točke x = –4, y = –16 je bila odmaknjena za 15 m proti zahodu. Izkopno polje je bilo razdeljeno na kvadrante velikosti 4 × 4 m. Relativne višine so bile merjene s točke 867 m n. m. Prehod so upoštevali v opisu in načrtu hrušiške trdnjave iz leta 1971 (Leben, Šašel 1971, 94, op. 2, sl. 8). Peter Petru v rokopisnem opisu celotnega obzidja (Arhiv AO NMS) prehod omenja: »… v razdalji 5 m vzhodno od JZ stolpa so bila v obzidju 1,8 m široka vrata.« Širina vrat se z dejanskim stanjem ne ujema, netočen je tudi njihov položaj v obzidju. Po mnenju Thila Ulberta, ki je povzel Brusinov načrt trdnjave (in ga dopolnil z izohipsami ter natančno lokacijo stavb hrušiškega zaselka), razen vzhodnih in zahodnih glavnih vrat v predelu trdnjave južno od ceste drugih vrat ni bilo (Ulbert 1981, 18, Beilage 1). Brusin (1959) prehoda v južnem obzidju ni zaznal, zaznal pa je podoben prehod skozi obzidje na severni strani trdnjave, ob stolpu na Listniku, ga tudi vnesel v načrt trdnjave in ga upošteval pri konservaciji obzidja. Sledove prehoda v južnem obzidju omenja tudi N. Osmuk (1998). the north (in the interior of the fort), 1.9 m from the line of the same point. Figure 5. Hrušica (Ad Pirum). Section B–B' showing the exterior side of the passage in the southern defence walls, view from the south. The stones forming the threshold are delimited to the east and the west by a stone set upright in the wall. Defence walls are visible in the west (drawing I. Murgelj). Slika 5. Hrušica (Ad Pirum). Proil B–B' na zunanji strani prehoda v južnem obzidju, pogled z juga. Kamni, ki tvorijo prag, so na vzhodni in zahodni strani zamejeni z navpično postavljenima kamnoma. Na zahodni strani je vidno obzidje (risba I. Murgelj). he passage is an original element of the defence walls. It was built contemporaneously with the defence walls, as indicated by the construction details; the wall was 2.70 m wide in this spot, which corresponds to the average width of the fort’s defence walls.8 he passage is 2.26 m wide. Towards the exterior, a threshold was separately constructed, completely surviving to this day, and aligned with the exterior face of the walls (ig. 4). he loor of the threshold was paved with seven cleft slate slabs of irregular form (measuring from 0.60 × 0.20 m to 0.40 × 0.30 m and roughly 0.12 m thick), while the space between them was illed with smaller slabs so as to make a densely paved surface. he slate slabs were laid onto a roughly 0.20 m thick bedding layer of mortar-bound rubble, which at the same time formed part of the foundation layer of the defence walls laid onto the ragged surface of the bedrock (igs. 5, 7). he threshold terminated at both ends (to the east and the west) at a small lat piece of stone built upright into the wall, determining the width of the passage. he defence walls in this spot stand on solid bedrock levelled with a layer of mortar extending far beyond the ground covered by the defence walls. In the area of the passage, this layer of mortar extended onto the lower-lying stones of the defence walls. Towards the interior, the stones of the passage pavement and its bedding were all but gone. Only two lat stones survived, which indicate the interior threshold of the passage as well as the course of the interior face of the defence walls (igs. 3, 4). he east wall of the passage showed very clear signs of ire damage, in the shape of ine cracks in the stones, which were also observed on the easternmost slab of the exterior threshold. he debris on the exterior of the passage reached to the bedrock. Excavations did not reveal the connection between the passage and the terrace located several metres down the south slope in front of the fort. 2.1.2 South-west tower Similarly as the other most vulnerable points of the defence walls, the south-west corner was additionally fortiied with a tower.9 It was constructed on the highest, exposed 8 9 Cf. Leben, Šašel 1971, 94. Leben and Šašel (1971, 94) saw seven towers (Nos. 1–3 and 5–8) in the defence walls of the Ad Pirum fort, Ulbert (1981, 17–18, igs. 9, 10, 14, app. 1) followed Brusin and wrote of six, while Petru (in his manuscript diary) noted or supposed nine towers. Modern investigations revealed ive towers of the fort’s defence walls, difering considerably in ground plan njegova nesporna gradbena povezanost z obzidnim zidom, ki je tu debel 2,70 m, kar ustreza običajni širini hrušiškega obzidja.8 Prehod je širok 2,26 m. Na zunanji strani je bil v celoti ohranjen njegov prag, ki je bil natančno uravnan z linijo zunanjega lica obodnega zidu obzidja (sl. 4). Tlakovan je bil s sedmimi nivojsko poravnanimi lomljenimi lapornimi ploščami nepravilne oblike (deb. približno 0,12 m, vel. od 0,60 × 0,20 m do 0,40 × 0,30 m). Od tlaka prehoda so se poleg večjih plošč ohranile tudi manjše; skupaj so nekoč sestavljale povsem tlakovano hodno ploskev prehoda. Laporne plošče so bile položene na okoli 0,20 m debel sloj kamenja in malte, ki je bil v bistvu tudi temeljni sloj obzidja, nalit čez vegasto površje žive skale (sl. 5, 7). Na vzhodni in zahodni strani se je prag končal ob pokonci v obzidje vgrajenih manjših ploščatih lomljencih, ki določata širino prehoda. Obzidje tudi v tem delu stoji na trdni in nosilni skalnati osnovi. Temeljni maltni sloj je segal še precej zunaj tlorisa zidu. Na območju prehoda je bila malta razpotegnjena tudi na spodnje kamne zidu obzidja. 8 Prim. Leben, Šašel 1971, 94. Figure 6. Hrušica (Ad Pirum). Section B–B' showing the exterior side of the passage in the southern defence walls, view from the south. The west part of the threshold is shown and to its let the southern defence walls partially covered by a mortar coat (photo D. Svoljšak); cf. igs. 3–5. Slika 6. Hrušica (Ad Pirum). Hrušica (Ad Pirum). Proil B–B' na zunanji strani prehoda v južnem obzidju, pogled z juga. Viden je zahodni del praga in levo od njega južno obzidje, ki je zadaj pokrito z maltnim plaščem (foto D. Svoljšak); prim. sl. 3–5. Figure 7. Hrušica (Ad Pirum). Southwest corner of the defence walls. Section C'–C showing the contemporaneity of the early tower and the defence walls (drawing I. Murgelj); cf. igs. 3 and 8. Slika 7. Hrušica (Ad Pirum). Jugozahodni vogal obzidja. Proil C'–C, povezanost starejšega stolpa z obodnim obzidjem (risba I. Murgelj); prim. sl. 3 in 8. 347 Na notranji strani obzidja so bile temeljne gradbene sestavine prehoda skoraj povsem iztrgane. Ohranila sta se le dva ploščata kamna, ki nakazujeta položaj notranjega praga v prehodu in hkrati tudi potek notranjega lica obzidja (sl. 3, 4). Na vzhodni strani prehoda so bili opazni zelo jasni sledovi gorenja; sledi ognja so bile kot ina razpokanost opazne tudi na najvzhodnejši plošči zunanjega praga prehoda. Na zunanji strani prehoda so ruševine zidu segale do raščenih tal. Izkopavanja niso razkrila, kakšna je bila komunikacija med prehodom in nekaj metrov nižjo teraso na južnem pobočju pred trdnjavo. 2.1.2 Jugozahodni stolp Figure 8. Hrušica (Ad Pirum). South-west corner of the fort. Contact between the early tower (let) and the defence walls (right), top part covered with a mortar coat (photo D. Svoljšak). Slika 8. Hrušica (Ad Pirum). Jugozahodni vogal trdnjave. Vzhodni stik med starejšim stolpom (levo) in obodnim zidom trdnjave (desno), zgoraj maltni plašč (foto D. Svoljšak). spot of this area, known locally as the Šance fallow. It was once separated from the nearby elevation by a shallow saddle, but is now separated by a deep cut of the road towards Bukovje and further on to Postojna, which was constructed by the Italian authorities between World Wars I and II as part of rearranging the communications across the Hrušica Pass.10 he south-west tower aforded a good view of the southern slopes and, together with the tower built at the junction of the western defence walls and the transverse wall across the interior of the fort, as well as complete control over the area in front of the west gates. he excavations revealed two construction phases of the tower. he irst (earlier) tower was built contemporaneously with the defence walls of the fort, which is evidenced by the continuous construction of the two elements; in other words, the wall continues into the tower without a break in construction (igs. 7, 8). he builders of the fort widened the southern walls by 2.70 m in their western end, in the length of 5.15 m, i.e. doubled the width of the walls, and thus created sub-square foundations of the tower, measuring 5.30 × 5.15 m (igs. 3, 9). In the south, the tower reached the point where the plateau of the fort breaks into the slope towards the exterior terrace. he west face of the tower, measuring 5.30 m, continued in a straight line into the west face of the defence walls (ig. 9). he south face of the tower followed the rising surface of the bedrock. Simi- 348 10 and surface area (ig. 2): the south-west tower of two construction phases, the west tower at the junction of the western and the transverse walls, the tower on top of Listnik, the tower in the middle of the transverse wall and the towerbridge above the passage from the lower to the upper fort. Also identiied are two towers lanking the east gate. The existence of a west gate and its fortiication in the area of the Bajc farmstead cannot be conirmed. The excavations of the south-west tower also indicated that the ground plans and building history of all the other visible towers are not as certain as previously thought; the same goes for the junction between the defence walls and the south-eastern and western sections of the barrier walls. Cf. Chapter 4. Jugozahodni vogal trdnjavskega obzidja je bil, tako kot vsa druga v trdnjavskem obroču najobčutljivejša mesta, dodatno utrjen s stolpom.9 Postavljen je bil na najvišje, izpostavljeno mesto južnega trdnjavskega območja, v ljudskem izročilu je to ledina Šance. Od sosednje vzpetine jo je nekoč ločevalo plitvo sedlo, zdaj pa ju loči globok vsek za cesto proti Bukovju oz. Postojni, delo italijanskih oblasti med obema vojnama, ko so preurejali poti v hrušiškem sedlu.10 S tega stolpa so imeli branitelji dober pregled nad južnimi pobočji, skupaj s stolpom na spoju prečnega zidu z zahodnim obodnim obzidjem pa tudi popoln nadzor nad predelom pred zahodnimi vrati trdnjave. Izkopavanja so pokazala dve gradbeni stopnji jugozahodnega stolpa. Prvi (starejši) stolp je bil zgrajen sočasno s celotnim obzidnim obročem trdnjave, kar je bilo prepoznavno v gradbeniški povezanosti obzidnega zidu in stolpa. Stolp je namreč neposredno, brez delitvene reže, izhajal iz obzidnega zidu, tako da sta stolp in obzidje sestavljala enovito vogalno gmoto (sl. 7, 8). Utrjevalci hrušiške trdnjave so južno obzidje na skrajnem zahodnem koncu v dolžini 5,15 m odebelili za eno širino zidu, tj. za 2,70 m, ter tako 9 10 V obzidju trdnjave Ad Pirum je po opisu Lebna in Šašla (1971, 94) sedem stolpov (1–3 in 5–8), Ulbert (1981, 17–18, sl. 9, 10, 14, pril. 1) je sledil Brusinu in jih prepoznal šest, Petru (rokopisni dnevnik) pa jih je videl oz. domneval devet. Njihovi tlorisi in talne površine so različni. V resnici je v obzidju trdnjave Ad Pirum vidnih pet stolpov (sl. 2), in sicer: jugozahodni z dvema gradbenima stopnjama, zahodni na spoju prečnega zidu z obodnim obzidjem, stolp na vrhu Listnika, stolp na sredini prečnega zidu in stolp – mostovž nad prehodom iz spodnje v zgornjo trdnjavo, prišteti pa jim velja še s stolpoma utrjena vzhodna trdnjavska vrata. Nepojasnjeno je vprašanje zahodnih vrat utrdbe, njihove utrjenosti na območju Bajčeve domačije in njej pripadajočega dvorišča. Prav tako so, sodeč po izsledkih izkopavanj jugozahodnega stolpa, negotovi zdaj vidni tlorisi in gradbena zgodovina vseh drugih stolpov v trdnjavskem obzidju. Negotov je tudi spoj trdnjavskega obzidja z jugovzhodnim in zahodnim krakom zapore. Prim. poglavje 4. larly as the whole of the fort, the tower was constructed on ragged karst bedrock and residual loam between its tips (ig. 7). In preparations for construction, this base was irst slightly modiied and then a thick layer of mortar applied onto it. he surface of this layer exceeds that of the tower in almost all places. he foundation mortar also partially covered the bottom course of stones in the faces of the tower; here it was very hard. he layer of mortar along the east face of the tower revealed impressions of cleft wood. Pieces of mortar bearing similar impressions were also found in the debris of the tower along its south face (ig. 12). Figure 9. Hrušica (Ad Pirum). Early tower in the south-west corner of the fort. Sketch of the reconstructed ground plan. Slika 9. Hrušica (Ad Pirum). Starejši stolp v jugozahodnem vogalu trdnjave. Skica rekonstruiranega tlorisa. Figure 10. Hrušica (Ad Pirum). Early tower in the south-west corner of the fort, view towards the north-west. Contact between the early tower and the defence walls, and the part of the early tower not covered by the late tower. East side of the late tower in the background of the photo and the Roman ground surface in the foreground (photo D. Svoljšak); cf. ig. 3. Slika 10. Hrušica (Ad Pirum). Starejši stolp v jugozahodnem vogalu trdnjave, pogled proti severozahodu. Spoj starejšega stolpa z obzidjem in del starejšega stolpa, ki ga ni prekril mlajši stolp. Zadaj je vzhodna stranica mlajšega stolpa, spredaj antična hodna površina (foto D. Svoljšak); prim. sl. 3. he faces of the tower were very carefully and precisely constructed. hey were made of specially selected rough pieces of stones with lat surfaces and rare rounded pieces inserted in between so as to form lat faces. hese faces were preserved no more than three courses high, i.e. to the maximum height of 0.60 m; the state of preservation worsened with the distance from the defence walls (cf. ig. 7). he stones were bound by high-quality lime mortar that included inely crushed bricks. he inill of the core of the foundations was similar to that of the defence walls, i.e. of stones bound by lime mortar. he Roman-period ground surface around the tower consisted of brown loam, mixed with stones, and ragged bedrock. Found on top of it was an easily distinguishable layer of charcoal and patches of blackish and red burnt soil, which indicates a ierce ire (ig. 3). he burnt layers also included bits of mortar. v gmoti zidu ustvarili temelje stolpa, ki ima skoraj pravilen kvadratni tloris in meri 5,30 × 5,15 m (sl. 3, 9). Na južni strani je stolp segal do preloma trdnjavskega platoja v pobočje nad zunanjo teraso, na zahodni strani pa se je njegova stranica, dolga 5,30 m, brez presledka nadaljevala v obodni obrambni zid (sl. 9). Stolp je bil postavljen, tako kot obzidje v celoti, na trdno in nosilno kraško skalno osnovo ali na ilovnato preperino med grebeni žive skale (sl. 7). Južna stranica stolpa je sledila dvigu skalnate osnove. Na nekoliko prirejeno raščeno osnovo je bil najprej nalit obilen prvi sloj malte, skorajda povsod širše od tlorisne zasnove stolpa. Temeljna malta je bila deloma razpotegnjena še na spodnjo lego kamnov v pročelnih licih stolpa. Na teh mestih je bila zelo trda. Ob vzhodni stranici stolpa so bili v temeljnem maltnem nanosu vidni odtisi klanega lesa. Kosi malte s podobnimi odtisi lesa so bili tudi v ruševini stolpa ob njegovi južni steni (sl. 12). 349 Navpična lica stolpa so bila grajena skrbno in natančno. Neobdelano, a praviloma namenoma odbrano oglato lomljeno kamenje, redkeje tudi oblo, je bilo vanje vgrajeno tako, da so bile zunanje ploskve gladke. Ohranjene so bile največ tri lege, to je do višine 0,60 m; stopnja ohranjenosti je ponehavala z odmikom od obzidja (prim. sl. 7). Kakovostni apneni malti, uporabljeni za gradnjo stolpa, so bili primešani drobci zdrobljene opeke. Figure 11. Hrušica (Ad Pirum). Southwest corner of the later tower in the foreground (A), part of the west side of the early tower in the background (B) and the mortar coat at the top of the photo (C) (photo D. Svoljšak); cf. ig. 3. Slika 11. Hrušica (Ad Pirum). V ospredju je jugozahodni vogal mlajšega stolpa (A), zadaj del zahodne stranice starejšega stolpa (B) in na vrhu fotograije maltni plašč (C) (foto D. Svoljšak); prim. sl. 3. Notranjost temeljev stolpa je bila enaka kot polnilo obzidja, tj. zapolnjena s kamenjem, trdno vezanim z apneno malto. Na rimskodobni hodni površini okoli stolpa so bile vidne izrazita plast oglja ter črnikaste in rdeče prežgane lise zemlje na rjavi ilovnati, s kamni pomešani osnovi med grebeni žive skale, kar kaže na sledi močnega požara (sl. 3). V prežganih plasteh so bili drobci malte. Kamnito-maltne ruševine zunaj tlorisa kvadratnega stolpa so se ohranile le tik ob obodu stolpa; bile so zelo rahle in puhle, na kamnih so bile sigaste tvorbe. Večina najdb, tudi novčnih, je bila prav na ožgani površini ob stolpu in v enakem okolju na pobočju južno od stolpa. Beyond the square ground plan of the tower, the debris of the tower only survived along the edges of the tower; the layer of stone and mortar was soft and porous, with sinter formations on the stones. Most inds, including coins, were recovered from the burnt surface along the tower and from the burnt surface on the slope south of the tower. During his conservation, Brusin did not detect this phase of the tower;11 he followed the highest-preserved edge of the defence walls and only noticed the late phase. He had most of its ruins levelled across the slope south of the tower (ig. 17). he Roman military strategists replaced the square tower that had been destroyed in ire by a new one of a diferent ground plan and hence of a diferent position within the defence walls. In preparations for the construction of new tower, the old one was pulled down to its foundations (ig. 3). In the south and east, it was not covered over by the new tower and the roughly 0.60 m high remains served as a small retaining wall above the slope. he remains of the old tower that were covered by the new tower were then reinforced by an up to 0.07 m thick layer of pure mortar (ig. 13). A small part of the new tower was built directly on the adapted ragged bedrock and residual loam between its tips. he foundation layer of mortar at places reaches 350 11 Brusin 1959, 43. Brusin med obnovo obzidja tega stolpa ni odkril;11 sledil je namreč najvišje ohranjenemu robu obzidja in tako zaznal le mlajši stolp. Večino njegovih ruševin je poravnal na pobočju južno od stolpa (sl. 17). V požaru uničeni kvadratni stolp so rimski strategi nadomestili z novim, vendar drugačnega tlorisa in zato tudi drugačne umestitve v obzidje. Pogoreli stolp so v pripravah za gradnjo novega porušili do temeljev (sl. 3); na južni in vzhodni strani, kjer mlajši stolp ni prekril starejšega, je njegov okoli 0,60 m visoki ostanek postal oporni zidek nad pobočjem. V delu, kjer so novi stolp postavili na ostanke starega, so te utrdili z do 0,07 m debelim prelivom čiste malte (sl. 13). Na vseh drugih delih, kjer je bil novi stolp zunaj tlorisa starega, je bil postavljen na prirejena trdna in nosilna skalnata tla oziroma na ilovnato preperino med grebeni žive skale. Spodnji, temeljni maltni nanos je ponekod segal čez robove tlorisa stolpa. Lica stolpa so zgrajena iz lomljenih in na zunanji strani poravnanih kamnov, povezanih z malto; ta je bila v fugah razpotegnjena čez njihove robove in deloma po licih kamnov (sl. 14). Jugovzhodno in severozahodno lice stolpa sta bila komaj opazno nagnjena navznoter. Novi stolp je bil v tlorisu nepravilno poligonalen (sl. 3, 15). Štiri njegove stranice, ki so bile zunaj obodnega obzidja, so merile 5,30 m (južna), 4,10 m (jugovzhohodna), 4,10 m (severozahodna) in 3,20 m (severna). Domnevna peta (severovzhodna) stranica je ostala neodkrita pod Brusinovim 11 Brusin 1959, 43. beyond the edges of the tower. he faces were made up of broken pieces of stone with lat sides forming a lat face of the wall; the stones were bound by mortar that was thickly applied so as to cover over the edges and sometimes even the whole faces of the stones (ig. 14). he south-eastern and north-western faces of the new tower were, barely visibly, inclined towards the interior. he new tower is irregularly polygonal in ground plan (igs. 3, 15). Four of its faces project from the defence walls and measure 5.30 m (southern), 4.10 m (south-eastern), 4.10 m (north-western) and 3.20 m (northern). he imaginary ifth (north-eastern) face remained undetected under Brusin’s mortar coat.12 his face would be 4.90 m wide if measured from the points where it touched the defence walls. In the south, the wall of the new tower began at the contact of the defence walls and the east face of the irst tower (igs. 3, 10, 15). his also ensured that the same distance between the new tower and the passage that continued to be in use. he foundations for the tower’s south face mostly consisted of the walls of the irst tower and extended beyond its remains in only a short section. Other faces of the tower did not follow the contours of the irst tower. he south and west faces joined at an almost right angle and formed a tip that projected far from the defence walls towards the southwestern edge of the fort’s plateau. he north tower face met the defence walls at the north-west corner of the irst tower. he distance between the outer corners of the second tower thus measured 5.70 m, which was also the maximum width of the tower. he distance between the projecting tip and the centre of the imaginary ifth face measured 8.20 m. Two shallow round pits were dug through the layer of mortar along the south wall of the tower, located roughly 0.40 m apart and measuring an average of 0.16 m in diameter (ig. 13). he core of the investigated part of the tower was illed with layers of stones and mortar in such a way that a layer of stones was completely covered with a layer of mortar, which was followed by another layer of stones and so forth. he mortar used in the construction of the second tower contained no crushed bricks. he debris of the second tower has not survived; it was removed by Brusin and with it also any possible small inds connected with this tower. 2.1.3 East section in the extension to the excavated area he trial trench (l. 4 m, w. 1 m) placed in the exterior of the passage through the defence walls was extended to include 12 Wherever showing a good state of preservation, Brusin's mortar coat has not been removed. Figure 12. Hrušica (Ad Pirum). Impressions of clet wood in the lime mortar pieces in the debris of the earlier tower (photo D. Svoljšak). Slika 12. Hrušica (Ad Pirum). Odtisi klanega lesa na kosih apnene malte v ruševinah starejšega stolpa (foto. D. Svoljšak). maltnim plaščem.12 Ta stranica bi med mestoma, kjer je bil stolp navezan na obzidje, merila 4,90 m. Na južni strani je stolp izhajal iz spoja obzidja z vzhodno stranico prvega stolpa (sl. 3, 10, 15). Na ta način so graditelji ohranili enak odmik stolpa od tudi takrat očitno še vedno uporabljanega prehoda v obzidju. Južno lice stolpa je večji del temeljilo na jedru prvega stolpa in je le v kratkem delu izstopalo iz njegovega okvira. Druga pročelja stolpa pa s prvim stolpom niso imela nobene povezave. Južno in zahodno pročelje sta v skoraj pravokotnem spoju tvorila konico stolpa, ki je štrlela daleč iz obzidja proti jugozahodnemu robu trdnjavskega platoja. Severno pročelje stolpa se je na obzidje navezovalo tam, kjer je bil severozahodni vogal prvega stolpa. Razdalja med zunanjima vogaloma je znašala 5,70 m, kar je bila največja širina stolpa. Razdalja med izstopajočim vogalom in sredino navidezne pete stranice je znašala 8,20 m. Skozi maltni naliv ob južni steni stolpa sta bili okoli 0,40 m vsaksebi vkopani plitvi okrogli jami (premer okoli 0,16 m; sl. 13). 12 Na mestih, kjer je bil Brusinov maltni plašč še dobro ohranjen, ga namreč med izkopavanji nismo odstranili. Figure 13. Hrušica (Ad Pirum). Excavations at the south-west corner of the defence walls, view towards the northwest. A layer of mortar covering the remains of the early tower core, onto which the south-east wall of the late tower was built. The mortar layer beside the east wall of the later tower revealed two round and shallow depressions, measuring roughly 0.16 m across (photo D. Svoljšak); cf. ig. 3. Slika 13. Hrušica (Ad Pirum). Izkopavanja jugozahodnega vogala obzidja. Pogled proti severozahodu. Preliv malte čez ostanke jedra starejšega stolpa in nanj postavljena jugovzhodna stena mlajšega stolpa. V maltnem prelivu ob vzhodni steni mlajšega stolpa sta vidni plitvi okrogli jami premera okoli 0,16 m (foto D. Svoljšak); prim. sl. 3. 351 Figure 14. Hrušica (Ad Pirum). Excavations at the south-west corner of the defence walls, view towards the northeast. Exterior of the northwest corner: defence walls conserved with mortar (A), exterior face of the defence walls (B), west side of the late tower (C), low wall in the foreground (D) (photo D. Svoljšak); cf. igs. 3 and 18 as well as the description in paragraph 2.1. Slika 14. Hrušica (Ad Pirum). Izkopavanja jugozahodnega vogala obzidja. Pogled proti severovzhodu. Zunanja stran severozahodnega vogala: z malto konservirano obodno obzidje (A), zunanje lice rimskega obodnega obzidja (B), zahodna stranica mlajšega stolpa (C), spredaj zidec (D) (foto D. Svoljšak); prim. sl. 3 in 18 ter opis v poglavju 2.1. Figure 15. Hrušica (Ad Pirum). Excavations at the southwest corner of the defence walls. Sketch showing the reconstructed ground plan of the late tower and the defence walls with the passage. Slika 15. Hrušica (Ad Pirum). Izkopavanja jugozahodnega vogala obzidja. Skica rekonstrukcije tlorisa mlajšega stolpa in obzidja s prehodom. Notranjost odkopanega dela stolpa je zapolnjena s sloji kamenja in malte. Sloji malte so bili naliti v takšni debelini, da so v celoti prekrili spodnjo plast kamenja. Vanjo je bila nato naložena nova plast kamenja. V malti, ki so jo uporabljali za gradnjo stolpa, ni zdrobljene opeke. Ruševine drugega stolpa niso bile več ohranjene; odstranil jih je Brusin, z njimi pa tudi morebitne s stolpom povezane drobne najdbe. 2.1.3 Vzhodni proil v razširitvi izkopnega polja the edge of the fort’s plateau towards the terrace on the southern slope that was protected by a wall. his extension was not part of the original conservation plan and could thus not be excavated in its entirety. It was thus not possible to establish the connection between the layers on the slope and the defence walls in the area of the passage, nor was it possible to establish the nature of the transition between the fort’s plateau and the lower terrace. It was only possible to document a small part of the section in the trench (ig. 17). he debris along the defence walls was already removed by Brusin, who had it removed onto the slope, while also levelling the terrain along the defence walls. he section (ig. 3: A–A1; ig. 17) of the gently falling slope revealed four layers: 352 1. Layer of turf and humus, up to 0.35 m thick. It contained a dense network of roots of shrubs and small trees (hawthorn) that hedge the southern edge of the fort’s plateau. he humus was soft and blackish. 2. Layer of Roman-period debris, up to 0.50 m thick. It consisted predominantly of small stone pieces, but also lime mortar, mostly in a crumbling state with rare small hardened lumps, and scattered broken and variously sized pieces of stone. 3. Layer of grey earth with blackish bits. Crushed mortar and small pieces of stone were mixed with the earth at the top. Close to the passage, 0.40 m below the level of the Na zunanji strani prehoda skozi obzidje je bil izkop s sondo (dol. 4 m, šir. 1 m) razširjen čez rob trdnjavskega platoja proti z zidom varovani terasi na južnem pobočju Hrušice. Ta del raziskave je presegal konservatorski načrt, zato sonda ni bila izkopana do konca, tako da ni bila odkrita povezava med plastmi na pobočju in obzidjem ob prehodu, niti ni bilo ugotovljeno, kakšen je bil iztek trdnjavskega platoja v spodnjo teraso. Dokumentirali smo le manjši del proila (sl. 17). Neposredno ob obzidju je ruševine odstranil že Brusin, jih odrinil na pobočje in teren ob obzidju na zunanji strani zravnal. V proilu (sl. 3: A–A1; sl. 17) so bile v blago padajočemu pobočju berljive štiri plasti: 1. Humus z rušo, debelina do 0,35 m. Plast je bila gosto preprežena s koreninami grmovja in drevja (glog), ki kot živa meja obrašča južni rob trdnjavskega platoja. Humus je bil rahel, črnikast. 2. Sloj rimskodobnih ruševin, debelina do 0,50 m. V njem so bili apnena malta, po večini v razsutem stanju ali pa v manjših zatrdelih kepah, razmetano lomljeno kamenje različnih velikosti, predvsem pa kamniti drobir. 3. Plast sive zemlje s črnikastimi delci. Na redko sta ji bila po vrhu primešana zdrobljena malta in kamnit drobir. V tej plasti je bila blizu prehoda v obzidju, 0,40 m pod nivojem praga prehoda, lisa, ki je vsebovala oglje in rdeče prežgano zemljo. V tej plasti je bilo več novcev.13 4. Dno proila je bilo po večini na živi skali ali na rjavi ilovnati preperini med grebeni skale. 13 Prim. Katalog, Novčne najdbe št. 1–14. passage threshold, the layer included a patch of charcoal and red burnt earth. he layer yielded several coins.13 4. he bottom of the section was mostly ragged bedrock, as well as residual loam between its tips. he debris layer (2) was formed when Brusin removed the debris that covered the surviving defence walls and used it to level the area in front of the walls. he archaeological record has thus only been preserved in Layer 3, which represents the slope humus of the Roman-period ground. Near the defence walls and the passage, this layer revealed traces of the ire that had destroyed the early tower. 2.1.4 Pit beside the western defence wall he area in front of the defence walls, where the northwestern face of the second tower meets the defence walls, revealed a pit dug into the ragged bedrock and residual loam ig. 18: C). he pit (measuring 0.80 × 1.55 m) was dug roughly perpendicularly to the defence walls. Its lower part was adapted to the bedrock that sloped towards the north. he bedrock showed traces of ire, but also revealed some Roman-period mortar left unused during the construction of the tower. he upper edge of the pit had a 0.25 m high drywall lining of a single course of stones. It was covered by Brusin’s mortar coat that reached to the bedrock in this area. he pit only contained modern-period rubbish, comprising pottery sherds, iron nails and an iron mount. 2.2 Discussion and conclusion he investigations in the area of the south-western corner of the Ad Pirum fort after 1979 revealed two chronologically separate fortiication interventions: the irst one involves the construction of the defence walls, the passage through the southern defence walls and the square tower built in the south-western corner, while the second phase is represented by the projecting later tower of an irregularly pentagonal ground plan. he passage, positioned close to the square corner tower, enabled communication between the interior of the fort and the terrace to the south, where the fort was additionally fortiied by a 1.5 thick wall. It begins, together with the main barrier wall running in a south-easterly direction, at the south-east corner of the fort and continues towards the south-west along the edge of a small artiicially levelled terrace. Currently, it ends after 40 metres, but must once have reached to the slopes of the elevation located opposite the fort and thus blocked the access to the Hrušica Pass from the south. 13 Cf. Catalogue, Coin inds Nos. 1–14. Plast ruševin (2) je nastala, ko je Brusin odstranil ruševine, s katerimi je bil prekrit ohranjeni del obzidja, in z njimi poravnal zunanji predel ob obzidju. Pravi arheološki zapis je tako le 3. plast, ki je v bistvu pobočni humus rimskodobne hodne površine; v tej plasti so blizu obzidja in prehoda skozenj ohranjene sledi požara, ki je uničil starejši stolp. 2.1.4 Jama ob zahodnem zidu obzidja Na mestu, kjer se je severozahodno pročelje mlajšega stolpa spojilo z obzidjem, je bila na njegovi zunanji strani v preperelo raščeno skalo in zemljeno polnilo med njenimi rebri vkopana jama pravokotne oblike (sl. 18: C), ki je vzdolž obzidja merila 0,80 m, pribl. pravokotno nanj pa 1,55 m. Dno jame je bilo prilagojeno na severno stran močno nagnjeni skalni osnovi, ki je kazala sledove ognja. Na skalnati osnovi ob jami je bilo nekaj rimskodobne, pri gradnji stolpa neuporabljene malte. Vrhnji rob jame je bil ograjen s suhozidno obrobo, široko 0,25 m, z eno samo lego kamnov. Čeznjo je segal Brusinov maltni plašč, ki je v tem delu segal vse do skalnate osnove griča. V jami so bile le novodobne smeti: lončene črepinje, železni žeblji in železen okov. Figure 16. Hrušica (Ad Pirum). Southwestern part of the late tower in the foreground (A) and part of the west side of the early tower in the background (B); mortar coat at the top of the photo (C) (photo D. Svoljšak). Slika 16. Hrušica (Ad Pirum). Jugozahodni del mlajšega stolpa (spredaj, A) in del zahodne stranice starejšega stolpa (zadaj, B); na vrhu fotograije maltni plašč (C) (foto D. Svoljšak). Figure 17. Hrušica (Ad Pirum). East section A–A' in the extended trench across the slope between the plateau of the fort and the lower terrace (cf. ig. 3). 1 turf and humus; 2 Roman-period debris; 3 grey earth with a patch containing charcoal and red burnt earth; 4 bedrock and residual loam (photo D. Svoljšak). Slika 17. Hrušica (Ad Pirum). Vzhodni proil A–A' v razširjenem izkopu pobočja med platojem utrdbe in spodnjo teraso (prim. sl. 3). 1 humus z rušo; 2 rimskodobne ruševine; 3 siva zemlja z liso, ki je vsebovala oglje in rdeče prežgano zemljo; 4 živa skala in ilovnata preperina (foto D. Svoljšak). 2.2 Diskusija in sklep Raziskovanje utrjenosti jugozahodnega vogala trdnjave Ad Pirum na Hrušici je razkrilo dva časovno ločena grad- 353 Figure 18. Hrušica (Ad Pirum). South-west corner of the defence walls, view roughly towards the east. Debris of the defence walls with a mortar coat in the background (A), face of the western defence walls in the foreground to the let (B) and a pit in front of it (C), west side of the late tower in the foreground to the right (D), bedrock in the foreground (E) and on it a heap of mortar (F) (photo D. Svoljšak); cf. ig. 3. Slika 18. Hrušica (Ad Pirum). Jugozahodni vogal obzidja, pogled približno proti vzhodu. Zadaj ruševine obzidja z maltnim plaščem (A), levo spredaj lice zahodnega zidu obzidja (B) in jama pred njim (C), desno spredaj zahodna stranica mlajšega stolpa (D), spredaj živa skala (E) in kup malte (F) na njej (foto D. Svoljšak); prim. sl. 3. Figure 19. Hrušica (Ad Pirum). 1–19 small inds unearthed during the excavations at the south-west corner of the fort; 20 small hobnail from the trial trench excavated to the west of the fort. 13, 18 glass, 14 bronze, 16 bronze and iron, 15 lead, rest iron. Scale = 1: 2 (drawing I. Murgelj). Slika 19. Hrušica (Ad Pirum). 1–19 najdbe z izkopavanj jugozahodnega stolpa trdnjave; 20 žebljiček s sondiranja zahodno od trdnjave. 13, 18 steklo, 14 bron, 16 bron in železo, 15 svinec, drugo železo. M = 1: 2 (risba I. Murgelj). he passage is very similar to the one through the northern part of the defence walls, at the highest point of the fort (ig. 2), next to a tower that is also square in ground plan. he latter passage enabled access to the barrier wall running from the top of the hill of Listnik towards the northwest, irst down into the valley, today occupied by a forest path leading towards Črni vrh, and then towards the slopes of Javorjev grič, where it ends. he tower atop Listnik was the focal point of the Ad Pirum fort in terms of visual control; it enabled the garrison to control the whole barrier system around the Hrušica Pass and the access roads to the fort, both from the Vipava Valley and from Ljubljana, and aforded an unimpeded view over the vast forests of the Hrušica plateau and further to the south. he tower in the south-western corner of the fort was also positioned with visual control in mind; it stands on the highest point of the lower fort, which enabled control over the area along the southern defence walls, over the pass in front of the west entrance gates, but also over the area along the auxiliary barrier wall leading towards the south-west that included a pair of gate towers guarding an important Roman auxiliary road.14 he earlier tower, of a square ground plan, was constructed together with the defence walls. Its faces were well built and the core illed with rubble bound by layers of mortar. 14 354 In the Hrušica area, this minor road branched of the main road from Aquileia across Ad Pirum to Emona. Its route and signiicance was described by Peter Petru (Petru 1977; Petru 1980–1981). bena posega: v prvega sodijo skupaj s celotnim obzidnim obročem pozidan južni obodni zid, prehod v njem in iz obzidja v jugozahodnem vogalu izpeljan kvadratni stolp, v drugega pa iz obzidja štrleč stolp nepravilnega štiri(pet) straničnega tlorisa. Prehod skozi obzidje tik ob kvadratnem vogalnem stolpu je omogočal komunikacijo med trdnjavo in teraso južno od nje, kjer je bil trdnjavski kompleks dodatno zavarovan z okoli 1,5 m debelim zidom. Ta zid se začenja skupaj z glavno jugovzhodno zaporo v JV vogalu trdnjave in je speljan proti jugozahodu po robu manjše umetno poravnane terase. Zdaj je že po 40 metrih iztrgan, nekoč pa je verjetno segal do pobočja nasproti trdnjave ležečega griča in tako zapiral dostop na hrušiško sedlo z južne strani. Prehod v južnem delu trdnjavskega obzidja je v vsem podoben prehodu na severni in hkrati najvišji točki trdnjave (sl. 2), ob stolpu prav tako kvadratnega tlorisa. Skozi ta prehod je bil možen dostop do zidane zapore, ki z vrha Listnika teče proti severozahodu, najprej v dolino, kjer je zdaj gozdna cesta v smeri proti Črnemu Vrhu, nato pa v pobočja Javorjevega griča, kjer se konča. Stolp na vrhu Listnika je bil v razglednem žarišču trdnjave Ad Pirum: od tu je trdnjavska posadka lahko nadzirala ves zaporni sistem okoli sedla, občutljive dele cestne trase na pristopih v trdnjavo iz Vipavske doline in tudi iz Ljubljanske kotline ter imela neoviran pregled nad obsežnim področjem hrušiških gozdov daleč na jug. Stolp v jugozahodnem vogalu trdnjave pa je stal na najvišji točki spodnje trdnjave, od ko- Its construction, at least in the foundations, used wooden scafolding (of cleft boards), the impressions of which have been preserved in the mortar. he tower was damaged in a ierce ire. Its traces are clearly visible on the Roman ground surface around the tower both in the interior and even more so in the exterior of the fort, more precisely in the area of the passage and on the slope below the tower. hese traces also provide indirect evidence of a wooden superstructure of the tower, but also of wooden elements built into the passage. he ire damaged the early tower to an extent that the defenders of the Hrušica Pass were forced to pull it down almost to the ground and built a new one in its place. A large part of the debris of the ire-damaged tower was removed by the builders of the new tower and probably a smaller part much later by Brusin; the undisturbed debris only survived along the somewhat better preserved southern and eastern walls, as well as on the nearby ground surface. he early tower, built contemporaneously and as a constituent part of the defence walls, was later replaced with a newly-built tower of an irregularly polygonal ground plan. Its tip projected far from the line of the defence walls, to the very edge of the fort’s south plateau. his is a considerable architectonic alteration, which can only be understood in the sense of changed tactics and strategy of fortiication, in other words, in the sense of a new military and fortiication doctrine of the Roman army, aimed at ensuring a more efective defence of the fort and control over its surroundings. he construction of the two towers is chronologically determined primarily by coin inds. In their exact indspots, the coins can be divided into two groups. he irst consists of coins found beside the tower, on a former ground surface with very clear signs of ire damage, covered by the debris of the early tower (Catalogue Nos. 1, 2, 4, 5). he second group comprises coins found close to one another in a layer of blackish earth, also with clear signs of a ire (Layer 3 in the east section), in the extension of the trench across the south slope below the fort (Cat. Nos. 3, 6–12, 14). he irst group consists of four coins from the period of Constantine II (Cat. Nos. 1, 2) and Magnentius (Cat. Nos. 4, 5). he second group predominantly consists of coins from the period of Valentinian I and Valens (Cat. Nos. 6–12, 14), with a single exception being a coin of Constantius II (Cat. No. 3). Apart from the location, the coins also form two groups according to the time and the emperor under which they were minted. One group consists of coins minted between 335/336 and 354 (Cat. Nos. 1–5) and the other of coins of Valentinian and Valens, minted between 364/367 and 375 (Cat. Nos. 6–14). der je bilo mogoče nadzorovati prostor ob južnem obzidju trdnjave in sedlo pred zahodnimi vrati trdnjave, prav tako pa tudi dogajanje ob pomožni zapori proti jugozahodu, ki je vključevala vratna stolpa, skozi katera je vodila pomembna rimska stranska cesta.14 Starejši stolp, ki je imel kvadratni tloris, je bil izpeljan iz obzidja. Lica so bila zelo kakovostno grajena, notranjost pa je bila zapolnjena s kamenjem, trdno povezanim s prelivi malte. Vsaj pri gradnji temeljnega predela stolpa so uporabili opaž iz klanega lesa (deske), katerega sledovi so se ohranili v malti. Stolp je bil poškodovan v močnem požaru; njegovi sledovi so bili jasno vidni na rimski hodni površini okoli stolpa znotraj in še bolj intenzivno zunaj trdnjavskega obzidja – ob prehodu v obzidju in na pobočju pod stolpom. Izrazite sledi požara posredno izpričujejo leseno nadgradnjo stolpa, pa tudi lesene dele, ki so bili vgrajeni v prehod. Požar je stolp prizadel v tolikšni meri, da so ga bili branitelji hrušiškega prelaza primorani porušiti skoraj do tal in na njegovem mestu postaviti novega. Večji del ruševin v požaru poškodovanega stolpa so odstranili že graditelji novega stolpa, nekaj malega za njimi pa morda še Brusin; nedotaknjene ruševine so se ohranile le tik ob malo višje ohranjenih južni in vzhodni steni ter na njima bližnji hodni površini. Arheološki izvid je jasen. V JZ vogalu trdnjave je bil najprej, sočasno in skupaj z obzidnim obročem, zgrajen stolp kvadratnega tlorisa; uničil ga je močen požar. Nadomestili so ga s čisto novim stolpom z nepravilno poligonalnim (petstraničnim) tlorisom, ki ni več sledil izvirnim linijam poteka obzidja. Konica stolpa je bila namreč iz nekdanjega obzidnega vogala izpahnjena daleč navzven, nad rob južnega trdnjavskega platoja. To je bila občutna arhitektonska sprememba, ki je razložljiva edinole s taktično-strateškimi spremembami načina utrjevanja, tj. novo vojaško-fortiikacijsko doktrino rimske vojske, ki naj bi omogočila učinkovitejše branjenje trdnjave in nadzor nad njeno okolico. Gre torej za dva dogodka, ki jima čas odmerjajo predvsem novci. Po njihovi legi jih lahko razdelimo v dve skupini. V prvo skupino sodijo novci, ki so bili najdeni ob stolpu, na nekdanji hodni površini z zelo zgovornimi sledovi ognja, prekriti z ruševinami stolpa (katalog št. 1, 2, 4, 5). V drugo skupino pa sodijo novci, ki so ležali skupaj v črnikasti zemlji z zelo jasnimi sledovi požara (3. plast v vzhodnem proilu izkopa) v razširjenem izkopu na južnem pobočju pod trdnjavo (kat. št. 3, 6–12, 14). V prvi skupini so štirje novci iz obdobja Konstantina II. (kat. št. 1, 2) in Magnencija (kat. št. 4, 5). V drugi skupini prevladujejo novci iz obdobja Valentinijana I. in Valensa (kat. št. 6–12, 14), izjema je le novec Konstancija II. (kat. št. 3). 14 Na območju Hrušice se je odcepila od itinerarske ceste Aquileia–Ad Pirum–Emona. Njen potek in pomen je opisal P. Petru (Petru 1977; Petru 1980–1981). 355 Razen po lokaciji, ki je naključna, se novci razvrščajo v dve skupini glede na čas kovanja in vladarsko pripadnost. V eni skupini so zastopani novci, kovani med leti 335/336 in 354 (kat. št. 1–5), v drugi pa Valentinijanovi in Valensovi novci, kovani med 364/367 in 375 (kat. št. 6–14). Prvo skupino novcev si lahko predstavljamo kot zapuščino bitke med Konstancijem II. in Magnencijem leta 352, katere središčni spopad je bil prav na Hrušici.15 V tem spopadu je utrdbo branil Magnencij, Konstancij II. pa jo je z obkolitvenim manevrom osvojil. Takrat bi lahko bil požgan starejši jugozahodni stolp. Novci druge skupine so bili, razen enega, najdeni skupaj in bi zato lahko bili del zaklada, zakopanega 375 ali kmalu po tem v nevarnosti, ki je pretila alpskim zaporam in utrdbi Ad Pirum.16 Vendar se zdi verjetneje, da so ti novci povezani z obnovo jugozahodnega stolpa utrdbe Ad Pirum v valentinijanskem času. Tloris novega stolpa namreč kaže na dobo Valentinijana I.17 Med redkimi drobnimi najdbami so mali železni žebljički (sl. 19: 1–12), morda okovni žebljički podplatov obuval rimskih vojakov. Figure 20. Hrušica (Ad Pirum). Sketch of the excavations at the western defence walls now occupied by the Bajc farmstead (Podkraj 101). The igure shows the position of the trenches from 1989, 1990 and 1993 (in red) with marked course of the defence walls, in blue where established and with broken lines where supposed. Slika 20. Hrušica (Ad Pirum). Skica izkopavanj na območju zahodnega obzidja oz. Bajčeve domačije (Podkraj 101). Položaj izkopnih polj 1989, 1990 in 1993 z označenim ugotovljenim (modro) in domnevnim (črtkano) potekom obzidja ter lego proilov (rdeče). he irst group can be interpreted as the remains of the battle between Constantius II and Magnentius in 352, the main confrontation of which took place on Hrušica.15 It was Magnentius who defended the fort and Constantius II who inally conquered it by besieging manoeuvres. his might also represent the event that resulted in the irst tower being burnt down. he coins of the second group were, all but one, found close together and could possibly be seen as part of a hoard buried in 375 or soon afterwards, during the time the Alpine barrier system and the Ad Pirum fort came under great threat.16 However, the ground plan of the new tower points to the period of Valentinian I, and it is thus more probable that this group of coins is connected with the renovation of this tower during the Valentinian period.17 Apart from coins, the rare small inds further include small iron nails (ig. 19: 1–12), possibly the hobnails of the Roman soldiers’ shoes. he indings of the excavations in the fort at Hrušica in 1971–1973 and even more so in 1975–1979,18 on the north side of the Roman (and modern) road revealed extensive construction activities that can be related to the renovations of the fort during the second half of the 4th century. Odkritja z izkopavanj na Hrušici v letih 1971–1973 in še posebej v letih 1975–197918 na severni strani rimske (in sedanje) ceste so opozorila na obsežno gradbeno dejavnost, ki jo lahko povežemo z obnovitvenimi deli v trdnjavi v drugi polovici 4. stoletja. Na to kažeta takrat odkriti veliki apnenici in vzdolž trase rimske ceste, pred vzhodnimi vrati utrdbe odkrita obsežna gmota pripravljene, vendar ne do kraja uporabljene apnene malte. Ena apnenica je bila umeščena v opuščeno cisterno z okoli 35 m³ prostornine v ohranjenem delu, druga v opuščen lesen objekt. Že med izkopavanji so bila ta odkritja opredeljena kot pričevanja o temeljiti obnovi in popravilu obzidja ne glede na dotedanjo pozidanost v utrdbi. Poudariti velja opustitev cisterne, ki je v hrušiškem brezvodju eden od ključnih objektov preživetja. P. Petru je cisterno datiral na začetek 3. stoletja,19 obe apnenici pa v zadnja desetletja 4. stoletja.20 3 Raziskovanja na območju zahodnega obzidja v letih 1989–1993 Zdaj viden obzidni obroč trdnjave Ad Pirum samo na zahodni strani ni sklenjen. Prekinjen je v dolžini okoli 73,50 m, med štrcljem južno od stolpa na stičišču prečnega zidu in obodnega obzidja ter med kratkim ohranjenim delom 15 15 16 17 18 356 Šašel 1971a, 24–26; Šašel 1971b. Cf. Šašel 1971a, 27. Cf. Rabold 2005, 194. Excavation reports were regularly published by Peter Petru (1972; 1973; 1974a; 1974b; 1975a; 1975b; 1977; 1980–1981; 1981a; 1981b). 16 17 18 19 20 Šašel 1971a, 24–26; Šašel 1971b. Prim. Šašel 1971a, 27. Prim. Rabold 2005, 194. O izkopavanjih je redno poročal Peter Petru (1972; 1973; 1974a; 1974b; 1975a; 1975b; 1977; 1980–1981; 1981a; 1981b). Petru 1977, 221. Petru 1981a, 270. his is indicated by the inds of two large lime kilns and a great mass of prepared, but not used lime mortar found along the Roman road, in front of the east gate of the fort. One lime kiln was set up in an abandoned cistern, measuring roughly 35 m³ in the surviving part, while the second lime kiln was set up in an abandoned wooden building. Already during excavations, these inds were interpreted as evidence of major renovation of the defence walls, which did not take into account the buildings in the fort’s interior. Of further importance is the abandonment of a cistern, i.e. a key element of survival in the waterless area of the Hrušica Pass. Peter Petru dated the cistern to the beginning of the 3rd century19 and both lime kilns into the last decades of the 4th century.20 3 Excavations in the area of the western defence walls from 1989 to 1993 he now visible defence walls of the Ad Pirum fort only show a gap in their western side. he gap is roughly 73.50 m long; it begins south of the west tower positioned at the junction between the defence walls and the transverse wall across the fort and ends just short of the south-west tower of the fort. In this section, the houses of the small hamlet of Hrušica now stand: the Lanthieri hunting manor with stables south of the road, the modern inn of Stara pošta and the Bajc farmstead with outhouses north of the road. he investigations in this area comprised several rescue archaeological excavations and watching briefs during earth and construction works, entrusted to the Archaeological Department at the National Museum of Slovenia (ig. 2). he investigations in the summer of 1989 involved documenting the construction pit for a cellar that had been dug next to the west wall of the house of A. Bajc (Podkraj 101), measuring 6 × 4 m (igs. 2, 20).21 he east and south sections of the pit were cleaned and documented (igs. 21, 22), which showed that the west wall of the Bajc house stood on the levelled defence walls of the Roman fort.22 he defence walls have particularly massive foundations in this area, such as were not observed elsewhere (Trenches 4, 11, 14, 19 and the area beside the south-west tower). he foundations here are 0.82 m high, projecting substantially from the face of the wall and take the form of a solid block 19 20 21 22 Petru 1977, 221. Petru 1981a, 270. Even prior to the arrival of the team of archaeologists from the National Museum of Slovenia, the excavated material and the pit itself were examined by a well-known collector of archaeological inds, with the aid of a metal detector. According to the members of the Bajc family, the examination proved unsuccessful. The same source also revealed that this collector did ind, on the same day, 31 Roman coins and a pendant in the shape of a bird on a ield east of their house. These inds originated from the earth that had been removed during the 1975 and 1979 archaeological excavations and strewn across the said ield. Svoljšak 1990; Svoljšak 1997a, 240–241. severno od jugozahodnega stolpa trdnjave. V tem odseku so na obzidje postavili stavbe malega zaselka v Hrušici: južno od ceste Lanthierijev lovski dvorec s hlevom, sedanje gostišče Stara pošta, severno od ceste pa Bajčevo domačijo s pomožnimi objekti. Arheološki oddelek Narodnega muzeja Slovenije je po naročilu Zavoda za varstvo kulturne dediščine Slovenije, OE Nova Gorica izvedel na tem območju (sl. 2) več zaščitnih arheoloških izkopavanj in nadzorov ob zemeljskih in gradbenih delih. Poleti 1989 je bilo ob zahodni steni stanovanjske hiše A. Bajca (Podkraj 101) dokumentirano stanje v že izkopani, 6 × 4 m veliki gradbeni jami za klet (sl. 2, 20).21 Urejena in dokumentirana sta bila vzhodni in južni proil izkopa (sl. 21, 22), ki kažeta, da zahodna stena Bajčeve hiše temelji na poravnanem zahodnem obzidju rimske utrdbe.22 Tam ima obzidje rimske trdnjave posebej izdaten temelj, kakršnega na drugih mestih, kjer je bilo obzidje raziskano do temeljev (sonde 4, 11, 14, 19 in območje ob jugozahodnem stolpu), ni bilo. Temelj se v tem delu obzidja izkazuje kot masiven, kar 0,82 m visok in iz fronte obzidja vidno izstopajoč blok zelo trdne mešanice apnene malte in kamenja; postavljen je bil na razgibano skalno osnovo, kar je pri hrušiškem obzidju dosledno upoštevana gradbeniška norma. Masivnost temeljev obzidja v tem delu nakazuje, da so tu morda bila zahodna trdnjavska vrata, ki sta jih, podobno kot vzhodna vrata, varovala stolpa. Takemu temelju ustrezajoča bi bila v tem delu zahodnega obzidja ugotovljena debelina zidu, ki znaša 2,96 m. Od zidu sta bili pod Bajčevo domačijo ohranjeni še dve legi (viš. 0,30 m), tako da je bil tam zid skupaj visok 1,10 m. 21 22 Še pred prihodom arheološke ekipe NMS je izkopano zemljo in tudi izkop z detektorjem pregledal vsem dobro znani zbiralec arheoloških najdb, vendar, po pripovedovanju Bajčevih, brez uspeha. Na njivi vzhodno od hiše pa je, prav tako po pripovedovanju Bajčevih, tistega dne našel 31 rimskih novcev in obesek v obliki ptice. Te najdbe so bile iz izkopane zemlje, ki je bila prepeljana na njivo po izkopavanjih med 1975 in 1979. Svoljšak 1990; Svoljšak 1997a, 240–241. Figure 21. Hrušica (Ad Pirum). South section in the trench excavated in 1989, view towards the south. 1 surface of the courtyard; 2–3 layers connected with construction activities for the Bajc house at Podkraj 101; 4 levelled debris of the Roman-period defence walls mixed with contemporary objects; 5 layer of mortar from the time of the defence walls construction; 6 sandy and greasy earth mixed with bone remains from the period prior to the construction of the defence walls, former ground surface; 7 limestone bedrock and residual loam; 8 bottom two courses of the western defence walls under the Bajc house; 9 west face of the Bajc house; 10 foundations of the western defence walls. Slika 21. Hrušica (Ad Pirum). Južni proil izkopnega polja leta 1989, pogled proti jugu. 1 nasutje dvorišča; 2–3 plasti, povezani z gradnjo Bajčeve hiše (Podkraj 101); 4 poravnane ruševine rimskodobnega obzidja s primešanimi sočasnimi predmeti; 5 plast malte iz obdobja gradnje zahodnega trdnjavskega obzidja; 6 peskovita mastna zemlja s primešanimi kostmi iz obdobja pred gradnjo obzidja, nekdanja hodna površina; 7 geološka osnova – apnenčeva skala in ilovnata preperina; 8 spodnji legi zahodnega obzidja pod Bajčevo domačijo; 9 fasada zahodne stene Bajčeve domačije; 10 temelji zahodnega obzidja rimske trdnjave. 357 Figure 22. Hrušica (Ad Pirum). East section in the trench excavated in 1989, view towards the east. The west wall of the Bajc house (9) is built on top of the western defence walls (8) with foundations (10) (photo D. Svoljšak). Slika 22. Hrušica (Ad Pirum). Vzhodni proil izkopnega polja leta 1989, pogled proti vzhodu. Pod zahodno fasado Bajčeve domačije (9) je zahodno obzidje rimske trdnjave (8) in njegovi temelji (10) (foto D. Svoljšak). Figure 23. Hrušica (Ad Pirum). Excavations beside the Bajc house in 1990, view towards the south. The western defence walls of the Roman fort served as foundations of the west wall of the Bajc house (photo D. Svoljšak). Slika 23. Hrušica (Ad Pirum). Izkopavanja ob Bajčevi domačiji leta 1990, pogled proti jugu. Zahodno obzidje rimske trdnjave, na katerem temelji zahodna stena Bajčeve hiše (foto D. Svoljšak). Figure 24. Hrušica (Ad Pirum). Section of the defence walls in the trench from 1993. 1 Roman defence walls; 2 bedrock; 3a–b Roman-period humus or ground surface; 4 debris of mortar and stones; 5 modern-period lime kiln; 6 humus surface layer (drawing I. Murgelj). Slika 24. Hrušica (Ad Pirum). Presek čez obzidje v izkopu leta 1993. 1 rimsko obzidje; 2 geološka osnova; 3a–b antični humus oz. hodna površina; 4 maltno kamnita ruševina; 5 recentna apnena jama; 6 humusno površje (risba I. Murgelj). 22 of lime mortar and stones. hey were laid onto the ragged bedrock, which is the building standard for the whole defence walls of the fort. hese massive foundations indicate the superstructure of the west gates, protected by a pair of gate towers, similarly as in the case of the east gates. Appropriate for such foundations is the width of the western defence walls, measuring 2.96 m in this part. Of this wall, two courses (h. 0.30 m) have been preserved under the Bajc house, which makes the stone structure here measure a total of 1.10 m in height. In June 1990, the same house was the site of a watching brief conducted during the excavation of a construction pit (measuring 6.70 × 8.70 m) for a garage and stable. he excavation uncovered a 4.4 m long section of the western defence walls of the Roman fort (igs. 2, 20, 23). he wall measured 2.7 m in width in the north part and 2.96 m in the south part and survived up to 0.52 m high. It was laid onto the ragged bedrock with residual loam between its tips, jutting up to 0.60 m from the loam and incorporated into the foundations of the walls. he west face of the wall, composed of small pieces of stone and mortar, was well preserved, the mortar in the gaps smoothed. he east face, of small pieces of stone and mortar, was poorly preserved and damaged in numerous places by recent cuts. he south part of the excavation pit showed that the west wall of the Bajc house is built on top of the defence walls, while the northern part revealed a slight westward deviation in the course of the defence walls.23 In 1993, the Bajc family undertook to levelling a 4.70 m wide area north of the garage and stable, so as to improve access to their house, and, in doing so, removed a 4.50 m long section of the western defence walls. he section of the defence walls uncovered in the north part of the levelled area was documented (ig. 24).24 he renovation of the Stara pošta inn (Podkraj 100, former Lanthieri Manor) involved a watching brief, conducted on 27 June 1992, of the construction work in the interior of the building and along its east face, where a stable once 23 24 Junija 1990 je bil nadzorovan izkop gradbene jame (vel. 6,70 × 8,70 m) za garažo in hlev ob isti hiši in ob tem je bil odkrit 4,4 m dolg odsek zahodnega obzidja rimske trdnjave (sl. 2, 20, 23). Na severni strani je bilo široko 2,7 m, na južni 2,96 m; ohranjeno je bilo do 0,52 m visoko. Postavljeno je bilo na ilovnati mrtvici in grebenih žive skale, ki do 0,6 m štrlijo iz mrtvice in so vključeni v temelje obzidja. Zahodno lice, zgrajeno iz manjših lomljencev in malte, je bilo dobro ohranjeno, fuge so bile zaglajene, vzhodno lice pa so recentni vkopi na več mestih iztrgali ali poškodovali. Na južni strani izkopa je bilo vidno, da na obzidju temelji zahodna stran Bajčeve hiše, v severnem delu pa je bila vidna sprememba poteka obzidja rahlo proti zahodu.23 Severno od garaže oz. hleva so Bajčevi leta 1993, da bi si olajšali dovoz, v širini 4,70 m poravnali del zemljišča in pri tem odstranili 4,50 m dolg del zahodnega obzidja rimske trdnjave. Na severni strani poravnave je bil dokumentiran tam nastali presek obzidja (sl. 24).24 Med obnovo gostišča Stara pošta (Podkraj št. 100, nekdaj Lanthierijev dvorec) smo 27. junija 1992 bdeli nad gradbenimi posegi v notranjosti stavbe in ob njenem vzhodnem pročelju, kjer je nekoč stal hlev.25 Poleg novoveških struktur so takrat bili odkriti zelo borni sledovi zahodnega obzidja rimske trdnjave, ki so se kazali kot malta na skalnati osnovi. Obzidje je bilo odstranjeno že pri gradnji dvorca, ker se je tu živa skala strmo dvigovala proti JZ vogalu trdnjave.26 Od zahodnega obzidja rimske trdnjave tako ostaja neraziskan še predel pred Bajčevo domačijo, pod sedanjo cesto ter južno od gostišča Stara pošta, prav do vidnega dela 23 24 23 358 24 Svoljšak 1997a, 241–242, sl. 16. Svoljšak 1997a, 242. 25 26 Svoljšak 1997a, 241–242, sl. 16. Svoljšak 1997a, 242. Svoljšak 1997b, 239, sl. 13. Svoljšak 1997b. stood.25 he works revealed modern-age remains, but also scarce remains of the western defence walls of the fort, which took the form of mortar traces on the bedrock. he western defence walls had already been removed during the construction of the manor, because the bedrock in this area rose steeply toward the south-west corner of the fort.26 he only non-investigated parts of the gap in the western defence walls are those in front of the Bajc house, under the modern road and the part south of the inn reaching to the visible defence walls. he latter area held, until recently, a modern outhouse with a cistern (ig. 2). 4 Trench across the road to the west of the fort, 1996 he preparations for modernization and asphalt paving of the road from Podkraj to Kalce, leading across Hrušica, involved excavating trial trenches across the said road in the area to the west of the fort’s western defence walls (igs. 2, 25). his investigation was conducted in 1996 at the incentive of Nada Osmuk of the regional oice of the Institute for the Protection of Cultural Heritage in Nova Gorica. he position of the trench at the crossing of the Col–Kalce and Bukovje–Črni vrh roads was determined in collaboration with the operator (SGP Primorje from Ajdovščina) and its works manager (Mr Krašna), but also following a discussion with Lojze Plesničar (Podkraj 82A) and Marija Bajc (Podkraj 101), both locals who were familiar with the former situation in the area and who remembered the accounts of the late Franc Bajc (Podkraj 101). he decisive factor in positioning the trench was the information that the current shape of the crossroads dates to the years between 1935 and 1937. At that time, the Italians modernized the crossroads and adapted it to the new communications and military needs along the Rapal border; this involved considerable alterations of the terrain in the west access to the Ad Pirum fort. A very deep cut was made into the slope between the plateau of the fort and the neighbouring hill (902 m a.s.l.) and the level of the former road from Hrušica southward towards Bukovje was considerably lowered, while the removed earth and stones was transferred onto the slope, making it considerably gentler and creating a vast plateau for the new crossroads, which was then connected with the road northwards to Črni vrh by way of an embankment. he newly formed depression now holds Bajc’s ield (lot no. 330, cadastral community Podkraj). he slope, down which children once sledged into the valley was thus made lat. his, however, also meant that the access to the Roman fort from the west was originally (in Roman times) as steep and diicult as that in the east (ig. 26). he only 25 26 Svoljšak 1997b, 239, ig. 13. Svoljšak 1997b. obzidja severno jugozahodnem stolpu. V tem delu je do nedavnega stal recenten pomožni objekt s cisterno (sl. 2). 4 Sonda čez cesto zahodno od trdnjave (1996) V okviru priprav na posodobitev in asfaltiranje ceste Podkraj–Kalce čez Hrušico je bila na predlog Nade Osmuk (ZVKDS OE Nova Gorica) zahodno od zahodnega obzidja rimskodobne trdnjave na Hrušici leta 1996 izkopana kontrolna sonda čez obstoječo cesto (sl. 2, 25). Položaj sonde v križišču cest Col–Kalce in Bukovje–Črni Vrh je bil dogovorjen z izvajalcem del (SGP Primorje iz Ajdovščine) in tamkajšnjim vodjem del (g. Krašna) ter po posvetu z domačinoma, Lojzetom Plesničarjem (Podkraj 82A) in Bajčevo mamo (Marija Bajc, Podkraj 101), ki sta poznala nekdanje razmere na tem mestu in sta se pri tem opirala še na spomine že pokojnega Bajčevega očeta (Franc Bajc, Podkraj 101). Temeljno napotilo za umestitev sonde je bil podatek, da je križišče v sedanji podobi nastalo v letih 1935–1937. Takrat so namreč Italijani križišče posodobili in ga prilagodili novim prometnim in vojaškim potrebam ob rapalski meji; s tem posegom so temeljito preoblikovali površje na zahodni pristopni strani v utrdbo Ad Pirum. Z globokim vsekom v pobočje so med trdnjavskim platojem in sosednjim gričem (kota 902 m) občutno znižali nivo nekdanje poti od Hrušice na jug proti Bukovju, z izkopano zemljino in kamenjem pa so poravnali dotedanje pobočje in klanec zahodno od trdnjave in ustvarili obsežen plato za novo križišče, ki so ga z utrjenim nasipom navezali še s potjo na sever proti Črnemu Vrhu. V novo nastali vrtači je zdaj Bajčeva njiva (parc. št. 330, k. o. Podkraj). Dotedanji klanec, po katerem so se otroci, kot je pripovedovala Bajčeva mama, sankali v dolino, je bil s temi posegi poravnan. Vse dotlej, torej tudi v rimski dobi, je bil pristop na sedlo s trdnjavo Ad Pirum z zahodne strani podobno strm in naporen, kot je to na vzhodni strani (sl. 26). Od cestne trase pred letom 1937 in še starejših je na južnem robu vrtače z njivo še viden okoli 1,20 m širok okrajek.27 27 Tam je zdaj nameščena obvestilna tabla o obstoju rimskodobne ceste. Figure 25. Hrušica (Ad Pirum). Position of the trench in the crossroads to the west of the fort. 1 road towards Kalce; 2 road towards Bukovje; 3 road towards Col constructed between 1935 and 1937 and abandoned in 1996; 4 road towards Col in use since 1996; 5 road towards Črni Vrh (adapted from: PISO portal, Prostorski informacijski sistem občine Ajdovščina). Slika 25. Hrušica (Ad Pirum). Položaj sonde v križišču zahodno od trdnjave. 1 cesta proti Kalcam; 2 cesta proti Bukovju; 3 med letoma 1935 in 1937 zgrajena cesta proti Colu, opuščena 1996; 4 cesta proti Colu od 1996 dalje; 5 cesta proti Črnemu Vrhu (podlaga: PISO portal, Prostorski informacijski sistem občine Ajdovščina). 359 Figure 26. Sketch of the position of the Ad Pirum fort within the Hrušica Pass, as revealed by the trial trenching in the crossroads to the west of the fort. Slika 26. Skica umestitve trdnjave Ad Pirum v hrušiško sedlo, kot jo kažejo rezultati sondiranj v križišču zahodno od trdnjave. remains of the old road, from before 1937, are a 1.20 m wide road edge on the southern fringes of the depression.27 Sonda je bila kot sestavni del cestarskih gradbenih opravil strojno izkopana v križišču cest Kalce–Col in Črni Vrh– Bukovje, 48 m zahodno od zahodnega obzidja rimske trdnjave (sl. 2, 25). V teren je bila umeščena približno v smeri sever–jug. Sprva je bila dolga 5,50 m, široka 2 m (v tem delu je bil dokumentiran tudi njen zahodni proil), nato pa je bila podaljšana proti jugu v križišče še za 3 metre. Zaradi časovne stiske cestnega podjetja arheološki zapisi v podaljšku sonde niso bili dokumentirani. Sonda je na severni strani segala v južno pobočje »vrtače« z njivo. Pokazala je, da je pod vozno površino leta 1996 še makadamske ceste iz Podkraja v Hrušico in dalje proti Kalcam več starejših cestišč. As part of road construction works, the trench was machine excavated at the crossing of the Kalce–Col and Črni vrh–Bukovje roads, i.e. 48 m west of the fort’s western defence walls (igs. 2, 25). It had a roughly north-southerly orientation. It was initially 5.50 m long and 2 m wide (a section was documented in this part), but was later extended further three metres towards the south. Due to time pressure on the part of the road menders, the archaeological record in the extension could not be documented. he trench was cut into the north slope of the depression and showed that the earth under the road from Podkraj to Hrušica and further to Kalce, still of gravel in 1996, held several earlier roads. Plasti v zahodnem podolžnem proilu sonde so razvidne iz sl. 27 in 28. Najstarejše cestišče (C1) tvorita deseta (10) in šesta (6) plast, prva kot tamponska izravnava nad skalnato osnovo, druga kot vozno nasutje. To je deloma že zdrsnilo po blagem prvotnem pobočju. Na njegovi zgornji ploskvi sta videti dve plitvi vdolbini, najverjetneje kolesnici. Osna razdalja med njima znaša 1,50 m. Glede na uporabo mivke v cestnem nasutju (obilno so jo Rimljani uporabili severno od ceste v notranjosti utrdbe za izravnavo vrtače) 28 in zaradi dvojice predmetov (rimska lončena črepinja29 in žebljiček; sl. 19: 20) v tamponski izravnavi smo to cestišče opredelili kot rimskodobno. Skupna debelina cestnega ustroja je znašala do 0,70 m. he west section of the layers in the trench is shown on igs. 27 and 28. he earliest road (C1) is represented by Layers 10 and 6, the former as bedding above the bedrock and the latter as the surface layer. he latter partially slid down the gentle original slope. Two shallow depressions were observed on its surface, most probably ruts, revealing 1.50 m of distance between axles. Based on the use of sand in the surface layer (Romans used it extensively to level a sinkhole in the interior of the fort) 28 and on two small inds (Roman pottery shard29 and a small hobnail; ig. 19: 20) in the bedding, this road is dated to the Roman period. he total thickness of the road measured up to 0.70 m. Za cesto C2 je bil na rimsko cestišče nasut izravnalni tampon (plast 4A), nanj pa sloj drobnega ostrorobega, zaradi uporabe trdo zbitega apnenčevega grušča (plast 4), ki se je na površju zaradi obrabe zdrobil v apneni prah (plast 3). To je bila vozna ploskev. Ustroj ceste C2 je bil debel od 0,10 m do 0,40 m. Rob cestišča je bil odkrit le na severni strani. Tamponska izravnava (plast 4A), v kateri so bili tudi koščki lesnega oglja, je segala čez obseg cestišča, po pobočju. Primes koščkov rdeče žgane opeke v obeh plasteh ceste C2 kaže na sočasnost nasipanja. Prostorsko se ta cesta ujema z rimsko cesto (C1). Za časovno opredelitev C2 ni druge opore kot njen stratigrafski položaj, ki jasno kaže, da je mlajša od rimske ceste C1. he construction of Road C2 involved irst covering the previous road with bedding (Layer 4A) and then a layer of ine-grained and sharp-edged limestone gravel (Layer 4), compacted and, also through use, transformed into lime dust towards the top (Layer 3). he latter also represented the road surface. Road C2 measured between 0.10 and 0.40 m in thickness. he edge of the road was only detected on 27 28 360 29 An information panel on the existence of a Roman-period road has been set up there. The 1975–1979 excavations revealed a depression to the north of the road leading throught the Ad Pirum fort, with its ill including a thick layer of pure river sand, which was ascribed a levelling, but primarily a iltering function (Petru 1977, 221). The shard was not preserved. Tretjo cesto (C3) tvori le eno, 0,11 m debelo nasutje ostrorobega grušča in drobljenega kamenja (plast 2). Njegova vrhnja ploskev je bila popolnoma ravna. S to cesto je povezana zidana pobočna opora iz neobdelanega lomljenega kamenja in malte (plast 7). Postavljena je bila na trdna skalna tla in deloma v tamponsko izravnavo (plast 4A) za cestišče C2. Maltno vezivo je bilo večinoma izprano, tako da je bil sloj malte naložen na zunanji strani škarpe (plast 7A). 28 29 V vrtači severno od ceste skozi trdnjavo Ad Pirum je bila med izkopavanji v letih 1975–1979 odkrita debela plast čiste rečne mivke, pripisana pa ji je bila, ob izravnalni, predvsem iltracijska funkcija (Petru 1977, 221). Odlomka nismo shranili. the north side. he bedding (Layer 4A), which revealed pieces of wood charcoal, extended beyond the width of the road surface and down the slope. he inclusion of pieces of red ired bricks in both layers of Road C2 indicates their contemporaneity. Spatially, this road corresponds with Road C1, which through stratigraphic sequence also ofers the only clue as to its date – Road C2 is later than the Roman Road C1. he third road (C3) consists of a single, 0.11 m thick layer of sharp-edged gravel and pieces of stone (Layer 2). Its surface was completely lat. Connected to this road is a retaining wall of mortar-bound unworked stones (Layer 7). he wall was laid onto the bedrock and partly onto the bedding for Road C2 (Layer 4A). he mortar was mostly washed down the wall, creating a layer of mortar on the exterior face of the retaining wall (Layer 7A). he penultimate, i.e. fourth road (C4), was built between 1935 and 1937 and did not follow the course of the Roman road, but rather ran farther to the south. Its bedding consisted of a thick layer of stones (Layer 1), which raised the level of the road for roughly 1.50 m. he road towards Podkraj that was built between 1935 and 1937 remained in use until 1996. It was abandoned due to the installation of a gas pipeline and communication was again arranged along the course of the Roman road.30 his latest road, as well as the crossroads to the west of the fort, was surfaced with asphalt. Prior to the Italian intervention, the situation on the west side of the fort was very similar to the one on the east side (ig. 26). he road to the fort, located in the pass and on the slopes above it, led across a rather long and steep slope crowned and controlled by the western defence walls with towers located at the junction with the transverse wall and at the south-west tower. his was shown by a trench excavated in a single day. he indings clearly refute the previously held opinion of the vulnerability of the fort’s west gates. Translation: Andreja Maver Language editing: Terry Troy Jackson 30 At that time, a rock with an engraved modern-period inscription was removed from the side of the road below the hamlet of Mlake (roughly a kilometre west of Hrušica). The inscription is poorly legible and includes two lines; the irst one reads (A?)NNO 1691 and the second one AN .... E... (N?) E. The inscription was transferred to the Stara pošta inn and placed in front of the museum room arranged in the inn. Predzadnje, to je četrto cestišče (C4), je bilo zgrajeno med 1935 in 1937. Ni bilo speljano po trasi rimske ceste, temveč precej bolj proti jugu. Urejeno je bilo na debelem sloju kamenja (plast 1), s katerim je bil nivo ceste dvignjen za okoli 1,50 m. Med 1935 in 1937 zgrajeno cestišče proti Podkraju je bilo v uporabi do leta 1996. Zaradi napeljave plinovoda je bilo to cestišče zahodno od križišča opuščeno, urejena in asfaltirana pa je bila cesta po trasi nekdanje rimske ceste.30 Z asfaltom je bilo prekrito tudi križišče, ki leži zahodno ob rimski utrdbi. Tako je nastalo najmlajše cestišče. Pred italijansko prenovo križišča so bile torej razmere na zahodni strani rimske utrdbe v Hrušici zelo podobne tistim na vzhodni strani (sl. 26). Do trdnjave, ki je stala v sedlu in na pobočjih nad njim, je bila tudi na zahodni strani cesta speljana po precej dolgem in napetem klancu, nad katerim je kraljevalo in ga obvladovalo zahodno trdnjavsko obzidje s stolpoma na spoju s prečnim zidom in v jugozahodnem vogalu. To je pokazala na hitro, v enem samem dnevu strojno izkopana sonda, in tako ovrgla do tedaj prevladujoče mnenje o ranljivosti zahodnih trdnjavskih vrat. 30 Takrat so z roba ceste pod zaselkom Mlake (pribl. 1 km zahodno od Hrušice) umaknili v skalo vsekan dvovrstični novoveški napis, ki je slabo berljiv. V prvi vrstici razberemo (A?)NNO 1691, v drugi vrstici pa AN .... E... (N?) E. Napis so prenesli h gostilni Stara pošta, pred vhod v tamkajšnjo muzejsko sobo. Figure 27. Hrušica (Ad Pirum). West section in the trench in the crossroads west of the fort. 1A humus and turf; 1 stones; 2 sharp-edged gravel and grey earth; 3 ine-grained lime sand; 4A bedding; 4 layer of ine-grained, sharp-edged and compacted limestone gravel; 5 lime; 6 sand of various grain sizes; 7 wall of mortar-bound unworked broken pieces of stone; 7A weathered mortar; 8 residual loam; 9 bedrock; 10 bedding, stone cobbles and small broken pieces of stone, sand and earth (drawing I. Murgelj). Slika 27. Hrušica (Ad Pirum). Zahodni proil sonde v križišču zahodno od trdnjave. 1A humus in ruša; 1 kamenje; 2 ostrorobi kamniti grušč in siva zemlja; 3 droben apneni pesek; 4A izravnalni tampon; 4 plast drobnega ostrorobega in trdo zbitega apnenčevega grušča; 5 apno; 6 mešanica mivke in peska; 7 zid iz neobdelanega lomljenega kamenja in malte; 7A preperela malta; 8 ilovnata preperina; 9 geološka osnova (skala); 10 tamponska izravnava, kamnite oblice in manjše lomljeno kamenje, mivka in zemlja (risba I. Murgelj). Figure 28. Hrušica (Ad Pirum). Part (southern third) of the west section in the trench at the crossroads to the west of the fort (photo T. Lauko); cf. ig. 27. Slika 28. Hrušica (Ad Pirum). Del (južna tretjina) zahodnega proila sonde v križišču zahodno od trdnjave (foto T. Lauko); prim. sl. 27. 361 CATALOGUE KATALOG Catalogue of coins (identiied by Andrej Šemrov).1 Katalog novcev (opredelitev Andrej Šemrov).1 1. Bronze coin. Well preserved. Found in the stone and mortar debris just above the burnt surface in Grid Sq. 4, x = 1.30, y = –5.50, z = –0.79. 12 September 1997. Field No. 2. Cen, Constantinus I (Constantinus II), 336–337, Aq, RIC 140. Weight 1.14 g. Inv. No. LJ 26332. 2. Bronze coin. Very well preserved. Found in the stone and mortar debris just above the burnt surface in Grid Sq. 4, x = 1.27, y = –6.70, z = –0.94. 12 November 1997. Field No. 14. Cen, Delmatius, 335–336, Sis, RIC 256. Weight 1.14 g. Inv. No. LJ 26396. 3. Bronze coin. Very well preserved. Found in the layer of earth mixed with mortar in Grid Sq. 4, x = 0.35, y = –6.40, z = –1.44. 3 October 1997. Field No. 23. AE 2, Constantius II (Constantius Gallus), 351–354, Sis, RIC 337. Weight 3.17 g. Inv. No. LJ 26397. 4. Bronze coin. Very well preserved. Found in the stone and mortar debris just above the burnt surface in Grid Sq. 4, x = 1.10, y = –5.30, z = –0.94. 12 November 1997. Field No. 9. AE 2, Magnentius, 350–351, Aq, RIC 148. Weight 5.13 g. Inv. No. LJ 26330. 5. Bronze coin. Well preserved. Found in the stone and mortar debris in Grid Sq. 4, x = 1.55, y = –4.80, z = –0.87. 12 November 1997. Field No. 4. AE 2, Magnentius, 351–352, Aq, RIC 173. Weight 4.56 g. Inv. No. LJ 26331. 6. Bronze coin. Well preserved. Found in the layer of earth mixed with mortar in Grid Sq. 4, x = 0.30, y = –6.80, z = –1.35. 3 October 1997. Field No. 19. AE 3, Valentinianus I, 367–375, Aq, RIC 11a xvi (a). Weight 1.66 g. Inv. No. Inv. No. LJ 26399. 7. Bronze coin. Well preserved. Found in the layer of earth mixed with mortar in Grid Sq. 2, x = – 0.10, y = –7.00, z = –1.45. 3 October 1997. Field No. 27. AE 3, Valentinianus I, 367–375, Sis, RIC 14a x. Weight 1.42 g. Inv. No. LJ 26411. 8. Bronze coin. Worn. Found in the layer of earth mixed with mortar in Grid Sq. 4, x = 0.30, y = –6.80, z = –1.35. 3 October 1997. Field No. 18. AE 3, Valentinianus I, 364–367, Tes, RIC 18a i. Weight 1.49 g. Inv. No. LJ 26402. 9. Bronze coin. Well preserved. Found in the layer of earth mixed with mortar in Grid Sq. 4, x = 0.30, y = –6.80, z = –1.35. 3 October 1997. Field No. 20. AE 3, Valentinianus I, 364–367, Tes, RIC 26a xvii. Weight 2.56 g. Inv. No. LJ 26400. 10. Bronze coin. Well preserved. Found in the layer of earth mixed with mortar in Grid Sq. 2, x = –0.10, y = –7.15, z = –1.45. 10 October 1997. Field No. 25. AE 3, Valentinianus I, 364–375, RIC ?. Type Gloria Romanorum. Weight 1.25 g. Inv. No. LJ 26409. 11. Bronze coin, fragmented. Found in the black layer of earth and mortar in Grid Sq. 2, x = –0.10, y = –7.15, z = –1.45. 10 October 1997. Field No. 26. AE 3, Valens, 364–367, Aq, RIC 7a ii (a). Weight 1.06 g. Inv. No. LJ 26410. 12. Bronze coin. Worn. Found in the layer of earth mixed with mortar in Grid Sq. 4, x = 0.30, y = –6.80, z = –1.35. 3 October 1997. Field No. 21. AE 3, Valens, 367–375, Aq, RIC 12b xvi (a; b). Weight 2.09 g. Inv. No. LJ 26401. 13. Bronze coin. Well preserved. Found in the debris of stones and mortar in Grid Sq. 6, x = 4.20, y = –7.60, z = –0.89. 12 1. Bronast novec. Dobro ohranjen. V kamnito-maltni ruševini tik nad ožgano površino, 4. kv., x = 1,30, y = –5,50, z = –0,79. 12. 09. 1997. Ter. št. 2. Cen, Constantinus I (Constantinus II), 336–337, Aq, RIC 140. Teža 1,14 g. Inv. št. LJ 26332. 2. Bronast novec. Zelo lepo ohranjen. V kamnito-maltni ruševini nad prežgano površino, 4. kv., x = 1,27, y = –6,70, z = –0,94. 12. 11. 1997. Ter. št. 14. Cen, Delmatius, 335–336, Sis, RIC 256. Teža 1,14 g. Inv. št. LJ 26396. 3. Bronast novec. Zelo lepo ohranjen. V plasti zemlje pomešane z malto, 4. kv., x = 0,35, y = –6,40, z = –1,44. 03. 10. 1997. Ter. št. 23. AE 2, Constantius II (Constantius Gallus) , 351–354, Sis, RIC 337. Teža 3,17 g. Inv. št. LJ 26397. 4. Bronast novec. Zelo lepo ohranjen. V kamnito maltniruševini, nad prežgano površino, 4. kv., x = 1,10, y = –5,30, z = –0,94. 12. 11. 1997. Ter. št. 9. AE 2, Magnentius, 350–351, Aq, RIC 148. Teža 5,13 g. Inv. št. LJ 26330. 5. Bronast novec. Dobro ohranjen. V kamnito-maltni ruševini, 4. kv., x = 1,55, y = –4,80, z = –0,87. 12. 11. 1997. Ter. št. 4. AE 2, Magnentius, 351–352, Aq, RIC 173. Teža 4,56 g. Inv. št. LJ 26331. 6. Bronast novec. Dobro ohranjen. V plast zemlje pomešane z malto, 4. kv., x = 0,30, y = –6,80, z = –1,35. 03. 10. 1997. Ter. št. 19. AE 3, Valentinianus I, 367–375, Aq, RIC 11a xvi (a). Teža 1,66 g. Inv. št. Inv. št. LJ 26399. 7. Bronast novec. Dobro ohranjen. V plasti zemlje pomešane z malto, 2. kv., x = – 0,10, y = –7,00, z = –1,45. 03. 10. 1997. Ter. št. 27. AE 3, Valentinianus I, 367–375, Sis, RIC 14a x. Teža 1,42 g. Inv. št. LJ 26411. 8. Bronast novec. Izrabljen. V plasti zemlje pomešane z malto, 4. kv., x = 0,30, y = –6,80, z = –1,35. 03. 10. 1997. Ter. št. 18. AE 3, Valentinianus I, 364–367, Tes, RIC 18a i. Teža 1,49 g. Inv. št. LJ 26402. 9. Bronast novec. Dobro ohranjen. V plasti zemlje pomešane z malto, 4. kv., x = 0,30, y = –6,80, z = –1,35. 03. 10. 1997. Ter. št. 20. AE 3, Valentinianus I, 364–367, Tes, RIC 26a xvii. Teža 2,56 g. Inv. št. LJ 26400. 10. Bronast novec. Dobro ohranjen. V plasti zemlje pomešane z malto, 2. kv., x = –0,10, y = –7,15, z = –1,45. 10. 10. 1997. Ter. št. 25. AE 3, Valentinianus I, 364–375, RIC ?. Tip Gloria Romanorum. Teža 1,25 g. Inv. št. LJ 26409. 11. Bronast novec, fragmentiran. V črni zemljeno-maltni plasti, 2. kv., x = –0,10, y = –7,15, z = –1,45. 10. 10. 1997. Ter. št. 26. AE 3, Valens, 364–367, Aq, RIC 7a ii (a). Teža 1,06 g. Inv. št. LJ 26410. 12. Bronast novec. Izrabljen. V plasti zemlje, pomešani z malto, 4. kv., x = 0,30, y = –6,80, z = –1,35. 03. 10. 1997. Ter. št. 21. AE 3, Valens, 367–375, Aq, RIC 12b xvi (a; b). Teža 2,09 g. Inv. št. LJ 26401. 13. Bronast novec. Dobro ohranjen. V kamnito-maltni ruševini, 6. kv., x = 4,20, y = –7,60, z = –0,89. 12. 09. 1997. Ter. št. 3. AE 3, Valens, 364–367, Sis, RIC 7b ii. Teža 2,46 g. Inv. št. LJ 26333. 14. Bronast novec. Zelo lepo ohranjen. V plasti zemlje, pomešani z malto, tik nad živo skalo, 4. kv., x = 0,30, y = –7,00, z = –1,39. 03. 10. 1997. Ter. št. 22. AE 3, Valens, 367–375, Sis, RIC 15b xlvi (a). Teža 2,29 g. Inv. št. LJ 26398. 1 362 All coins are kept in the Coin Cabinet at the National Museum of Slovenia. 1 Vse novce hrani Numizmatični kabinet Narodnega muzeja Slovenije. September 1997. Field No. 3. AE 3, Valens, 364–367, Sis, RIC 7b ii. Weight 2.46 g. Inv. No. LJ 26333. 14. Bronze coin. Very well preserved. Found in the layer of earth mixed with mortar, immediately above the bedrock in Grid Sq. 4, x = 0.30, y = –7.00, z = –1.39. 3 October 1997. Field No. 22. AE 3, Valens, 367–375, Sis, RIC 15b xlvi (a). Weight 2.29 g. Inv. No. LJ 26398. Catalogue of other small inds2 Figure 19. Excavations at the south-west tower 1. Iron hob nail. Surv. l. 1 cm. Inv. No. R 26628. Found in the layer of blackish earth with mortar remains. 2. Iron hob nail. Surv. l. 1 cm. Inv. No. R 26629. Found in the layer of blackish earth with mortar remains. 3. Iron hob nail. Surv. l. 1.4 cm. Inv. No. R 26619. Found in the debris of stones and mortar. 4. Iron hob nail. Surv. l. 1.4 cm. Inv. No. R 26622. Found in the debris of stones and mortar. 5. Iron hob nail. Surv. l. 1.05 cm. Inv. No. R 26618. Found in the debris of stones and mortar. 6. Iron hob nail. Surv. l. 1.2 cm. Inv. No. R 26626. Found in the debris of stones and mortar, in the mortar above the burnt surface with charcoal. 7. Iron hob nail. Surv. l. 1 cm. Inv. No. R 26624. Found in the debris of stones and mortar, in the mortar above the burnt surface with charcoal. 8. Iron hob nail. L. 2.1 cm. Inv. No. R 26630. Found in the mortar above the burnt surface with charcoal. 9. Iron hob nail. L. 1.45 cm. Inv. No. R 26623. Found in the debris of stones and mortar, in the mortar above the burnt surface with charcoal. 10. Iron hob nail. Surv. l. 0.9 cm. Inv. No. R 26625. Found in the debris of stones and mortar, in the mortar above the burnt surface with charcoal. 11. Iron hob nail. Surv. l. 0.9 cm. Inv. No. R 26627. Found in the black layer of earth and mortar. 12. Iron hob nail. L. 2.4 cm. Inv. No. R 26631. Found in the debris of mortar above the burnt surface with charcoal. 13. Part of a blue glass bead. Surv. l. 0.6 cm. Inv. No. R 26634. Found in the debris of mortar. 14. Bronze mount. L. 1.9 cm. Inv. No. R 26620. Found in the debris of stones and mortar. 15. Bent piece of a cast lead plate. Size 6.7 × 3.9 cm, th. 0.4 cm and less. Inv. No. R 26632. Found in the layer of earth mixed with mortar, on the exterior side of the passage through the southern defence walls, 0.40 m below the level of the threshold slabs. 16. Bronze button with an iron shank. Diam. 2 cm. Inv. No. R 26621. Found in the debris of stones and mortar. 17. Iron bell clapper. L. 13.6 cm. Inv. No. R 26617. Found in the debris beside the west face of the early tower. 18. Part of the body and base of a yellowish glass cup; Middle Ages. Size 3.4 × 3 cm. Inv. No. R 26635. Found in the debris of the early tower. 19. Iron hook. L. 7.15 cm. Inv. No. R 26633. Found in the burnt patch of earth under the debris of stone and mortar. Trench at the crossroads west of the Roman fort at Hrušica 20. Iron hob nail. L. 1.8 cm. Inv. No. R 26642. 2 Inventory numbers refer to the collection of the Archaeological Department at the National Museum of Slovenia. Abbreviations: l = length; surv. l. = surviving length; diam. = diameter. Katalog drugih drobnih najdb2 Slika 19. Izkopavanja jugozahodnega stolpa 1. Železen žebljiček. Ohr. d. 1 cm. Inv. št. R 26628. V črnikasti zemlji s primesjo malte. 2. Železen žebljiček. Ohr. d. 1 cm. Inv. št. R 26629. V črnikasti zemlji s primesjo malte. 3. Železen žebljiček. Ohr. d. 1,4 cm. Inv. št. R 26619. V kamnitno-maltni ruševini. 4. Železen žebljiček. Ohr. d. 1,4 cm. Inv. št. R 26622. V kamnitno-maltni ruševini. 5. Železen žebljiček. Ohr. d. 1,05 cm. Inv. št. R 26618. V kamnitno-maltni ruševini. 6. Železen žebljiček. Ohr. d. 1,2 cm. Inv. št. R 26626. V kamnitno-maltni ruševini, v malti nad prežgano površino z ogljem. 7. Železen žebljiček. Ohr. d. 1 cm. Inv. št. R 26624. V kamnitnomaltni ruševini, v malti nad prežgano površino z ogljem. 8. Železen žebljiček. D. 2,1 cm. Inv. št. R 26630. V malti nad prežgano površino z ogljem. 9. Železen žebljiček. D. 1,45 cm. Inv. št. R 26623. V kamnitnomaltni ruševini, v malti nad prežgano površino z ogljem. 10. Železen žebljiček. Ohr. d. 0,9 cm. Inv. št. R 26625. V kamnitno-maltni ruševini v malti nad prežgano površino z ogljem. 11. Železen žebljiček. Ohr. d. 0,9 cm. Inv. št. R 26627. V črnikasti zemljeno-maltni plasti. 12. Železen žebljiček. D. 2,4 cm. Inv. št. R 26631. V maltni ruševini nad prežgano površino z ogljem. 13. Del jagode iz modrega stekla. Ohr. d. 0,6 cm. Inv. št. R 26634. V maltni plasti. 14. Bronast okov. D. 1,9 cm. Inv. št. R 26620. V kamnitno-maltni ruševini. 15. Kos prepognjene ulite svinčene plošče. Vel. 6,7 × 3,9 cm, debelina 0,4 cm in manj. Inv. št. R 26632. V zemlji pomešani z malto, na zunanji strani prehoda skozi obzidje, 0,40 m pod nivojem plošče praga. 16. Bronast gumb z železnim trnom. Pr. 2 cm. Inv. št. R 26621. V kamnitno-maltni ruševini. 17. Železen bat zvonca. D. 13,6 cm. Inv. št. R 26617. V ruševini ob vzhodni steni starejšega stolpa. 18. Del ostenja in dna čaše iz rumenkastega stekla; srednji vek. Vel. 3,4 × 3 cm. Inv. št. R 26635. V ruševinah starejšega stolpa. 19. Železna kljukica. D. 7,15 cm. Inv. št. R 26633. V ožgani zemljeni lisi pod kamnito maltno ruševino. Sonda v križišču zahodno od rimske trdnjave na Hrušici 20. Železen žebljiček. D. 1,8 cm. Inv. št. R 26642. 2 Inventarne številke se nanašajo na zbirko Arheološkega oddelka Narodnega muzeja Slovenije. Okrajšave: d = dolžina; ohr. d = ohranjena dolžina; pr. = premer. 363 BIBLIOGRAPHY / LITERATURA BRUSIN, G. 1959, Il vallo romano in alpe Iulia. – In/V: LimesStudien, Vorträge des 3. Internationalen Limes-Kongresses in Rheinfelden: Basel 1957, Schriften des Institutes für Ur- und Frühgeschichte der Schweiz 14, Basel, 39–44. LEBEN, F., ŠAŠEL, J. 1971, XXVIII. Hrušica-Ad Pirum. – In/V: J. Šašel, P. Petru (eds./ur.), Claustra Alpium Iuliarum I, Fontes, Katalogi in monograije 5, Ljubljana, 93–96. OSMUK, N. 1998, Podkraj (Hrušica). – Varstvo spomenikov, Poročila 37/96, 87. PETRU, P. 1972, Hrušica nad Colom – antični kastel. – Arheološki pregled 14, 73–74. PETRU, P. 1973, Hrušica 1973 – poročilo o arheoloških izkopavanjih. – Arheološki pregled 15, 68–69. PETRU, P. 1974a, Hrušica nad Colom. – Varstvo spomenikov 17–19/1, 129–130. PETRU, P. 1974b, Hrušica nad Colom. – Varstvo spomenikov 17–19/1, 199–200. PETRU, P. 1975a, Hrušica, SR Slovenija – poročilo o arheoloških izkopavanjih v 1974. – Arheološki pregled 17, 88–90. PETRU, P. 1975b, Hrušica, SR Slovenija – poročilo o arheoloških izkopavanjih v 1975. – Arheološki pregled 17, 91–93. PETRU, P. 1977, Hrušica. – Varstvo spomenikov 21, 219–222. PETRU, P. 1980–1981, Eine bisher unbekannte Römerstrasse und die Sperrmauer auf der Hrušica (Ad Pirum). Teil des Systems Claustra Alpium Iuliarum. – Archaeologia Iugoslavica 20–21, 132–135. PETRU, P. 1981a, Hrušica. – Varstvo spomenikov 23, 270–271. 364 PETRU, P. 1981b, Hrušica, SR Slovenija. – Arheološki pregled 22, 95–96 [the author is P. Petru and not the erroneously cited P. Tetum / namesto P. Petru kot avtor napačno naveden P. Tetum]. RABOLD, B. 2005, Spätrömische Befestigungen im Neckarmündungsgebiet. – In/V: Imperium Romanum, Römer, Christen, Alamannen – die Spätantike am Oberrhein, Stuttgart, 194–197. ŠAŠEL, J. 1971a, Antični viri. – In/V: J. Šašel, P. Petru (eds./ ur.), Claustra Alpium Iuliarum I, Fontes, Katalogi in monograije 5, Ljubljana, 17–45. ŠAŠEL, J. 1971b, he struggle between Magnentius and Constantius II for Italy and Illyricum. – Živa antika 21, 205–216 [= Opera selecta, Situla 30, Ljubljana 1992, 716–727]. ŠAŠEL, J., PETRU, P. (eds./ur.) 1971, Claustra Alpium Iuliarum I. Fontes. – Katalogi in monograije 5, Ljubljana. SVOLJŠAK, D. 1990, Hrušica (Ad Pirum). – Varstvo spomenikov 32, 175–176. SVOLJŠAK, D. 1997a, Podkraj (Hrušica – Ad Pirum), Podkraj 101. – In/V: D. Svoljšak et al., Novo gradivo v Arheološkem oddelku Narodnega muzeja v Ljubljani (pridobljeno v letih od 1987 do 1993), Varstvo spomenikov 36/94–95, 240–242. SVOLJŠAK, D. 1997b, Podkraj (Hrušica – Ad Pirum), Podkraj 100. – In/V: D. Svoljšak et al., Novo gradivo v Arheološkem oddelku Narodnega muzeja v Ljubljani (pridobljeno v letih od 1987 do 1993), Varstvo spomenikov 36/94–95, 238–240. ULBERT, T. (ed./ur.) 1981, Ad Pirum (Hrušica). Spätrömische Passbefestigung in den Julischen Alpen. Der deutsche Beitrag zu den slowenisch-deutschen Grabungen 1971–1973. – Münchner Beiträge zur Vor- und Frühgeschichte 31, München. MALI NJIVČ ABOVE NOVAKI MALI NJIVČ NAD NOVAKI Janka Istenič, with a contribution by Andrej Šemrov (the coin catalogue) Janka Istenič, s prispevkom Andreja Šemrova (katalog novcev) Abstract Povzetek he coins and other archaeological inds, acquired by amateur treasure hunters using metal detectors, suggest that the mountain ridge of Mali Njivč above Novaki in the Cerkljansko region is an important late Roman1 site. he location of the site on the naturally excellently protected ridge in a favourable strategic position, which ofers an excellent view of its surroundings, and the small inds from the site lead us to the assumption that it was a late Roman military post, which protected the Cividale del Friuli/Forum Iulii–the Bača Valley–the Ljubljana Basin road. Novci in druge arheološke najdbe, pridobljene nestrokovno s pomočjo detektorjev kovin, kažejo, da je gorski greben Mali Njivč nad Novaki na Cerkljanskem pomembno najdišče iz pozne rimske dobe. Lega najdišča na naravno odlično zavarovanem grebenu z zelo dobrim razgledom po okolici in drobne najdbe z najdišča nas vodijo k domnevi, da je bila na njem poznorimska1 vojaška postojanka, ki je varovala prometnico Čedad/Forum Iulii–dolina Bače– Ljubljanska kotlina. Keywords: Mali Njivč, Late Roman Age, roads, Roman army Ključne besede: Mali Njivč, pozna rimska doba, ceste, vojska Figure 1. The location of Mali Njivč (a section from NTM 1 : 25000 Zali Log). Slika 1. Lega Malega Njivča (izsek iz DTK 1 : 25000 Zali Log). 1 The term “Late Roman age” in this paper is used for the period from the beginning of Diocletian’s rule until 476, whereas the term “Late Antiquity” is used for a longer period, from the beginning of Diocletian’s rule until the end of Antiquity, which, in the territory of the present-day Slovenia, corresponds to the Slavic settlement (cf. Ciglenečki 1999, 287–289). 1 Pojem pozna rimska doba v članku uporabljam za obdobje od začetka vlade Dioklecijana do leta 476, pojem pozna antika pa za daljše obdobje, ki sega od začetka Dioklecijanove vlade do konca antičnega obdobja; na ozemlju današnje Slovenije sovpada z naselitvijo Slovanov (prim. Ciglenečki 1999, 304–305). 365 Uvod Arheološki oddelek Narodnega muzeja Slovenije je februarja 2004 registriral arheološke najdbe, ki sta jih domačina našla z iskalcem kovin in izkopala na Malem Njivču pri naselju Novaki na Cerkljanskem (sl. 1). Pregled najdb in ogled najdišča sta pokazala, da gre za zelo zanimivo arheološko naselbino iz rimske dobe, zato smo se odločili za njeno podrobnejšo obravnavo. Izsledke predstavljamo v tem članku. Opis najdišča Najdišče obsega izrazit gorski greben Mali Njivč, ki je malo zamaknjen od smeri sever–jug proti severozahodu– jugovzhodu. Na zahodni strani se zaključi nad prepadnimi stenami, ki padajo proti potoku Pasica. Izrazito strmo in deloma prepadno se greben spušča tudi na ostalih treh straneh, razen na severovzhodu, kjer je edini neizpostavljen dostop na greben, ki omogoča pristop brez obvladanja plezalnih veščin (sl. 2–4). Greben je dolg okoli 210 m in širok od približno 10 m v najožjem osrednjem delu grebena do okoli 37 m na njegovem severnem delu (sl. 5). Vidne so terase, ki nakazujejo ostanke stavb (sl. 5, 6). Od teras (sl. 5: 1), h katerim pripelje pot na naselbino (sl. 5), se greben dviguje do najvišje točke (759/758 m nm. v.) na skalnatem severnem koncu. Južno od teras v sredini grebena ležjo druge terase, nato pa se greben dvigne na izrazit skalni vrh (751,8 m nm. v.); sledi padanje terena proti južnemu robu grebena z nekaj terasami (sl. 5). Figure 2. A view of Mali Njivč from the south (photo J. Istenič). Slika 2. Pogled na Mali Njivč z juga (foto J. Istenič). Figure 3. A view of Mali Njivč from the north-west (photo J. Istenič). Slika 3. Pogled na Mali Njivč s severozahoda (foto J. Istenič). Introduction he archaeological inds, discovered and dug up by two local hunters using metal detectors at Mali Njivč near the village of Novaki in Cerkljansko (ig. 1), were entered into the register of the Archaeological Department of the Narodni muzej Slovenije (the National Museum of Slovenia; the NMS) in February 2004. he examination of the inds and the visit to the site revealed an extremely interesting Roman site, which called for a more detailed study. he results are presented in this paper. The site he site encompasses a distinct mountain ridge of Mali Njivč, which is slightly shifted from the N–S axis towards NW–SE. Its western side ends above precipitous walls descending towards the Pasica brook. he other three sides of the ridge are also extremely steep and vertical in places, with the exception of the NE side, which permits the only unexposed approach onto the ridge without actually climbing (igs. 2–4). 366 he ridge is c 210 m long; its width ranges from about 10 m at its narrowest point to about 37 m at its northern side Zahodno od Malega Njivča, na drugi strani potoka Pasica, se nad potokom strmo dviga okoli 160 m višji Veliki Njivč (915 m nm. v.; sl. 1–4). Od tam ni podatkov o arheoloških najdbah. Ob sodelovanju Jožeta Golje, enega izmed dveh najditeljev predmetov, ki je na terenu pokazal, kje so najdišča posameznih predmetov, in upoštevaje zapisnik registracije zasebnih najdb ZN 199 in ZN 228 smo na načrt najdišča vrisali približna najdišča posameznih predmetov (sl. 5: 1–9). Večina najdb izvira z dveh izrazitih teras v osrednjem delu naselbine, kamor pripelje pot na naselbino (sl. 5: 1; sl. 6). Tam je bilo na površini približno 4 × 2 m najdenih osem novcev (katalog, novci: št. 1, 3, 4, 7–12), sulična ost (t. 1: 10), predmeta s trikotno oblikovanim in dletasto priostrenim delom (t. 3: 29, 30), dva noža (t. 3: 25, 26), del svedra (t. 2: 23) in drugi predmeti (t. 3: 27, 31, 36) ter odlomki »žlindre« (sl. 7). Certoška ibula (t. 1: 1) in dva novca (katalog, novci: št. 2, 5) so bili najdeni na terasi, ki leži severno od skalnatega vrha južnega dela grebena (sl. 5: 3), žvale (t. 3: 35) pa na terasi zahodno od tega vrha (sl. 5: 2). S skrajnega južnega dela grebena (sl. 5: 4) izvira amforičasti pasni okov (t. 1: 9), krilati (ig. 5). he path (ig. 5) leads to approximately the middle of the site, where several visible terraces suggest the remains of buildings (igs. 5, 6). From here, the ridge ascends to its highest point (759/758 m a.s.l.) at its rocky northern side. More terraces are located to the south of the central terraces, after which the ridge rises to a distinct rocky peak (751.8 m a.s.l.); the terrain then descends, again in terraces, towards the southern edge of the ridge (ig. 5). West of Mali Njivč, on the other side of the Pasica brook, the hill of Veliki Njivč (about 160 m higher than Mali Njivč) steeply ascends above the brook (915 m a.s.l.; igs. 1–4). No archaeological inds are known from there. he approximate ind spots of individual objects were entered into the site map (ig. 5: 1–9), based on the registration records of archaeological inds ZN 199 and ZN 228, as well as information given by Jože Golja, one of the two inders of the objects, who showed us where on the site, roughly, the objects were found. he majority of inds come from two distinct terraces in the central part of the site, to where the path to the settlement leads (ig. 5: 1; ig. 6). here, on the area of about 4 by 2 m, eight coins were discovered (catalogue, coins: nos. 1, 3, 4, 7–12); also a spearhead (pl. 1: 10); two objects with chisel-shaped ends (pl. 3: 29, 30); two knives (pl. 3: 25, 26); part of a drill (pl. 2: 23); and other objects (pl. 3: 27, 31, 36) as well as lumps of “slag” (ig. 7). A Certosa-type brooch (pl. 1: 1) and two coins (catalogue, coins: nos. 2, 5) were found on the terrace lying north of the rocky peak of the ridge’s southern part (ig. 5: 3), and a curb bit (pl. 3: 35) on the terrace west of the peak (ig. 5: 2). An amphora-shaped strap-end (pl. 1: 9) comes from the far southern part of the ridge (ig. 5: 4) and a propeller-stifener (pl. 1: 8) from the steep eastern slopes (ig. 5: 5). As far as Golja can remember, the spot ig. 5: 6 was where he found a worn-out coin that he could no longer identify among his collection. Also found on the steep eastern slopes (ig. 5: 7) were two brooches (pl. 1: 2, 3), and the object pl. 3: 37. he spearhead pl. 1: 16 probably comes from the eastern slopes, as well. At the northern part of the settlement, Golja found a pennanular brooch (pl. 1: 5; ig. 5: 8), while the other treasure hunter found a lot (“several shoe boxesfull”) of “lumps of slag” (ig. 5: 9; ig. 7). Discussion of inds he Archaeological Department has entered into its register 55 inds from Mali Njivč. hey are presented with catalogue descriptions, drawings (pls. 1–3) and a photograph (ig. 7). A selection of these inds is discussed here. Fourteen Roman coins were found on the site: three from the 2nd century, six from the second half of the 3rd century, pasni okov (t. 1: 8) pa s strmega vzhodnega pobočja (sl. 5: 5). Mesto sl. 5: 6 je po Goljevem spominu najdišče močno obrabljenega novca, ki ga v svoji zbirki ne zna več identiicirati. Na strmem vzhodnem pobočju (sl. 5: 7) so bili najdeni odlomek močno proilirane ibule in sponke s tečajem (t. 1: 2, 3) ter predmet t. 3: 37. Z vzhodnega pobočja je verjetno tudi ost t. 1: 16. Na severnem delu naselbine je Golja našel obročasto ibulo (t. 1: 5; sl. 5: 8), drugi najditelj pa veliko (»več škatel za čevlje«) »odlomkov žlindre« (sl. 5: 9; sl. 7). Figure 4. A view of Mali Njivč from the east (photo J. Istenič). Slika 4. Pogled na Mali Njivč z vzhoda (foto J. Istenič). Opredelitev drobnih arheoloških najdb Arheološki oddelek je registriral 55 najdb z Malega Njivča, ki so predstavljene z opisi v katalogu in risbami (t. 1–3) ter sliko (sl. 7). Izbor predmetov obravnavamo po časovnem zaporedju in po funkcionalnih skupinah. Z najdišča je znanih 14 rimskih novcev: trije skovani v 2. stoletju, šest v drugi polovici 3. stoletja, štirje v zadnji tretjini 4. stoletja in en Honorijev novec (408–423). Čeprav je bilo osem novcev (katalog, novci: št. 1, 3–4, 7–12) najdenih na razmeroma majhni površini na terasi v osrednjem delu grebena (sl. 5: 1), se nam ne zdi verjetno, da gre za zakladno najdbo, ker je bila tam najdena tudi velika večina drugih predmetov. Certoška ibula X. vrste (t. 1: 1) sodi v različico d, odlomek t. 3: 36 pa je del loka različice a Certoške ibule XIII vrste; oboje so nosili v 5. in 4. stoletju pr. Kr.2 V prazgodovino sodi verjetno tudi sulična ost t. 1: 10. Glava in lok ibule t. 1: 2 pripadata ibuli s tulastim (torej skovanim, v nasprotju z ulitim cevastim) tečajem. Emilie Riha je podobne ibule uvrstila v skupino ibul na tečaj z nieliranim okrasom (skupina 5.15), ki vključuje tudi primerke brez niella.3 V 1. stoletju in še na začetku 2. stoletja so jih nosili v severni Galiji, srednjem Porenju, Švici in posameznih kastelih ob limesu v sedanji Nemčiji, drugje pa so redke. 2 3 Teržan 1976, 331, 338, 357–368, 383. Riha 1979, 148–149. 367 Figure 5. The map of the site of Mali Njivč (R. Klasinc and J. Kusetič, February 2012). Slika 5. Načrt najdišča Mali Njivč (izdelava R. Klasinc in J. Kusetič, februar 2012). 368 four from the last third of the 4th century, and a coin of Honorious (408–423). Although eight coins (catalogue, coins: nos. 1, 3–4, 7–12) were discovered in a relatively small area on one of the central terraces (ig. 5: 1), it seems unlikely that this was originally a hoard, because the majority of other objects were also found there. Figure 6. A view of the two terraces in the central part of the settlement (ig. 5: 1), where most of the coins and other artefacts were discovered (photo J. Istenič). Slika 6. Terasi v osrednjem delu naselbine (sl. 5: 1), od kjer izvira največ novcev in drugih drobnih arheoloških najdb (foto J. Istenič). he Certosa-type brooch (pl. 1: 1), an Xd variant according to Biba Teržan, and the bow fragment of a XIIIa variant of the Certosa-type brooch (pl. 3: 36) were in use in the 5th and 4th centuries BC.2 he spearhead pl. 1: 10 is probably also prehistoric. Figure 7. Fragment of a lat object, product of melting iron objects or, less likely, iron ore (photo T. Lauko). Slika 7. Del ploščatega predmeta, ki je nastal s taljenjem železnih predmetov ali, manj verjetno, železove rude (foto T. Lauko). he brooch head and bow pl. 1: 2 are parts of a brooch with a narrow tube formed from the top of the bow rolled back. Emilie Riha has classiied similar brooches into the group of hinged brooches with niello decoration (group 5.15), also containing examples without the niello.3 hey were worn in the 1st century and into the 2nd century in northern Gaul, central Rhineland, Switzerland and several sites along the limes in present day Germany but were rare elsewhere. he foot and part of the bow (pl. 1: 3) belong to a brooch of the kräftig proilierte Fibeln group. he solid foot (i.e. without holes), the straight lower part of the bow and the shape of its knob suggest single-piece construction, perhaps a brooch of the Almgren Type 69, and a dating from the second half of the 1st century or the irst half of the 2nd century.4 he penannular brooch pl. 1: 4 is of a variant with coiled terminals, and a ring with a lat or rhomboid section, made of copper alloys or iron.5 hey were common in the 4th century, with a few rare examples dating to the 3rd century.6 At Tonovcov grad, they were found in the late antique (phase PA 2, dated to the end of 5th/beginning of 6th–7th centuries)7 and early medieval contexts.8 Two annular brooches (pl. 1: 5, 6) have a simple rectangular extension, while the brooch pl. 1: 7 has an elaborate extension. Annular brooches with extensions were common in the 4th century Pannonia and Noricum, but rare elsewhere. he graves in which they were found suggest they were part of menswear as a rule; judging by their ind spots they were mostly worn by soldiers.9 he brooches pl. 1: 5, 6 are of the Sellye 1 variant. According to the data in Sellye,10 they can be dated to the second half of the 4th century. he brooch pl. 1: 7 corresponds to the variant Sellye 11, which is repre2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Teržan 1976, 331, 338, 357–368, 383. Riha 1979, 148–149. Istenič 1999, 59–61. Riha 1979 var. 8.2.4; Feugère 1985, var. 30g2. Feugère 1985, 421; Istenič 2000, 69, pl. 38: 6; Riha 1979, 209. Modrijan, Ciglenečki, Milavec 2011, 71. Milavec 2011, 23. Sellye 1990, 18–27, 36–47; Oldenstein 1976, 218–219; Pröttel 2002, 101–102. Sellye 1990, 53–58, cat. nos. 1.3, 1.4. Noga in del loka (t. 1: 3) pripadata močno proilirani ibuli. Polna noga (tj. brez luknjic), iztegnjen spodnji del loka in oblika gumba na njem nakazujejo enodelno zgradbo, morda ibulo skupine Almgren 69, in datacijo v drugo polovico 1. ali prvo polovico 2. stoletja.4 Fibula t. 1: 4 sodi v različico obročastih ibul s spiralno uvitima zaključkoma,5 ki imajo pravokoten ali rombast presek in so narejene iz bakrovih zlitin ali železa, kot npr. ibula z Malega Njivča. Pogoste so bile v 4. stoletju, redki primerki pa so iz 3. stoletja.6 Na Tonovcovem gradu izvirajo iz poznoantičnih plasti (faza PA 2, datacija: konec 5./začetek 6. stoletja–7. stoletje)7 in iz zgodnjesrednjeveške plasti.8 K obročastim ibulam sodita tudi ibuli t. 1: 5, 6 z enostavnim pravokotnim nastavkom in ibula z razčlenjenim nastavkom t. 1: 7. Obročaste ibule s pravokotno razširitvijo so v Panoniji in deloma v Noriku v 4. stoletju pogoste, drugje redke. Grobne celote nakazujejo, da so bile praviloma del moške noše, njihova najdišča pa, da so jih največ nosili vojaki.9 Sponi t. 1: 5, 6 sodita v različico Sellye 1. Podatki, ki jih navaja Ibolya Sellye,10 nakazujejo datacijo v drugo polovico 4. stoletja. Spona t. 1: 7 z razčlenjeno razširitvijo ustreza različici Sellye 11, ki je zastopana le z enim 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Istenič 1999, 59–61. Riha 1979 var. 8.2.4; Feugère 1985, var. 30g2. Feugère 1985, 421; Istenič 2000, 69, t. 38: 6; Riha 1979, 209. Modrijan, Ciglenečki, Milavec 2011, 71. Milavec 2011, 23. Sellye 1990, 18–27, 36–47; Oldenstein 1976, 218–219; Pröttel 2002, 101–102. Sellye 1990, 53–58, kat. št. 1.3, 1.4. 369 sented by only one example found in a man’s grave from the Late Roman cemetery in Rust (Burgenland, Austria).11 primerkom iz groba moškega na poznorimskem grobišču v Rustu (Gradiščansko, Avstrija).11 In Slovenia, the majority of annular brooches with an extension come from Poetovio; however, they are known from a number of other sites, particularly in the eastern part of the country.12 V Sloveniji največ obročastih ibul s pravokotnim nastavkom izvira s Ptuja, sicer pa so znane s številnih drugih najdišč predvsem v vzhodnem delu države.12 Propeller-stifeners (pl. 1: 8) of decorated belts worn by soldiers and imperial magistrates date from the times of Constantine to the last quarter of the 4th century. Sporadically, they also appeared in the early 5th century. It would seem that earlier examples were shorter, up to 5 cm, while the latter were longer, from 7 to 10 cm.13 According to this classiication, the itting from Njivč would be of the earlier type. Amphora-shaped strap-ends, like pl. 1: 9, were also parts of military belts. In the second half of the 4th century and the beginning of the 5th century, they were common from Britannia to the Danube provinces.14 hree-bladed arrowheads had a long tradition in the Roman armament,15 and their presence on the late antique sites should not be uncritically associated with the Nomadic peoples, such as the Huns, the Avars, and so on.16 he arrowhead pl. 1: 11 has distinct blades, tapering concavely into the tang from which they are sharply separated. Two similar arrowheads, from Invillino and Vrbljana, are mentioned in von Freeden among arrowheads from late antique and early medieval sites.17 She associates them with late Roman and Byzantine armament. In the Slovenian context, the arrowhead from Mali Njivč corresponds most closely to the objects, which we assume come from the site of Gradec above Mihovo.18 Late antique graves (the extremely scarce objects from the graves would suggest their dating to the end of the 4th and to the 5th centuries) and a church from the 6th century were excavated at the site.19 Metal detector hunters have dug up a number of objects, e.g. crossbow brooches, as well as buckles, ittings and strap-ends of belts (the NMS, Inv. Nos. R 17800–17803, R 18923, R 18925, R 18959 and ZN 87/3, 4), which suggest a strong presence of Roman soldiers in the 4th century and/ or in the beginning of the 5th century. Many 4th century coins (particularly from the second half ) were also discovered on the site.20 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 370 20 Sellye 1990, 78, pl. 1, pl. 5: 3. Ciglenečki 2000, 53–54; Istenič 2000, 177, pl. 549: 9. Konrad 1997, 52; Pröttel 2002, 113–115; Paul 2011, 73–74. Konrad 1997, 53. Cf. examples from the Octavianic period: Istenič 2005 and Istenič, in this book. Von Freeden 1991, 593–610; Kniic 1993, 525–530; Milavec 2011, 48–49. Von Freeden 1991, 606, igs. 9: 4, 11: 1. Cf. Plaum 2000, 135, ig. 12. Breščak 1990, 105, 106. FMRSl IV, 123; FMRSl V, 94. Krilati okovi (t. 1: 8) so bili od konstantinskega časa do zadnje četrtine 4. stoletja deli pasov, ki so jih nosili vojaki in cesarski uradniki. Posamič se pojavljajo še v zgodnjem 5. stoletju. Zdi se, da so starejši primerki manjši in merijo v dolžino do 5 cm, mlajši primerki pa daljši, od 7 do 10 cm.13 Primerek z Njivča po tej delitvi sodi med starejše primerke. Amforičasti okovi, h katerim sodi t. 1: 9, so prav tako deli vojaških pasov. Razširjeni so od Britanije do podonavskih provinc in sodijo v drugo polovico 4. in na začetek 5. stoletja.14 Trikrilne puščične osti imajo v rimski oborožitvi dolgo tradicijo15 in jih na poznoantičnih najdiščih ne kaže nekritično povezovati z nomadskimi ljudstvi, kot so Huni, Avari idr.16 Puščična ost t. 1: 11 ima med seboj jasno ločena krilca, ki v trn prehajajo usločeno in so ostro ločena od trna. Podobni puščični osti iz Invilina in Vrbljane von Freedenova17 našteva med puščičnimi ostmi poznoantično-zgodnjesrednjeveških najdišč in ju povezuje s poznorimsko-bizantinsko oborožitvijo. V Sloveniji ima puščična ost z Malega Njivča najboljšo primerjavo med predmeti, za katere domnevamo, da izvirajo z najdišča Gradec na Mihovim.18 Tam so bili raziskani poznoantični grobovi (zelo redki pridatki kažejo na konec 4. in 5. stoletje) in cerkev iz 6. stoletja.19 Nepooblaščeni iskalci z detektorji kovin so izkopali številne predmete – med njimi čebuličaste ibule ter okove, zaključke in spone vojaških pasov (NMS R 17800–17803, R 18923, 18925, R 18959 in ZN 87/3, 4), ki kažejo na močno navzočnost rimskih vojakov v 4. in/ali na začetku 5. stoletja. Številne so tudi najdbe novcev iz 4. stoletja (še posebej druge polovice) s tega najdišča.20 Železni puščični osti s konico trikotnega preseka in trnastim nastavkom, ki je od trna jasno ločena s stožčasto oblikovano bazo (t. 1: 12), smo našli le eno dobro primerjavo, tj. ost z Gradine pri Doberdobu (Castellazzo di Doberdò, 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Sellye 1990, 78, t. 1, t. 5: 3. Ciglenečki 2000, 53–54; Istenič 2000, 177, t. 549: 9. Konrad 1997, 52; Pröttel 2002, 113–115; Paul 2011, 73–74. Konrad 1997, 53. Prim. npr. primerke iz oktavijanske dobe: Istenič 2005 in Istenič, v tem zborniku. Von Freeden 1991, 593–610; Kniic 1993, 525–530; Milavec 2011, 48–49. Von Freeden 1991, 606, sl. 9: 4, 11: 1. Prim. Plaum 2000, 135, sl. 12. Breščak 1990, 105, 106. FMRSl IV, 123; FMRSl V, 94. he iron arrowhead from Castellazzo di Doberdò in Italy, the site occupied in late prehistory, the Roman age and particularly in the Late Antiquity, was the only relatively close parallel we could ind to the iron collared and tanged projectile of triangular section pl. 1: 12.21 We could not ind any parallels to the precision-crafted iron heads pl. 1: 13, 15. he iron socketed spearhead pl. 1: 16 has two distinct barbs, which would suggest it is either late Roman or late antique. Such and similar spearheads were Germanic in origin and entered the Roman armament via German mercenaries in the 4th and 5th centuries.22 A spearhead with a very similarly shaped tip, but a shorter socket was found at Tonovcov grad in the Early Medieval context.23 he shape of the socketed iron head of rectangular section (pl. 1: 14) persisted through centuries. Similar heads were part of the 2nd century BC hoard of weapons from Grad near Šmihel,24 and were also among the weaponry found in the late antique settlement at Invillino. Bierbrauer believes they were catapult bolts, and associates them with the Byzantine siege of the 6th century.25 hey are also known from Hrušica,26 for example, which was not occupied after the beginning of the 5th century.27 One example comes from Tonovcov grad,28 where it was found in a context dated from the end of 5th/beginning of 6th to the 7th centuries.29 he big iron keys with a long handle twisted three times (pl. 2: 17–18) have close parallels at Magdalensberg (Austria, Carinthia), where they were found in the Early Principate contexts.30 Another parallel is the key from Gurina, classiied by Jablonka as a Roman Imperial Age key type.31 Keys from Sanzeno32 indicate that similar keys, but with diferent handles, were in use in the Late Iron Age. Italija), ki je bila v uporabi v pozni prazgodovini, rimski dobi in še posebej v pozni antiki.21 Primerjav za natančno izdelani železni konici t. 1: 13, 15 nismo našli. Železna ost t. 1: 16 s tulastim nasadiščem ima konico z izrazitima zalustma, kar kaže na poznorimski in poznoantični čas. Take in podobne osti so izvorno germanske ter so v rimsko oborožitev 4. in 5. stoletja prišle z germanskimi najemniki.22 Ost z zelo podobno oblikovano konico, a krajšim tulastim nastavkom je bila na Tonovcovem gradu najdena v zgodnjesrednjeveški plasti.23 Železna ost pravokotnega preseka s tulastim nasadiščem (t. 1: 14) pripada dolgotrajni obliki. Podobne osti so namreč del zaklada iz 2. stoletja pr. Kr. z Gradu pri Šmihelu,24 zastopane pa so tudi med orožjem iz poznoantične naselbine na Invillinu; zanje Bierbrauer meni, da so katapultni izstrelki in jih povezuje z bizantinskim obleganjem v 6. stoletju.25 Znane so npr. s Hrušice,26 ki ni bila poseljena po začetku 5. stoletja,27 in en primerek iz plasti mlajše poznoantične faze (PA 2: konec 5. / začetek 6. stoletja–7. stoletje)28 na Tonovcovem gradu.29 Veliki železni ključi z dolgim in trikrat uvitim ročajem (t. 2: 17–18) imajo dobre primerjave na Štalenski gori, kjer izvirajo iz zgodnjecesarskih plasti.30 Ustreza jim tudi primerek iz Gurine, ki ga je Jablonka opredelil kot tip ključa rimske cesarske dobe.31 Ključi iz Sanzena32 kažejo, da so podobne ključe, ki pa so imeli drugačne ročaje, uporabljali že v mlajši železni dobi. V Sloveniji so podobni ključi znani npr. z rimskega grobišča Strmec pri Beli Cerkvi33 in s poznoantične naselbine Tinje nad Loko pri Žusmu.34 In Slovenia, similar keys are known from e.g. the Roman cemetery at Strmec above Bela Cerkev,33 as well as from the late antique settlement of Tinje above Loka pri Žusmu.34 21 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 Buora 1991, 64, 67, pl. 3: 31. Feugère 1993, 236–237; Feugère 1996, 273; Plaum 2000, 106–108. Milavec 2011, 50, pl. 11: 2. Horvat 2002, pl. 15: 2–21. Bierbrauer 1987, 171, 296, pl. 58: 1–7, 9–10. Ulbert 1981, pl. 21: 136–137, 140–149. Pröttel 1996, 137. Milavec 2011, 49–50, pl. 10: 1. Modrijan, Ciglenečki, Milavec 2011, 71. Schütz 2003, 92–94, pls. 17/S19, 18/S22–23. Jablonka 2001, pl. 105: 4. Northduter 1979, pls. 54–60. Dular 1991, pl. 54: 5–6. Ciglenečki 2000, 57, pl. 5: 13, 14. The keys from Invillino (Bierbrauer 1987, 172, pl. 60: 13, 14), quoted as parallels to the keys from Tinje by Ciglenečki (l. c.), are considerably smaller and their handles are bent only once. In our opinion, the 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 Buora 1991, 64, 67, t. 3: 31. Feugère 1993, 236–237; Feugère 1996, 273; Plaum 2000, 106–108. Milavec 2011, 50, t. 11: 2. Horvat 2002, t. 15: 2–21. Bierbrauer 1987, 171, 296, t. 58: 1–7, 9–10. Ulbert 1981, t. 21: 136–137, 140–149. Pröttel 1996, 137. Dat. po Modrijan, Ciglenečki, Milavec 2011, 71. Milavec 2011, 49–50, t. 10: 1. Schütz 2003, 92–94, t. 17/S19, 18/S22–23. Jablonka 2001, t. 105: 4. Northduter 1979, t. 54–60. Dular 1991, t. 54: 5–6. Ciglenečki 2000, 57, t. 5: 13, 14. Ključa iz Invillina (Bierbrauer 1987, 172, t. 60: 13, 14), ki ju kot paraleli navaja Ciglenečki (l. c.), sta bistveno manjša in le enkrat uvita. Prav tako se nam ključa z Rifnika (Bolta 1981, t. 25: 45–47) ne zdita ustrezni paraleli (prim. Ciglenečki, l. c.). 371 he upper part of a key pl. 2: 20 has good parallels among Roman keys,35 unlike the lower part with holes. Likewise, we could not ind any similar keys from the Middle Ages or, indeed, the modern era. Zgornji del ključa t. 2: 20 ima dobre primerjave med ključi rimske dobe,35 spodnji del z luknjicami pa ne; prav tako nismo našli podobnih ključev med srednjeveškimi in novoveškimi ključi. Iron ladles, such as pl. 2: 24, are known from the sites ranging from the Late Iron Age to the Late Antiquity.36 Železnih zajemalk, kot je t. 2: 24, ni mogoče ozko časovno opredeliti. Poznamo jih z najdišč, ki segajo od mlajše železne dobe do pozne antike.36 he knife pl. 3: 25 has a good parallel among the inds from grave 31 at Unec, dated to the 4th century.37 he only partially surviving object pl. 3: 28 was probably part of a particular type of Late La Tène and Roman knives, which were used with both hands.38 Nož t. 3: 25 ima dobro primerjavo v grobu 31 z Unca, datiranem v 4. stoletje.37 Posebni vrsti noža, namenjeni uporabi z dvema rokama, iz poznolatenske in rimske dobe, verjetno pripada delno ohranjeni predmet t. 3: 28.38 We do not know the use of the objects pl. 3: 29, 30. A similar object, for example, is known from Tonovcov grad,39 and another from the late antique settlement of Kuzelin.40 Namembnost predmetov t. 3: 29, 30 nam ni znana. Podoben predmet je znan npr. s Tonovcovega gradu39 in iz poznoatične naselbine Kuzelin.40 Objects similar to pl. 3: 32, 33 are known from late antique graves, e.g. at Unec and Dolnji Zemono.41 Judging by its parallels, the curb bit pl. 3: 35 is from the Late Middle Ages.42 Predmeti, podobni t. 3: 32, 33, so znani iz poznoantičnih grobov, npr. na Uncu in Dolnjem Zemonu.41 Of the fair quantities of “slag”, found in the central and northern parts of the ridge (ig. 5: 1, 9), only one fragment survives (ig. 7). Its relatively regular lattened shape, its density of ca. 6.5 g/cm, and its magnetic properties suggest it was not slag. We assume the preserved fragment was the product of melting down iron objects or perhaps iron ore.43 Od precejšnje količine »žlindre«, ki sta jo Golja in Močnik našla na osrednjem in severnem delu grebena (sl. 5: 1, 9), je ohranjen le en odlomek (sl. 7). Njegova razmeroma pravilna sploščena oblika, speciična gostota okoli 6,5 g/ cm in magnetnost kažejo, da ne gre za žlindro. Za ohranjeni odlomek domnevamo, da je produkt taljenja železnih predmetov ali morda železove rude.43 Discussion Diskusija he only reliable prehistoric object from the site is the Certosa-type brooch (pl. 1: 1). he fragments of two brooches pl. 1: 2, 3 come from the 1st and 2nd centuries, respectively. Most inds that can be narrowly dated are from (the second half of ) the 4th century or perhaps early 5th century, and are associated with menswear, or rather late Roman Edini zanesljivi prazgodovinski predmet z najdišča je certoška ibula (t. 1: 1). Iz 1. in 2. stoletja sta odlomka dveh ibul (t. 1: 2, 3). Večina časovno ožje določljivih najdb je iz (druge polovice) 4. stoletja in morda še z začetka 5. stoletja ter povezana z moško nošo oziroma s poznorimsko vojsko.44 To so okovi vojaških pasov (t. 1: 8, 9) in obročaste ibule (t. 1: 4–7). Iz istega ali pa mlajšega časa sta triroba puščična ost (t. 1: 11) in železna ost z zalustma (t. 1: 16). 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 372 two keys from Rifnik (Bolta 1981, pl. 25: 45–47) are not close parallels (cf. Ciglenečki, l. c.) either. I.e. Istenič 2000, pl. 55: 5; Müller 2011, ig. 2: 1, ig. 6; Bassi, Nicolis 1997, ig. 41. Late Iron Age: Guštin 1991, 72, pls. 7: 2, 17: 5, 36: 7; Nothdurter 1979, 66, pl. 45: 630, 631; Augustan age: Fingerlin 1986, 216, 557: 4; Harnecker 1997, 15, 61, pl. 28: 306; second half of the 3rd century: Ciglenečki 1990, pl. 2: 6; Late Antiquity: Gaspari et al. 2000, 195, 198, igs. 6: 5, 8: 17. I would like to acknowledge Jana Horvat (IzA ZRC SAZU) for the information. Dolenz 1998, 207–210, pl. 74: W291–300. Milavec 2011, pl. 46: 14. Sokol 1998, 28, cat. no. 47. Horvat, in this book. Predovnik 2003, 80, 232, ig. 74: 714; Štular 2009, 100, ig. 5.20. I would like to acknowledge Neva Trampuž Orel and Zoran Milić (both the NMS) for their help in identifying the object. Za brzdo t. 3: 35 primerjave kažejo, da je poznosrednjeveška.42 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 Npr. Istenič 2000, t. 55: 5; Müller 2011, sl. 2: 1, sl. 6; Bassi, Nicolis 1997, sl. 41. Mlajša železna doba: Guštin 1991, 72, t. 7: 2, 17: 5, 36: 7; Nothdurter 1979, 66, t. 45: 630, 631; avgustejska doba: Fingerlin 1986, 216, 557: 4; Harnecker 1997, 15, 61, t. 28: 306; druga polovica 3. stoletja: Ciglenečki 1990, t. 2: 6; pozna antika: Gaspari et al. 2000, 195, 198, sl. 6: 5, 8: 17. Za podatek se zahvaljujem Jani Horvat (IzA ZRC SAZU). Dolenz 1998, 207–210, t. 74: W291–300. Milavec 2011, t. 46: 14. Sokol 1998, 28, kat. št. 47. Horvat, v tem zborniku. Predovnik 2003, 80, 232, sl. 74: 714; Štular 2009, 100, sl. 5.20. Za pomoč pri opredelitvi predmeta se zahvaljujem Nevi Trampuž Orel in Zoranu Miliću (oba Narodni muzej Slovenije). Prim. Ciglenečki 2011, 260. military.44 hey are belt-stifeners and strap-ends (pl. 1: 8, 9), as well as penannular and annular brooches (pl. 1: 4–7). he three-bladed (pl. 1: 11) and the “swallow tail formed” arrowhead (pl. 1: 16) are either from the same period or more recent. he fourteen coins do not represent a large pattern, but it seems that two clear groups stand out: the coin of Emperor Valerian and the ive coins minted from 268 to 276, and the four coins minted from 364 to 383. Among the irst group, two coins are worn out, and four are well preserved; they suggest that the site was inhabited in the last third of the 3rd century. he absence of coins from the irst half and the mid-4th century is probably an indication that the site was not occupied during that period, since the 3rd century antoniniani were rarely in use after the end of the 3rd century or possibly the beginning of the 4th century.45 he group of coins minted from 364 to 383 (three well preserved and two worn), suggests the site was occupied during the last third of the 4th century. From the combination of data provided by coins and other inds from Mali Njivč, we therefore assume that the site was occupied during the last third of the 3rd century, and again during the last third of the 4th century. he use of the site in the irst case is only indicated by coins, rather than other inds. he coin of Honorius suggests that the site was not entirely abandoned in the 5th century; the projectileheads pl. 1: 12, 16 might come from the same period. Human presence at Mali Njivč in the last third of the 3rd century, indicated only by coins, chronologically corresponds to the earliest and probably short-lived hilltop settlements in the region of the south-eastern Alps. hey were related to the dangers to which the population in the middle and the second half of the 3rd century was exposed.46 We assume Mali Njivč was a refuge for a short period in the last third of the 3rd century. With its excellent view of the surroundings, the ridge of Mali Njivč has a highly signiicant strategic position. We therefore assume that the inds from the last third of the 4th century are associated with an army garrison, which was controlling a vital route, presumably passing by the site. he route was connecting northern Italy with its towns of Forum Iulii (Cividale del Friuli, Italy) and Aquileia (Aquileia, Italy) to the area of central Slovenia through the valley of the River Bača, where it was protected by a defensive wall at Zarakovec,47 and then probably continued over Bukovo.48 In addition to the inds from Mali Njivč, the route along the foothills above the Cerknica 44 45 46 47 48 Cf. Ciglenečki 2011, 260. Kos 2011, 229–231; Istenič 1999, 203. Ciglenečki 1990, 154–157. Šašel, Petru 1971, 82–84, ig. 11. Cf. Ciglenečki 2011, 261, 268, ig. 5.1. Štirinajst novcev sestavlja majhen vzorec, v katerem pa jasno izstopata dve skupini: Valerijanov novec in pet novcev, skovanih v obdobju od 268 do 276, ter štirje novci, skovani med 364 in 383. Med novci prve skupine so, poleg dveh izrabljenih, štirje dobro ohranjeni, ki kažejo na obljudenost najdišča v zadnji tretjini 3. stoletja. Odsotnost novcev iz prve polovice in sredine 4. stoletja verjetno kaže na neobljudenost najdišča v tem obdobju, saj so bili antoninijani druge polovice 3. stoletja po koncu 3. oziroma začetku 4. stoletja redko v obtoku.45 Skupina novcev, skovanih med 364 in 383 (trije dobro ohranjeni in dva izrabljena), kaže na obljudenost naselbine v zadnji tretjini 4. stoletja. Iz kombinacije podatkov, ki izhajajo iz novcev in drugih drobnih najdb z Malega Njivča, torej sklepamo, da je bilo najdišče obljudeno v zadnji tretjini 3. stoletja in v zadnji tretjini 4. stoletja. Uporabo v zadnji tretjini 3. stoletja izpričujejo le novci, saj ni razvidna iz drugih najdb. En Honorijev novec nakazuje, da v 5. stoletju najdišče ni bilo povsem opuščeno; iz tega obdobja sta morda tudi osti t. 1: 12, 16. Človekova navzočnost na Malem Njivču v zadnji tretjini 3. stoletja, ki je izpričana le z novci, časovno sovpada z najzgodnejšo in verjetno kratkotrajno poselitvijo višinskih naselbin na območju jugovzhodnih Alp. Ta je bila povezana z nevarnostmi v sredini in drugi polovici 3. stoletja.46 Domnevamo, da je bilo v zadnji tretjini 3. stoletja na Malem Njivču kratek čas pribežališče. Greben Mali Njivč ima zelo pomembno strateško lego. Ta omogoča nadzor nad okolico, zato domnevamo, da so najdbe iz zadnje tretjine 4. stoletja povezane z vojaško posadko, ki je nadzirala pomembno pot, ki je verjetno vodila mimo najdišča. Gre za pot, ki je severno Italijo z mestoma Forum Iulii (Čedad/Cividale, Italija) in Aquileia/ Oglej (Aquileia, Italija) povezovala z območjem osrednje Slovenije prek doline reke Bače, kjer jo je varovala zapora pri Zarakovcu47 in verjetno naprej preko Bukovega.48 Potek poti po obronkih pobočij nad dolino Cerknice ter mimo Malega Njivča, in ne prek Cerknega,49 kot je vodila srednjeveška pot Čedad–Škoja Loka,50 poleg najdb z Malega Njivča nakazuje zgodnjesrednjeveška postojanka na Gra- 45 46 47 48 49 50 Kos 2011, 229–231; Istenič 1999, 203. Ciglenečki 1990, 154–157. Šašel, Petru 1971, 82–84, sl. 11. Prim. Ciglenečki 2011, 261, 268, sl. 5.1. Iz Cerkna in njegove ožje okolice, kjer so bili iskalci z detektorji kovin precej dejavni (prim. Istenič 2005 in Istenič, v tem zborniku), poznamo le eno zanesljivo poznoantično najdbo, tj. bronasto ibulo z nazaj zavito nogo iz 6. stoletja z Gradišča v Cerknem (NMS, inv. št. S 8101; za opredelitev ibule se zahvaljujem Timoteju Kniicu, NMS). Več poznoantičnih najdb je bilo najdenih na različnih lokacijah v okolici zaselka Police, ki leži jugozahodno od Cerkna, na planoti nad reko Idrijco: puščična ost s tordiranim vratom, trikrilna puščična ost in čebuličasta ibula (NMS, inv. št. R 19054, R 26449, R 26509, S 4027). Kosi 1998, 247–248. 373 valley and past Mali Njivč is indicated by the early medieval site (presumably occupied by soldiers) of Gradišče above Trebenče.49 he extremely scarce late antique inds from Cerkno and its immediate vicinity, where the hunters with metal detector were quite active,50 also suggest that in Late Antiquity the road did not pass by Cerkno, contrary to the medieval road Cividale del Friuli–Škoja Loka.51 If the route indeed went by Mali Njivč, it seems likely that it continued over Leskovica in the direction of Poljanska dolina (the valley of the River Poljanščica) in the east and towards Selška dolina (the valley of the River Selščica) in the north. he route connection between Forum Iulii and central Slovenia across the mountainous region between Idrija and Škoja Loka was important as early as the end of the 1st century BC, when the Romans were conquering the south-eastern Alps.52 In Late Antiquity, the site of Puštal above Trnje by Škoja Loka was probably related to the control of this route (ig. 8). Ciglenečki describes the site as a fort on a naturally protected and additionally fortiied area of 180 × 120 m, where pottery from the Late Antiquity was found.53 here, in the previous two decades, hunters with metal detectors have dug up Late La Tène, Roman and late antique artefacts, now kept in the NMS,54 as well as a hoard of tools and other objects from the second half of the 4th and early 5th centuries, kept by the museum at 49 50 51 52 53 54 374 I would like to acknowledge Timotej Kniic (the NMS) for the information. Cf. Istenič 2005 and Istenič, this book. The only reliable ind is a 6th century bronze brooch with a foot bent backwards from Gradišče v Cerknem (the NMS, Inv. No. S 8101; dated by Timotej Kniic). Several inds from Late Antiquity were discovered on various locations around the settlement of Police, located SW of Cerkno, on a plateau above the River Idrijca: an arrowhead with a spirally-twisted neck, a threebladed arrowhead and a crossbow brooch (the NMS, Inv. Nos. R 19054, R 26449, R 26509, S 4027). Kosi 1998, 247–248. Horvat 2009, 372. Ciglenečki 1987, 89, ig. 120 (the altitude cited there is incorrect). Inv. Nos. the NMS R 17792–17799, R 18887, R 17860–R 17864, R 18766, S 2549, S 2559, S 2563, S 3314, S 3484–3490, S 4002–4025, S 5085–5088; cf. Kniic, Sagadin 1991, cat. no. 72; Plaum 2001a; Plaum 2001b (In her paper on the strap end Inv. No. R 17793 (Plaum 2001a), Veronika Plaum states “Gorenja Raven” (without any other geographical data) as its ind spot, which is incorrect. She was misled by the claim by one of the inders that the ind spot of the object was Gornja Raven near Škoja Loka. We assume the inder was using either a 1 : 10,000 or 1 : 25,000 scale map; they both have the name Mala Roven (568.6 m a.s.l.) in place of the name Puštal on the 1 : 5,000 scale map. For the purpose of this paper, we have checked the ind spot data with both of the inders and determined it was undoubtedly the same site, i.e. Puštal above Trnje. Ciglenečki (2011, 261–262, ig. 5.1) assumed from Plaum’s publication 2001a that her “Gorenja Ravan” was a new site and located it to the area of the village of Gorenja Ravan on the western slopes of Malenski vrh between Selška and Poljanska Valleys); Štukl 2004, 416. dišču nad Trebenčami.51 Če je pot res vodila mimo Malega Njivča, se zdi verjetno njeno nadaljevanje na vzhod čez Leskovico proti Poljanski dolini in na sever proti Selški dolini. Povezava med Forumom Iulii in osrednjo Slovenijo čez Idrijsko in Škojeloško hribovje po Poljanski ali po Selški dolini je bila pomembna že ob koncu 1. stoletja pr. Kr., ko so Rimljani osvajali jugovzhodne Alpe.52 Z nadzorovanjem te poti v pozni antiki je verjetno povezano najdišče Puštal nad Trnjem pri Škoji Loki, ki je bilo sicer namenjeno predvsem nadzoru nad potjo po Selški dolini (sl. 8). Ciglenečki najdišče omenja kot utrdbo na naravno zavarovanem in dodatno utrjenem območju velikosti okoli 180 × 120 m, na katerem je bila najdena poznoantična keramika.53 V zadnjih dveh desetletjih so na njem s pomočjo detektorjev kovin amaterji izkopali predmete pozne latenske, rimske in poznoantične dobe, ki jih hrani Narodni muzej Slovenije,54 ter depojsko najdbo orodja idr. predmetov iz druge polovice 4. in začetka 5. stoletja, ki jo hrani Loški muzej.55 Med posamičnimi najdbami je veliko poznoantičnih predmetov. Vključujejo okove pasov in čebuličasto ibulo ter nakazujejo navzočnost vojske v drugi polovici 4. in/ali začetku 5. stoletja.56 Z istega najdišča izvirajo rimski novci, med katerimi močno prevladujejo poznoantični, največ iz druge polovice 4. stoletja, pa tudi vzhodnogotski novci prve polovice 6. stoletja – štirje novci iz skupinske najdbe, zakopane po 539, in en posamičen.57 Lega najdišča je idealna za nadzor nad potjo po Selški dolini, omogoča pa tudi širši pregled nad izhodom iz hribovitega sveta na zahodu na Sorško polje. Najdišče Mali Njivč je po ugodni strateški legi ob pomembni komunikaciji in po dataciji podobno Tonovcovemu gradu pri Kobaridu. Tam je bila v drugi polovici 4. in 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 Za podatek se zahvaljujem Timoteju Kniicu (NMS). Horvat 2009, 372. Ciglenečki 1987, 89, sl. 120 (pri navedbi nadmorske višine je nastala pomota). Inv. št. NMS R 17792–17799, R 18887, R 17860–R 17864, R 18766, S 2549, S 2559, S 2563, S 3314, S 3484–3490, S 4002– 4025, S 5085–5088; prim. Kniic, Sagadin 1991, kat. št. 72; Plaum 2001a; Plaum 2001b (Veronika Plaum je pri objavi jermenskega zaključka inv. št. R 17793 (Plaum 2001a) kot najdišče navedla »Gorenja Raven« (brez drugih geografskih podatkov!), kar je narobe. Zavedel jo je podatek enega od najditeljev, da je najdišče predmeta Gornja Raven v bližini Škoje Loke. Domnevamo, da je uporabljal geografsko karto v merilu 1 : 10.000 ali 1 : 25.000; na obeh je namreč Mala Roven (568,6 m nm. v.) imenovano območje, ki je na karti v merilu 1 : 5.000 poimenovano Puštal. Ob pisanju tega članka smo pri obeh najditeljih preverili najdiščne podatke in ugotovili, da gre nedvomno za eno najdišče, tj. Puštal nad Trnjem. Ciglenečki (2011, 261–262, sl. 5.1) je iz objave Plaum 2001a sklepal, da je tam navedena Gorenja Ravan novo najdišče in ga je lociral na območje vasi Gorenja Ravan na zahodnem pobočju Malenskega vrha na območju med Selško in Poljansko dolino); Štukl 2004, 416. Štukl 2004. NMS R 17860, R 17862, R 17792, R 17793, R 17795; Plaum 2001a; Plaum 2001b; Plaum 2002, 274, t. 3: 23, 31. FMRSl III, 71; FMRSl IV, 76; FMRSl V, 52, 53. Škoja Loka.55 Among other inds, many are late antique, including belt ittings and a crossbow brooch, indicating Roman military presence in the second half of the 4th and/ or early 5th centuries.56 Coins from the same site are largely from the Late Antiquity: mostly Roman coins from the second half of the 4th century, but also ive Visigoth coins, which date from the irst half of the 6th century (four come from a collective ind, buried after 539).57 he exceptional position of the site is ideal for the control of the route along Selška dolina, but it also enables a wider supervision over the exit/entrance ways from the hills onto Sorško polje from the west. In terms of a favourable strategic position along an important communication line and in terms of chronology, the site of Mali Njivč resembles Tonovcov grad at Kobarid. According to Ciglenečki, Tonovcov grad was the site of an army garrison, guarding the Forum Iulii–the Adige Valley–the Soča Valley–Predel–Koroška route, and was part of the military frontier that protected Italy.58 Conclusion he two prehistoric artefacts suggest a limited human presence at Mali Njivč in the Early Iron Age. As indicated from the coins and other small inds, the site was occupied in the last third of the 3rd century and again in the last third of the 4th century, and, perhaps, was not entirely abandoned in the 5th century. Mali Njivč seems to have been occupied for a short time in the last third of the 3rd century, similarly to other hilltop settlements in the region of the south-eastern Alps during the dangerous times in the mid- to late 3rd century. prvih treh desetletjih 5. stoletja po mnenju Ciglenečkega nameščena vojaška posadka, ki je varovala cesto Čedad/Forum Iulii–dolina Nadiže–dolina Soče–Predel–Koroška in je bila sestavni del vojne krajine, namenjene obrambi Italije.58 Sklep We assume that in the last third of the 4 century Mali Njivč was a location of an army garrison. he indications are the small inds (coins and objects associated with the Roman army), an outstanding strategic position, which enables the control over an important communication line, as well as the comparison to the site of Tonovcov grad at Kobarid. It is the position of Mali Njivč that actually suggests the course of a route that connected northern Italy through the valley of the River Bača with central Slovenia, or, more speciically, the course of the segment east of Bukovo. We assume it lead along the foothills on the edge of the valley of Cerknica to the area below Mali Njivč, from where two routes are possible: either north towards the Selška dolina or east towards the Poljanska dolina. th 55 56 57 58 Štukl 2004. The NMS R 17860, R 17862, R 17792, R 17793, R 17795; Plaum 2001a; Plaum 2001b; Plaum 2002, 274, pl. 3: 23, 31. FMRSl III, 71; FMRSl IV, 76; FMRSl V, 52, 53. Ciglenečki 2011, 259–260, 264–265. Prazgodovinski najdbi nakazujeta skromno človekovo navzočnost na Malem Njivču v starejši železni dobi. Glede na novce in druge drobne najdbe je bilo najdišče obljudeno v zadnji tretjini 3. stoletja in v zadnji tretjini 4. stoletja ter v 5. stoletju morda ni bilo povsem opuščeno. Figure 8. The assumed late Roman routes, settlements and defensive walls in northeastern Slovenia (updated from Ciglenečki 2011, ig. 5.1.). Slika 8. Severozahodna Slovenija z domnevnim potekom cest in poti v pozni rimski dobi ter sočasnimi zaporami in naselbinami (dopolnjeno po Ciglenečki 2011, sl. 5.1). Zdi se, da je bil Mali Njivč poseljen kratek čas v zadnji tretjini 3. stoletja, podobno kot druge višinske naselbine na območju jugovzhodnih Alp v obdobju nevarnosti v sredini in drugi polovici 3. stoletja. Domnevamo, da je bila v zadnji tretjini 4. stoletja na Malem Njivču vojaška postojanka. Na to kažejo drobne najdbe (novci in predmeti, ki jih povezujemo z rimsko vojsko), izjemna strateška lega, ki omogoča nadzor nad pomembno komunikacijo in primerjava z najdiščem Tonovcov grad pri Kobaridu. Prav lega Malega Njivča namreč nakazuje potek poti, ki je severno Italijo prek doline Bače povezovala z 58 Ciglenečki 2011, 259–260, 264–265. 375 Acknowledgments Timotej Kniic provided me with invaluable information and advice in studying the material and preparing this paper, while Boštjan Laharnar (both Archaeological Department of the NMS) helped me with organizing the making of the site map. Alenka Miškec (Coin Cabinet, the NMS) kindly provided me with information regarding the coin inds and found time to discuss their interpretation with me. Jana Horvat and Slavko Ciglenečki read the manuscript and gave valuable comments, while Dragan Božič (all Institute of Archaeology, ZRC SAZU) helped me date some of the objects. My sincere gratitude to all of them. Translation: Katarina Jerin Language editing: Terry Troy Jackson 376 osrednjo Slovenijo, natančneje potek njenega odseka vzhodno od Bukovega. Domnevamo, da je vodil po obronkih pobočij nad dolino Cerknice do pod Malim Njivčem, od koder sta možni dve nadaljevanji: na sever proti Selški dolini ali na vzhod proti Poljanski dolini. Zahvale Pri študiju gradiva in pripravi članka so bila zelo dragocena najrazličnejša pojasnila in nasveti Timoteja Kniica (Arheološki oddelek NMS). Boštjan Laharnar (Arheološki oddelek NMS) mi je pomagal pri organizaciji izdelave načrta najdišča. Alenka Miškec (Numizmatični kabinet NMS) mi je prijazno posredovala podatke o novčnih najdbah in si vzela čas za pogovor z mano o njihovi interpretaciji. Jana Horvat in Slavko Ciglenečki sta prečitala rokopis in prispevala dragocene pripombe, Dragan Božič (vsi Inštitut za arheologijo ZRC SAZU) pa mi je pomagal pri opredelitvi nekaj predmetov. Vsem se iskreno zahvaljujem. CATALOGUE KATALOG he objects are kept by the National Museum of Slovenia. Najdbe hrani Narodni muzej Slovenije. Plate 1. 1. Certosa type brooch; length 133 mm; copper alloy; Inv. No. P 29120. 2. Head and bow of a brooch with a narrow hinge, the upper side of the wide bow is devided in two iels decorated by incised ornament (no traces of niello or enamel are discernable); surviving length 33 mm; copper alloy; Inv. No. R 26834. 3. Foot and part of the bow of a brooch (Almgren Type 69?); surviving length 53 mm; copper alloy; Inv. No. R 26829. 4. Pennanular brooch with coiled terminals; length 46 mm; iron; Inv. No. R 26846. 5. Annular brooch with a rectangular extension and punched decoration; length 61 mm; copper alloy, iron pin; Inv. No. R 26835. 6. Annular brooch with a rectangular extension and punched decoration, the pin is missing; length 55 mm; copper alloy; Inv. No. R 26841. 7. Annular brooch with elaborate extension and punched decoration, the pin is missing; length 76 mm; copper alloy; Inv. No. R 26840. 8. Propeller-stifener with punched and chased decoration; length 40 mm; copper alloy; Inv. No. R 26836. 9. Amphora-shaped strap-end with punched decoration; surviving length 48 mm; copper alloy; Inv. No. R 26837. 10. Spearhead; surviving length 129 mm; iron; Inv. No. P 29119. 11. hree-bladed tanged arrowhead; length 57 mm; iron; Inv. No. R 26848. 12. Tanged and collared projectile of triangular section; length 61 mm; iron; Inv. No. R 26821. 13. Socketed projectile of square section; length 77 mm; iron; Inv. No. R 26820. 14. Socketed projectile of square section, the socket is split; length 81 mm; iron; Inv. No. R 26819. 15. Projectile (?); length 53 mm; iron; Inv. No. R 26865. 16. Arrowhead of a »swallow tail form« with a split socket; surviving length 8,7 mm; iron; Inv. No. R 26822. Tabla 1. 1. Certoška ibula, dol. 133 mm; bakrova zlitina; inv. št. P 29120. 2. Glava in lok ibule s skovanim (tulastim) tečajem, ohr. dol. 33 mm; zgornja stran širokega trakastega loka je s prečnimi rebri razdeljena na dve polji, v katerih je vrezan okras (v njem ni videti sledov niella ali emajla); bakrova zlitina; inv. št. R 26834. 3. Noga in del loka močno proilirane ibule (Almgren 69?), ohr. dol. 53 mm; bakrova zlitina; inv. št. R 26829. 4. Obročasta ibula z zavitima koncema, dol. 46 mm; železo; inv. št. R 26846. 5. Obročasta ibula z enostavnim nastavkom, ob robu punciran okras, dol. 61 mm; bakrova zlitina, trn železen; R 26835. 6. Obročasta ibula z enostavnim nastavkom, dol. 55 mm; bakrova zlitina; inv. št. R 26841. 7. Obročasta ibula z razčlenjenim nastavkom, dol. 76 mm; bakrova zlitina; inv. št. R 26840. 8. Krilati okov, dol. 40 mm; na licu punciran in morda tudi vgraviran okras; bakrova zlitina; inv. št. R 26836. 9. Okov v obliki amfore, ohr. dol. 48 mm; na licu punciran okras; bakrova zlitina; inv. št. R 26837. 10. Sulična ost, ohr. dol. 129 mm; železo; inv. št. P 29119. 11. Trikrilna puščična ost, dol. 57 mm; železo; inv. št. R 26848. 12. Izstrelek s konico trikotnega preseka in s trnom, dol. 61 mm; železo; inv. št. R 26821. 13. Izstrelek z dolgim tulastim nasadiščem in konico štirikotnega preseka, ina izdelava, dol. 77 mm; železo; inv. št. R 26820. 14. Izstrelek s tulastim nasadiščem in konico štirikotnega preseka, groba izdelava, dol. 81 mm; železo; inv. št. R 26819. 15. Izstrelek, dol. 53 mm; železo; R 26865. 16. Ost s tulastim nastavkom in konico z zalustima, ohr. dol. 8,7 mm; železo; inv. št. R 26822. Plate 2. 17. Key; length 224 mm; iron; Inv. No. R 26842. 18. Key; length 195 mm; iron; Inv. No. R 26843. 19. Key; surviving length 220 mm; iron; Inv. No. R 26844. 20. Key; reconstructed length 86 mm; iron; Inv. No. R 26845. 21. Elongated object with chased ornament; length 85 mm; leaded bronze;59 Inv. No. R 26866. 22. Elongated object; surviving length 51 mm; copper60; Inv. No. R 26867. 23. Fragment of a drill; surviving length 83 mm; iron; Inv. No. R 26826. 24. Part od a ladle; surviving length 148 mm; iron; Inv. No. R 26847. Plate 3. 25. Knife; surviving length 220 mm; iron; Inv. No. R 26818. 26. Knife; surviving length 165 mm; iron; Inv. No. R 26825. 27. Part of a knife (?); surviving length 87 mm; iron; Inv. No. R 26828. 28. Part of a tool with a blade and a handle; surviving length 86 mm; iron; Inv. No. R 26830. 29. Object with a chisel-shaped end; length 122 mm; iron; Inv. No. R 26816. 30. Object with a chisel-shaped end; surviving length 67 mm; iron; Inv. No. R 26817. 31. Staple; surviving length 72 mm; iron; Inv. No. R 26827. 32. Pointed object with a ring-loop; surviving length 104 mm; iron; Inv. No. R 26823. 33. Pointed object with a ring-loop; surviving length 118 mm; iron; Inv. No. R 26824. 34. Rod-like and twice bent object, one end pointed, the other lat and curved; length 97 mm; iron; Inv. No. R 26868. 35. Curb bit; length 130 mm; iron; Inv. No. G 13419. 36. Fragment of a Certosa type brooch; surviving length 19 mm; copper alloy; Inv. No. P 29121. 37. Ring; diameter 53 mm; iron; Inv. No. R 26831. Figure 7. Fragment of a lat object, product of melting down iron objects or perhaps of melting down iron ore, dimensions 87 × 51 × 18 mm, density ca. 6,5 g/cm3; Inv. No. R 26832. 59 60 Results of the characterisation (XRF) performed on object’s surface (by Zoran Milić, the National Museum of Slovenia): Cu 50.5 %, Pb 25.3 %, Sn 24.2 %. Characterisation (XRF) of the material, performed on object’s surface, by Zoran Milić, the National Museum of Slovenia. Tabla 2. 17. Ključ, dol. 224 mm; železo; inv. št. R 26842. 18. Ključ, dol. 195 mm; železo; inv. št. R 26843. 19. Ključ, ohr. dol. 220 mm; železo; inv. št. R 26844. 20. Ključ, rek. dol. 86 mm; železo; inv. št. R 26845. 21. Ploščata palčka, na sredini zgornje strani vrezan okras, dol. 85 mm; svinčev bron59; R 26866. 22. Paličast predmet, ohr. dol. 51 mm; baker60; R 26867. 23. Žlička svedra, ohr. dol. 83 mm; železo; inv. št. R 26826. 24. Zajemalo in del trakastega ročaja zajemalke, ohr. dol. 148 mm; železo; inv. št. R 26847. Tabla 3. 25. Nož, zaključek ročaja ni ohr., ohr. dol. 220 mm; železo; inv. št. R 26818. 26. Nož, ohr. dol. 165 mm; železo; inv. št. R 26825. 27. Del noža (?), ohr. dol. 87 mm; železo; inv. št. R 26828. 28. Del orodja z ravnim rezilom in pravokotno nanj postavljenim ročajnim trnom, ohr. dol. 86 mm; železo; inv. št. R 26830. 29. Predmet s trikotno oblikovanim delom, ki ima dletasto priostreno konico, dol. 122 mm; železo; inv. št. R 26816. 30. Predmet s trikotno oblikovanim delom, ki ima dletasto priostreno konico, ohr. dol. 67 mm; železo; inv. št. R 26817. 31. Razcepka z zanko okroglega preseka, ohr. dol. 72 mm; železo; inv. št. R 26827. 32. Koničast predmet z obročasto zanko, ohr. dol. 104 mm; železo; inv. št. R 26823. 33. Koničast predmet z obročasto zanko, ohr. dol. 118 mm; železo; inv. št. R 26824. 34. Paličast dvakrat zapognjen predmet, en konec je koničasto zaključen, drugi sploščen in usločen, dol. 97 mm; železo; inv. št. R 26868. 35. Brzda, dolžina 130 mm; železo; inv. št. G 13419. 36. Odlomek loka certoške ibule, ohr. dol. 19 mm; bakrova zlitina; inv. št. P 29121 37. Obroč, premer 53 mm; železo; inv. št. R 26831. Slika 7. Del ploščatega predmeta, produkt taljenja železa ali morda železove rude, 87 × 51 mm, debel. 18 mm, gostota okoli 6,5 g/cm3; inv. št. R 26832. 59 60 Razultati XRF analize na površini predmeta (Zoran Milić, Narodni muzej Slovenije): Cu 50,5 %, Pb 25,3 %, Sn 24,2 %. XRF analizo na površini predmeta je naredil dipl. ing. Zoran Milić, Narodni muzej Slovenije. 377 CATALOGUE OF COINS KATALOG NOVCEV Andrej Šemrov Andrej Šemrov Coins, individual inds. he names of emperors are followed by denomination (S = sestertius, As = as, An = antoninianus, AE = a bronze coin, the number indicates its size), the date, the mint (Sis = Siscia, Aq = Aquileia, Tes = hessalonica), standard bibliography and mintmark. he list gives the inventory number (Coin Cabinet, National Museum of Slovenia), measurements (Φ = diameter, wt. = weight, dim. = dimensions) and condition of coins. Novci, posamične najdbe. Pod posameznimi vladarji si sledijo podatki o nominalni vrednosti novca (S = sestertius, As = as, An = antoninianus, AE = bronast novec, številka označuje njegovo velikost), dataciji kovanja, kovnici (Sis = Siscia, Aq = Aquileia, Tes = hessalonica), standardni literaturi in priznaku kovnice. V seznamu so navedene inventarne številke (Numizmatični kabinet, Narodni muzej Slovenije), mere (dim. = dimenzije, Φ = premer, t. = teža) in stopnja ohranjenosti novcev. Rome / Rim Traianus 1 S 98–117 Roma RIC II ? Antoninus Pius (Faustina I. or / ali Diva Faustina I.) 2 As 138–161 Roma RIC III ? 177–178 Roma RIC III 1230 - RIC V/1 - (ad 104A) MIR - (ad 69c) M. Aurelius 3 S Valerianus I. 4 An after / po 255 Claudius II. 5 An 268–270 Roma RIC V/1 92K 6 An 268–270 Sis RIC V/1 181F 7 An 268–270 ? RIC V/1 ? ? I Tacitus 8 An 275–276 Roma RIC V/1 150F P 9 An 275–276 ? RIC V/1 ? ? Minting period / Obdobje kovanja 364–378 Valentinianus I. 10 AE 3 364–375 ? RIC IX ? ? 364–378 ? RIC IX ? ? 367–375 Tes RIC IX 26c xv TES */B RIC IX 30b 1 SMAQ RIC X ? ? Valens 11 AE 3 Gratianus 12 AE 3 Minting period / Obdobje kovanja 378–383 Valentinianus II. 13 AE 2 378–383 Aq Minting period / Obdobje kovanja 408–423 Honorius 14 378 AE 3 408–423 ? 1. LJ 84048. Reverse: standing igure. Wt.: 23.95 g. Φ: 32.5 mm. Axis: 6. Worn. 2. LJ 84052. Identiied according to portrait. Wt.: 9.97 g. Dim.: 22.5 × 23.5 mm. Worn. 1. LJ 84048. Reverz: stoječa igura. T.: 23,95 g. Φ: 32,5 mm. Položaj pečata: 6. Izrabljen. 2. LJ 84052. Določitev po portretu. T.: 9,97 g. Dim.: 22,5 × 23,5 mm. Izrabljen. 3. LJ 84049. Wt.: 20.1 g. Φ: 30 mm. Axis: 12. Well preserved. 4. LJ 84051. Cast, limesfalsa, imitation. Wt.: 2.37 g. Dim.: 18 × 20 mm. Axis: 6. Well preserved. 5. LJ 84053. Wt.: 1.89 g. Dim.: 22.5 × 20.5 mm. Axis: 12. Well preserved. 6. LJ 84054. Wt.: 1.6 g. Φ: 17 mm. Axis: 12. Well preserved. 7. LJ 84047. Reverse: Providentia (?) left. Wt.: 2.07 g. Dim.: 18.5 × 16.5 mm. Axis: 6. Worn. 8. LJ 84046. Wt.: 1.95 g. Dim.: 21 × 20 mm. Axis: 11. Well preserved. 9. LJ 84056. Wt.: 5.2 g. Dim.: 20.5 × 21.5 mm. Axis: 12. Worn. 10. LJ 84050. Wt.: 1.66 g. Φ: 17 mm. Axis: 12. Well preserved. 11. LJ 84044. Wt.: 1.22 g. Dim.: 16.5 × 18.5 mm. Axis: 12. Worn. 12. LJ 84045. Wt.: 2.05 g. Dim.: 17 × 16 mm. Axis: 12. Well preserved. 13. LJ 84057. Wt.: 3.22 g. Φ: 23.5 mm. Axis: 12. Well preserved. 14. LJ 84055. Wt.: 2.14 g. Φ: 15.5 mm. Axis: 12. Worn. 3. LJ 84049. T.: 20,1 g. Φ: 30 mm. Položaj pečata: 12. Dobro ohranjen. 4. LJ 84051. Ulitek, limes falsa, imitacija. T.: 2,37 g. Dim.: 18 × 20 mm. Položaj pečata: 6. Dobro ohranjen. 5. LJ 84053. T.: 1,89 g. Dim.: 22,5 × 20,5 mm. Položaj pečata: 12. Dobro ohranjen. 6. LJ 84054. T.: 1,6 g. Φ: 17 mm. Položaj pečata: 12. Dobro ohranjen. 7. LJ 84047. Reverz: Providentia (?) levo. T.: 2,07 g. Dim.: 18,5 × 16,5 mm. Položaj pečata: 6. Izrabljen. 8. LJ 84046. T.: 1,95 g. Dim.: 21 × 20 mm. Položaj pečata: 11. Dobro ohranjen. 9. LJ 84056. T.: 5,2 g. Dim.: 20,5 × 21,5 mm. Položaj pečata: 12. Izrabljen. 10. LJ 84050. T.: 1,66 g. Φ: 17 mm. Položaj pečata: 12. Dobro ohranjen. 11. LJ 84044. T.: 1,22 g. Dim.: 16,5 × 18,5 mm. Položaj pečata: 12. Izrabljen. 12. LJ 84045. T.: 2,05 g. Dim.: 17 × 16 mm. Položaj pečata: 12. Dobro ohranjen. 13. LJ 84057. T.: 3,22 g. Φ: 23,5 mm. Položaj pečata: 12. Dobro ohranjen. 14. LJ 84055. T.: 2,14 g. Φ: 15,5 mm. Položaj pečata: 12. Izrabljen. BIBLIOGRAPHY / LITERATURA BASSI, C., NICOLIS, F. 1997, Elementi per conoscenza dei sistemi di apertura e chiusura in età romana: lo scavo archeologico di Mezzocorona-Giontec. − In/V: U. Rafaelli (ed./ur.), Oltre la porta, Serrature, chiavi e forzieri dalla preistoria all’età moderna nelle Alpi orientali, Trento, 103–114. BIERBRAUER, V. 1987, Invillino − Ibligo in Friaul 1. − Münchner Beiträge zur Vor- und Frühgeschichte 33, München. BOLTA, L. 1981, Rifnik pri Šentjurju. Poznoantična naselbina in grobišče / Rifnik – spätantike Siedlung und Gräberfeld. – Katalogi in monograije 19, Ljubljana. BREŠČAK, D. 1990, Gradec nad Mihovim. − In/V: Arheološka najdišča Dolenjske, Arheo, Posebna številka, izdana ob 100-letnici arheoloških raziskav v Novem mestu, 13. 9. 1890 – 13. 9. 1990, Novo mesto, 105–106. BUORA, M. 1991, Punte di freccia a tre alette dal Friuli-Venezia Giulia. − Civiltà Padana 3, 59−78. CIGLENEČKI, S. 1987, Höhenbefestigungen aus der Zeit vom 3. bis 6. Jh. im Ostalpenraum / Višinske utrdbe iz časa 3. do 6. st. v vzhodnoalpskem prostoru. – Dela 1. razreda SAZU 31, Ljubljana. CIGLENEČKI, S. 1990, K problemu datacije nastanka rimskodobnih višinskih utrdb v jugovzhodnoalpskem prostoru. – Šašlov zbornik, Arheološki vestnik 41, 147–176 [summary in German / povzetek v nemščini]. CIGLENEČKI, S. 1999, Results and problems in the Archaeology of the Late Antiquity in Slovenia / Izsledki in problemi poznoantične arheologije v Sloveniji. − Arheološki vestnik 50, 287−309. CIGLENEČKI, S. 2000, Tinje nad Loko pri Žusmu / Tinje oberhalb von Loka pri Žusmu. − Opera Instituti Archaeologici Sloveniae 4, Ljubljana. CIGLENEČKI, S. 2011, Vloga in pomen poznoantične naselbine / he role and importance of the Late Antique settlement. − In/V: S. Ciglenečki, Z. Modrijan, T. Milavec, Poznoantična utrjena naselbina Tonovcov grad pri Kobaridu, Naselbinski ostanki in interpretacija / Late Antique fortiied settlement Tonovcov grad near Kobarid, Settlement remains and interpretation, Opera Instituti Archaeologici Sloveniae 23, Ljubljana, 257−287. DOLENZ, H. 1998, Eisenfunde aus der Stadt auf dem Magdalensberg. – Kärntner Museumsschriften 75, Archäologische Forschungen zu den Grabungen auf dem Magdalensberg 13, Klagenfurt. DULAR, A. 1991, Prazgodovinska grobišča v okolici Vinjega vrha nad Belo cerkvijo / Die vorgeschichtlichen Nekropolen in der Umgebung von Vinji vrh oberhalb von Bela cerkev. – Katalogi in monograije 26, Ljubljana FEUGÈRE, M. 1985, Les ibules en Gaule méridionale. De la conquête à la in du Ve s. ap. J.-C. – Revue Archéologique de Narbonnaise, Supplément 12, Paris. FEUGÈRE, M. 1993, Les armes des Romains. − Paris. FEUGÈRE, M. 1996, L’armement du Bas-Empire. – In/V: M. Reddée, J. Bénard (eds./ur.), L’armée romaine en Gaule, Paris, 267–278. FINGERLIN, G. 1986, Dangstetten I. Katalog der Funde (Fundstellen 1 bis 603). – Forschungen und Berichte zur Vor- und Frühgeschichte in Baden-Württemberg 22, Stuttgart. 379 FMRSl III: P. Kos, A. Šemrov, Die Fundmünzen der römischen Zeit in Slowenien III. – Berlin 1995. FMRSl IV: A. Šemrov, Die Fundmünzen der römischen Zeit in Slowenien IV. – Berlin 1998. FMRSl V: A. Šemrov, Die Fundmünzen der römischen Zeit in Slowenien V. – Mainz am Rhein 2004. FREEDEN, U. von 1991, Awarische Funde in Süddeutschland?. − Jahrbuch des Römisch-Germanischen Zentralmuseums Mainz 38/2, 593– 627. GASPARI, A., GUŠTIN, M., LAZAR, I., ŽBONA TRKMAN, B. 2000, Late Roman tool inds from Celje, Gradišče at Zbelovska gora and Sv. Pavel above Vrtovin (Slovenia). − In/V: M. Feugère, M. Guštin (eds./ur.), Iron, Blacksmiths and Tools, Ancient European Crafts, Acts of the Instrumentum Conference at Podsreda (Slovenia) in April 1999, Monographies Instrumentum 12, Montagnac, 187−203. GUŠTIN, M. 1991, Posočje in der jüngeren Eisenzeit. – Katalogi in monograije 27, Ljubljana [summary in Slovene / povzetek v slovenščini]. HARNECKER, J. 1997, Katalog der Eisenfunde von Haltern aus den Grabungen der Jahre 1949–1994. – Bodenaltertümer Westfalens 35, Mainz am Rhein. HORVAT, J. 2002, he Hoard of Roman Republican Weapons from Grad near Šmihel / Zaklad rimskega republikanskega orožja z Gradu pri Šmihelu pod Nanosom. – Arheološki vestnik 53, 117–192. HORVAT, J. 2009, Selected Aspects of Romanisation in Western and Central Slovenia. – In/V: G. Cuscito (ed./ur.), Aspetti e problemi della romanizzazione, Venetia, Histria e Arco Alpino orientale, Antichità Altoadriatiche 68, 355–381. ISTENIČ, J. 1999, Poetovio, zahodna grobišča I. Grobne celote iz Deželnega muzeja Joanneuma v Gradcu / Poetovio, the western cemeteries I. Grave-Groups in the Landesmuseum Joanneum, Graz. – Katalogi in monograije 32, Ljubljana. ISTENIČ, J. 2000, Poetovio, zahodna grobišča II. Grobne celote iz Deželnega muzeja Joanneuma v Gradcu. Katalog / Poetovio, the western cemeteries II. Grave-Groups in the Landesmuseum Joanneum, Graz. Catalogue. – Katalogi in monograije 33, Ljubljana. ISTENIČ, J. 2005, Evidence for a very late Republican siege at Grad near Reka in Western Slovenia. – “Archäologie der Schlachtfelder – Militaria aus Zerstörungshorizonten”, Carnuntum Jahrbuch 2005, Wien, 77–87 [summary in German / povzetek v nemščini]. JABLONKA, P. 2001, Die Gurina bei Dellach im Gailtal. Siedlung, Handelsplatz und Heiligtum. – Aus Forschung und Kunst 33, Klagenfurt. KNIFIC, T. 1993, Hunski sledovi v Sloveniji? − In/V: B. Lamut (ed./ur.), Ptujski arheološki zbornik ob 100-letnici muzeja in Muzejskega društva, Ptuj, 521−542 [summary in English / povzetek v angleščini]. 380 KNIFIC, T., SAGADIN, M. 1991, Pismo brez pisave. Arheologija o prvih stoletjih krščanstva na Slovenskem. – Ljubljana. KONRAD, M. 1997, Das römische Gräberfeld von Bregenz – Brigantium I. − Münchner Beiträge zur Vor- und Frühgeschichte 51, München. KOS, P. 2011, Novčne najdbe / Coin inds. – In/V: Z. Modrijan, T. Milavec, Poznoantična utrjena naselbina Tonovcov grad pri Kobaridu, Najdbe / Late Antique fortiied settlement Tonovcov grad near Kobarid, Finds, Opera Instituti Archaeologici Sloveniae 24, Ljubljana, 221−238. KOSI, M. 1998, Potujoči srednji vek. Cesta, popotnik in promet na Slovenskem med antiko in 16. stoletjem. – Ljubljana. MILAVEC, T. 2011, Kovinske najdbe / Metal inds. – In/V: Z. Modrijan, T. Milavec, Poznoantična utrjena naselbina Tonovcov grad pri Kobaridu, Najdbe / Late Antique fortiied settlement Tonovcov grad near Kobarid, Finds, Opera Instituti Archaeologici Sloveniae 24, Ljubljana, 21–81. MIR: R. Göbl, Die Münzprägung der Kaiser: Valerianus I./Gallienus/Saloninus (253/268), Regalianus (260) und Macrianus/Quietus (260/262). – Denkschriften / Österreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften, Philosophisch-historische Klasse 286 = Veröfentlichungen der Numismatischen Kommission 35, Wien, 2000. MODRIJAN, Z., CIGLENEČKI, S., MILAVEC, T. 2011, Terenski izvid / Field report. − In/V: S. Ciglenečki, Z. Modrijan, T. Milavec, Poznoantična utrjena naselbina Tonovcov grad pri Kobaridu, Naselbinski ostanki in interpretacija / Late Antique fortiied settlement Tonovcov grad near Kobarid, Settlement remains and interpretation, Opera Instituti Archaeologici Sloveniae 23, Ljubljana, 65−162. MÜLLER, M. 2011, Schlüssel und Schloss im römischen Alltag. − In/V: M. Reuter, R. Schiavone (eds./ur.), Gefährliches Plaster, Kriminalität im römischen Reich, Xantener Berichte 21, Mainz am Rhein, 19−40. NOTHDUFTER, J. 1979, Die Eisenfunde von Sanzeno im Nonsberg. − Römisch-Germanische Forschungen 38, Mainz am Rhein. OLDENSTEIN, J. 1976, Zur Ausrüstung römischer Auxiliareinheiten. Studien zu Beschlägen und Zierat an der Ausrüstung der römischen Auxiliareinheiten des obergermanisch-raetischen Limesgebietes aus dem zweiten und dritten Jahrhundert n. Chr. – Bericht der Römisch-Germanischen Kommission 57, (1977), 49–284. PAUL, M. 2011, Fibeln und Gürtelzubehör der späten römischen Kaiserzeit aus Augusta Vindelicum/Augsburg. – Münchner Beiträge zur Provinzialrömischen Archäologie 3, Wiesbaden. PFLAUM, V. 2000, Claustra Alpium Iuliarum in barbari. – Unpublished Master’s thesis / Neobjavljena magistrska naloga, Oddelek za arheologijo, Filozofska fakulteta Univerze v Ljubljani. PFLAUM, V. 2001a, Katalog št. 53: jermenski zaključek. – In/V: P. Bitenc, T. Kniic (eds./ur.), Od Rimljanov do Slovanov, Predmeti, Ljubljana, 24. PFLAUM, V. 2001b, Katalog št. 83: okroglo ogledalo z ušescem. – In/V: P. Bitenc, T. Kniic (eds./ur.), Od Rimljanov do Slovanov, Predmeti, Ljubljana, 31. PFLAUM, V. 2002, Spätrömische Kerbschnittverzierte Gürtelbeschläge im Gebiet des heutigen Slowenien. – In/V: G. Cuscito, M. Verzár-Bass (eds./ur.), Bronzi di età romana in Cisalpina. Novità e riletture. Atti della XXXII Settimana di Studi Aquileiesi, 28–30 maggio 2001, Antichità Altoadriatiche, 51, Trieste, 259–287. PREDOVNIK, K. 2003, Trdnjava Kostanjevica na Starem gradu nad Podbočjem. – Archaeologia historica Slovenica 4, Ljubljana. PRÖTTEL, Ph. M. 1996, Mediterrane Feinkeramikimporte des 2. bis 7. Jahrhunderts n. Chr. im oberen Adriaraum und in Slowenien. – Kölner Studien zur Archäologie der römischen Provinzen 2, Espelkamp. PRÖTTEL, Ph. M. 2002, Dir spätrömischen Metallfunde. – In/V: S. Ortisi, Ph. M. Pröttel, Römische Kleinfunde aus Burghöfe 2, Frühgeschichtliche und Provinzalrömische Archäologie, Materialien und Forschungen 6, Rahden, 95–140. RIC II: H. Mattingly, E. A. Sydenham, he Roman Imperial Coinage. Vol. II: Vespasian to Hadrian. – London, 1926. RIHA, E. 1979, Die römischen Fibeln aus Augst und Kaiseraugst. – Forschungen in Augst 3, Augst. SCHÜTZ, N. M. 2003, Eisenfunde aus der Stadt auf dem Magdalensberg II. − Kärntner Museumsschriften 77, Archäologische Forschungen zu den Grabungen auf dem Magdalensberg 14, Klagenfurt. SELLYE, I. 1990, Ringibeln mit Ansatz aus Pannonien. − Savaria 19/1, 17–102. SOKOL, V. 1998, Rimski metal s Kuzelina / Roman metalwork from Kuzelin. − Zagreb. ŠAŠEL, J., PETRU, P. (eds./ur.) 1971, Claustra Alpium Iuliarum I. Fontes. – Katalogi in monograije 5, Ljubljana. ŠTUKL, J. 2004, Poznoantični depo s Puštala nad Trnjem. − Arheološki vestnik 55, 415–427 [summary in English / povzetek v angleščini]. RIC III: H. Mattingly, E. A. Sydenham, he Roman Imperial Coinage. Vol. III: Antoninus Pius to Commodus. – London, 1930. ŠTULAR, B. 2009, Mali grad. Visokosrednjeveški grad v Kamniku / High Medieval Castle in Kamnik. – Opera Instituti Archaeologici Sloveniae 15, Ljubljana. RIC V/1: P. H. Webb, he Roman Imperial Coinage. Vol. V, Part I: Valerian I to Florian. –London, 1972. TERŽAN, B. 1976, Certoška ibula. − Arheološki vestnik 27, (1977), 317−536 [summary in German / povzetek v nemščini]. RIC IX: J. W. E. Pearce, he Roman Imperial Coinage. Vol. IX: Valentinian I–heodosius I. – London, 1951. ULBERT, T. (ed./ur.) 1981, Ad Pirum (Hrušica). Spätrömische Passbefestigung in den Julischen Alpen. Der deutsche Beitrag zu den slowenisch-deutschen Grabungen 1971–1973. – Münchner Beiträge zur Vor- und Frühgeschichte 31, München. RIC X: J. P. C. Kent, he Roman Imperial Coinage. Vol. X: he Divided Empire and the Fall of the Western Parts 395–491. – London, 1994. 381 Plate 1. Mali Njivč. 1–3, 5–9 copper alloy; 4, 10–16 iron. Scale = 1 : 2 (drawing I. Murgelj). Tabla 1. Mali Njivč. 1–3, 5–9 bakrova zlitina; 4, 10–16 železo. M = 1 : 2 (risba I. Murgelj). 382 Plate 2. Mali Njivč. 21 leaded bronze; 22 copper; rest iron. Scale = 1 : 2 (drawing I. Murgelj). Tabla 2. Mali Njivč. 21 svinčev bron; 22 baker; drugo železo. M = 1 : 2 (risba I. Murgelj). 383 Plate 3. Mali Njivč. 36 copper alloy; rest iron. Scale = 1 : 2 (drawing I. Murgelj). Tabla 3. Mali Njivč. 36 bakrova zlitina; drugo železo. M = 1 : 2 (risba I. Murgelj). 384 LATE ROMAN ARMY, CLAUSTRA ALPIUM IULIARUM AND THE FORTIFICATIONS IN THE SOUTH-EASTERN ALPS POZNORIMSKA VOJSKA, CLAUSTRA ALPIUM IULIARUM IN UTRJENA KRAJINA V JUGOVZHODNIH ALPAH Slavko Ciglenečki Slavko Ciglenečki Abstract Izvleček he several important aspects of the Roman army presented in this contribution relect the altered military doctrine as implemented in the area of the south-eastern Alps following the reforms of Diocletian and Constantine. he Late Roman period in this area thus boasts numerous military installations consisting of fortiications and barrier walls functioning as part of the Claustra Alpium Iuliarum defence system, as well as less readily identiiable forts behind and in front of the defence zone. he contribution also provides a more detailed discussion on the genesis of the defence system and highlights several problems encountered during the colourful history of its research, but also proposes several conclusions. Of those, the initial construction of the forts of the barrier system can reliably be dated to the 270s, their gradual expansion to the 4th and the abandonment of a large part of the barrier walls to the beginning of the 5th century. he chronology of individual sections of the barrier walls is, on the other hand, poorly known. What is certain is that the wider area of the south-eastern Alps was additionally fortiied by posts, some of which can be identiied as forts (for example Velike Malence and Gradišče near Zalog). Others, located along communications of either strategic or defence importance, only revealed various militaria in their interior, but no fortiication features that would allow them to be positively identiied as military posts (for example Ančnikovo gradišče and Gradišče near Dunaj). V prispevku so prikazani pomembnejši pojavi v poznorimski vojski, ki so bili posledica spremenjene vojaške doktrine po dioklecijansko-konstantinskih reformah na območju jugovzhodnih Alp. Številne vojaške objekte poznorimskega obdobja je mogoče deliti na trdnjave in zaporne zidove v sklopu obrambnega sistema Claustra Alpium Iuliarum, na drugi strani pa na mnoge slabše prepoznavne utrdbe pred obrambnim pasom in za njim. Podrobneje je predstavljena problematika geneze zapornega sistema. Nakazani so tudi posamezni problemi iz pestre zgodovine raziskav in izoblikovane nekatere sklepne ugotovitve. Nastanek dela trdnjav je mogoče že zanesljivo staviti v sedemdeseta leta 3. st., postopno dograjevanje v 4. st. in opustitev večjega dela zapor na začetek 5. st. O kronologiji gradnje posameznih odsekov zapornih zidov je znanega malo. Obrambni sistem dopolnjuje v širšem območju jugovzhodnih Alp množica različnih utrjenih postojank, med katerimi je deloma mogoče prepoznati vojaške utrdbe (Velike Malence, Gradišče pri Zalogu), druge pa zgolj kažejo v notranjosti najdene različne militarije in so razporejene na strateških ali obrambno pomembnih mestih vzdolž važnejših komunikacij, a pri njih ni mogoče več videti utrdbenih značilnosti, ki bi jih zanesljivo opredelile kot vojaške postojanke (Ančnikovo gradišče, Gradišče pri Dunaju). Keywords: Claustra Alpium Iuliarum, barrier walls, forts, Late Roman period, defence of Italy, genesis of the defence system, chronology, south-eastern Alpine area he military remains from the Late Roman period are still readily visible in the cultural landscape of present-day Slovenia, their state of preservation being very good in comparison to others from earlier or later periods. he highstanding walls and towers of the fort at Ajdovščina, the appropriately presented walls on Hrušica and Ančnikovo gradišče, the reconstructed fortlet on Lanišče and numerous others upstanding monuments bear witness to the in- Ključne besede: Claustra Alpium Iuliarum, Klavstra, zaporni zidovi, utrdbe, poznorimsko obdobje, obramba Italije, geneza zapornega sistema, kronologija, jugovzhodnoalpsko območje Poznorimske vojaške ostaline v Sloveniji so v primerjavi s tistimi iz zgodnejših in tudi z mnogimi iz poznejših zgodovinskih obdobij še vedno zelo opazne v kulturni krajini. Visoko stoječi zidovi in stolpi vojaške trdnjave v Ajdovščini, dobro prezentirano zidovje na Hrušici in Ančnikovem gradišču, rekonstruirani burgus na Lanišču in številni drugi nad površino ohranjeni spomeniki pričajo o intenzivnem vojaškem dogajanju v zadnjih dveh stoletjih rimske države. Niso zgolj znak dobre ohranjenosti 385 tensive military activity in the last two centuries of the Roman state. Not only are some of them well preserved, their existence alone attests to the extreme importance of the Slovenian territory as an area of transit. During the period in question, the Julian Alps and areas to the east and west represented the last defence of Italy and its capitals in Mediolanum and Ravenna against incursions from the east and the north. he reforms adopted during the reigns of Emperors Diocletian and Constantine brought about considerable changes in the structure, disposition and size of army troops. If these had previously been concentrated along the limes, the border troops (limitanei) were now joined by mobile troops (comitatenses) positioned in the interior, particularly along important routes leading into the heart of the Empire.1 he geostrategic position of the south-eastern Alpine area dictated the construction of a vast network of large and small forts, which is most apparent in the extensive military installations of the Claustra Alpium Iuliarum.2 he military importance of defending the north-eastern border of Italy is also discernible in Notitia dignitatum, a military manual from the irst third of the 5th century, which mentions units of the Roman army serving in this area.3 he said units are legiones Iuliae Alpine I–III. One of them was a regular unit (III Iulia Alpina legio comitatensis). he other two were a sort of paramilitary formations (pseudocomitatenses), the composition and operation of which is still somewhat vague. In the opinion of Peter Petru, the pseudocomitatenses took on a military function only in times of peril and were otherwise farmers in the hinterland of the frontier.4 Two of the legions operated in Italy and one (II Iulia Alpina pseudocomitatensis) in Illyricum, i.e. in front of the barrier system.5 he radius of their operations is known, but very little of the exact locations of their forts and the exact method of operation. In connections with that, investigations of recent decades in Slovenia have revealed a number of small inds that did not come to light within known fortiications, but may nevertheless be connected with the army. hese are primarily various weapons,6 parts of the characteristic military dress,7 as well as the ever-better identiiable traces of the annona.8 Discussions on the Late Roman army on the territory of Slovenia should diferentiate between two types of military installations: reliably identiied forts and barrier walls of the Claustra, on the one hand, and a dense network of various military or semi-military installations strewn across a wide belt in front of and behind the Claustra, on the other. he posameznih spomenikov, ampak so pričevalci o velikem strateškem pomenu Slovenije v času zatona rimske države. Takrat so Julijske Alpe in območja vzhodno in zahodno od njih opravljala vlogo zadnjega branika matične Italije in takratnih prestolnic Mediolana in Ravene pred vpadi z vzhoda in severa. Reforme v času cesarjev Dioklecijana in Konstantina so močno spremenile strukturo, razpored in gostoto vojaških posadk. Če so bile te prej osredotočene ob limesu, pa so se tedaj ob mejnih enotah (limitanei) razporedili vojaški mobilni oddelki (comitatenses) po globini ozemlja, predvsem ob vpadnicah, ki so vodile v osrčje imperija.1 Zaradi geostrateške lege jugovzhodnoalpskega območja je tu nastala mreža večjih in manjših vojaških utrdb, ki je prepredala velik del ozemlja in je bila najopaznejša v obsežnih defenzivnih vojaških napravah sistema Claustra Alpium Iuliarum.2 O vojaškem pomenu obrambe Italije na severovzhodni strani pa ne pričajo le obsežne, a še vedno zelo malo raziskane utrdbe: v vojaškem priročniku iz prve tretjine 5. st. Notitia dignitatum so omenjeni tudi oddelki rimske vojske, ki so opravljali službo na tem območju.3 Gre za tri legije, imenovane Iuliae Alpine I–III. Ena je bila povsem regularna enota (III Iulia Alpina legio comitatensis), dve nekakšni paravojaški formaciji, imenovani pseudocomitatenses; o njuni sestavi in delovanju še nimamo prave predstave. Po mnenju P. Petruja so pseudocomitatenses nastopale kot vojska le v času nevarnosti, drugače pa kmetovale nekje v zaledju.4 Dve sta delovali na območju Italije in ena (II Iulia Alpina pseudocomitatensis) na območju Ilirika, torej pred zapornim sistemom.5 Poznamo radij njihovega delovanja, malo pa vemo o natančnejših lokacijah njihovih utrdb in načinu njihovega delovanja. Raziskovanja v zadnjih desetletjih so odkrila množico drobnih najdb, ki jih je velikokrat mogoče povezati z vojsko, a niso bile odkrite znotraj že znanih vojaških trdnjav. To so predvsem različno orožje,6 deli značilne moške noše7 in tudi v zadnjem času vedno bolje prepoznani sledovi anone.8 Na Slovenskem je pri obravnavi poznorimske vojske nujno ločiti dve vrsti vojaških naprav: zanesljive vojaške trdnjave in zaporno zidovje sistema Klavster, v širokem pasu pred njimi in za njimi pa tudi gosto mrežo različnih vojaških ali polvojaških naprav, ki so sicer lahko funkcionirale samostojno, vendar so bile najverjetneje povezane v širši sklop zavarovanja Italije.9 1 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 386 8 Campbell 2005, 110–130. Overview in Šašel, Petru 1971. Šašel 1971b, 35. Petru 1978b, 224. Šašel 1971b, 35. Sivec 2002; Sivec 1997; Valič 1997. Župančič 2002; Plaum 2002; Ciglenečki, Milavec 2009. Vidrih Perko 1997a; Vidrih Perko, Župančič 2003. 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Campbell 2005, 110–130. Pregledno pri Šašel, Petru 1971. Šašel 1971b, 35. Petru 1978b, 224. Šašel 1971b, 35. Sivec 2002; Sivec 1997; Valič 1997. Župančič 2002; Plaum 2002; Ciglenečki, Milavec 2009. Vidrih Perko 1997a; Vidrih Perko, Župančič 2003. Prim. pri Saria 1939, 147; Petru 1969; Ciglenečki 1997, 193; Vidrih Perko, Župančič 2003, 464–467. latter could probably have functioned independently, but were most efective in joint operation of the defence of Italy.9 1 Claustra Alpium Iuliarum In the Late Roman period, the most important complex of military installations in the south-eastern Alpine area was the system of fortiications and barrier walls, which have thus far been archaeologically documented from Rijeka in Croatia, across the hills of the Notranjska region in Slovenia and the hinterland of Ljubljana to the hills around Hrušica and further on to the Soča river, supposedly even to the valley of the Zila (Gail) river in southern Austria. he Romans thus fortiied the natural barrier between Italy and Illyricum, namely the Alps. he fortiication took the form of forts and long walls constructed across valleys, roads, mule tracks and paths, as well as lookout and ambush points, signalling posts and towers; in short, they set up a systematic protection of all access to Italy. he most vulnerable and strategically important spots were protected with forts. he aim of the barrier walls was to check the advance of the enemy, to monitor the movement of enemy troops in diicult terrain, gradually weakening them and not giving them the possibility of fully developing its battle formations before inally destroying them with the core of the army waiting in the lowland of Italy.10 his barrier system comprises all the fortiications connected with the barrier walls, but also the fort at Ajdovščina and Vrhnika that protected the access route into Italy on either side of the Claustra, as well as the Tarsatica city fortiication and the fort on Pasjak positioned along the main road from Tarsatica to Tergeste (ig. 1). 1.1 Views of the genesis of the barrier system and indings of recent investigations Most of the aspects concerning the Claustra barrier system, particularly its military importance, provisioning and functioning, have already been illuminated.11 In view of that, the attention here will primarily be paid to the genesis of the Claustra, as well as to an overview of the results provided by the recent investigations of the barrier system. In a diachronic overview, I shall irst look at the observations that various historians and archaeologists published in connection with the system as a whole and its individual fortiications. he observations that, for a lack of research but also an incomplete or erroneous interpretation, date the system to an earlier time will not be considered.12 9 10 11 12 Cf. Saria 1939, 147; Petru 1969; Ciglenečki 1997, 193; Vidrih Perko, Župančič 2003, 464–467. Petru 1975; Petru 1976, 28; Petru 1978a, 506. Petru 1978a; Ulbert 1981, 42–49; Šašel 1988; Pröttel 1996, 133–149; Vidrih Perko, Župančič 2003, 460–467. Cf. Degrassi 1954, 137. 1 Claustra Alpium Iuliarum Najpomembnejši sklop vojaških naprav poznorimskega obdobja na jugovzhodnem alpskem območju je sistem utrdb in obrambnih zidov, katerih obstoj so doslej z arheološkimi raziskavami dokazali od Reke (Rijeka) prek notranjskih gričev in ljubljanskega zaledja do hrušiškega višavja in naprej do Soče ter domnevno celo do Ziljske doline. Že po naravi z alpsko pregrado nakazano mejno črto med Italijo in Ilirikom so Rimljani utrdili s trdnjavami, zaprli z daljšimi zidovi doline in tudi ceste, kolovoze in steze, postavili preže in zasede, signalne postaje in stolpe, skratka sistematično zavarovali dostope v Italijo. Nevarnejša in strateško pomembna mesta so zavarovali s trdnjavami. Namen zapornih zidov je bil zavreti nasprotnikov prodor, spremljati premike sovražnikovih enot po težko prehodnih območjih, jih postopno slabiti, ob prihodu v ravninski italski svet pa nato pričakati z glavnino italske vojske in tam uničiti, preden bi lahko sovražnik v celoti razvil svoje bojne linije.10 V to skupino sodijo vse utrdbe, ki so bile v navezavi z zapornimi zidovi, hkrati pa tudi trdnjavi v Ajdovščini in na Vrhniki, ki sta pomembno varovali glavno arterijo pred zaporami in za njimi, pa tudi mestna utrdba Tarsatica in kastel Pasjak ob itinerarski cesti Tarsatica–Tergeste (sl. 1). 1.1 Pogledi na genezo zapornega sistema in izsledki novejših raziskav Sistem Klavster je bil predvsem z vidika njihovega vojaškega pomena, oskrbe, funkcioniranja in marsičesa drugega že osvetljen.11 Na tem mestu se zdi potrebno posvetiti predvsem temeljnemu problemu: genezi celotnega zapornega sistema ter pregledu novejših rezultatov raziskav. Poglejmo najprej diahrono, do katerih ugotovitev glede datacije celotnega sistema in tudi posameznih utrdb v njem so prišli različni zgodovinarji in arheologi. Na tem mestu ne bomo posebej obravnavali časovnih opredelitev tistih, ki so Klavstre zaradi pomanjkanja raziskav ali tudi nepopolne ali napačne interpretacije pisnih virov datirali v zgodnejša obdobja.12 Prvi je zaporni sistem označil za poznorimskega A. Müllner v obsežni študiji o Emoni in tudi pozneje, pri opisu Hrušice, pri čemer se je opiral na najdene novce in širše zgodovinske razmere (barbarski vpadi).13 Mnogo podrobneje in temeljiteje je Klavstre ovrednotil šele O. Cuntz v začetku 20. st.14 S kritičnim branjem virov 10 11 12 13 14 Petru 1975; Petru 1976, 28; Petru 1978a, 506. Petru 1978a; Ulbert 1981, 42–49; Šašel 1988; Pröttel 1996, 133–149; Vidrih Perko, Župančič 2003, 460–467. Prim. pri Degrassi 1954, 137. Müllner 1879, 133; Müllner 1893, 166. Cuntz 1902. 387 Figure 1. Barrier walls, reconstructed road network and important Late Roman sites in the area of the Claustra Alpium Iuliarum. 1 towns, 2 fortiications, 3 settlements (M. Belak). Slika 1. Zaporni zidovi, rekonstruirana cestna mreža in pomembnejša poznorimska najdišča na območju zapor. 1 mesta, 2 utrdbe, 3 naselbine (izdelava M. Belak). he irst to attribute the barrier system to the Late Roman period was Alfons Müllner in his comprehensive study of Emona, but also later in a description of the Hrušica fort, basing his interpretation on the coin inds and a wider historical context involving the barbaric incursions.13 388 13 Müllner 1879, 133; Müllner 1893, 166. in oslonitvijo na tlorise tedaj že raziskanih poznorimskih trdnjav ob renskem limesu je domneval, da je bila večina trdnjav in obrambnega zidovja zgrajena v konstantinskem obdobju. K. Pick in W. Schmid sta leta 1924 pri opisu prvih raziskav na območju zapor omenjala, da je bil obrambni pas zgra- A more detailed assessment of the Claustra was provided by Otto Cuntz in the beginning of the 20th century.14 His critical reading of the ancient literary sources and the study of the ground plans of the investigated Late Roman fortiications along the Rhein limes led him to suppose the construction of most forts and the barrier walls during the Constantine period. When reporting on the irst investigations in the Claustra area in 1924, Karl Pick and Walter Schmid mentioned that the defence system was only constructed towards the end of the 3rd century, a date determined more precisely in 1926 by Schmid, who attributed it to Diocletian on the basis of Zosimus’ books.15 Nikola Vulić wrote an overview of the Roman limes in Yugoslavia in 1937, in which he also dated the fortiications between Emona and Aquileia to the Diocletian period and supposed the long walls, intended to check the advance of various peoples, to have been constructed around 400.16 A diferent chronological attribution of the beginning of the barrier system was indicated by Balduin Saria.17 He was the irst to date the forts to the time before Diocletian, most likely to the time of Emperor Gallienus. his supposition was based on the dramatic events during the reign of Gallienus, namely the Alamannic incursion and the fortiication of several cities in northern Italy, but probably also on his investigations on Gradišče near Velike Malence, where he dated the irst phase into the ‘dangerous time’ of the 3rd century.18 Similarly as Vulić, he dated the construction of the barrier walls to around 400, a time after the fall of the Danube limes, because he excluded the possibility of the fort at Vrhnika and the barrier walls in its hinterland to be operative contemporaneously.19 In 1945, Sandro Stucchi published his supposition that the fortiications within the Claustra were of diferent dates, marking the one at Vrhnika as the earliest and dating it to the time of Gallienus. He dated the construction of the barrier walls to 388, i.e. in the time of Andragatius’ interventions.20 he studies that importantly inluenced later researchers were those written by Attilio Degrassi, whose view of the development of the barrier system was based on an insightful study of ancient sources.21 In his opinion, the earliest fort was that at Ajdovščina, mentioned as Castra al14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 Cuntz 1902. Pick, Schmid 1922–1924, 296; Schmid 1923–1924, 185. Cited ater Degrassi 1954, 138, note 185. Saria 1939, 145–146. Saria 1929, 17. Saria 1939, 146. Cited ater Degrassi 1954, 139, 140, notes 195, 196. Degrassi 1954, 140–151. jen šele ob koncu 3. st., Schmid pa je leta 1926 ta podatek preciziral in gradnjo sistema pripisal Dioklecijanu glede na Zosimovo pričevanje.15 N. Vulić je leta 1937 v svojem pregledu rimskega limesa v Jugoslaviji stavil kastele med Emono in Akvilejo prav tako v dioklecijansko obdobje, okoli 400 pa naj bi bili zgrajeni dolgi zidovi, ki naj bi zadrževali premike ljudstev.16 Drugačno časovno opredelitev nastanka zapornega sistema je nakazal B. Saria.17 On je prvi datiral trdnjave v čas pred Dioklecijanom, najverjetnejše se mu je zdelo obdobje cesarja Galijena. K tej domnevi so ga pripravila burna dogajanja v Galijenovem času, vpad Alamanov in okrepitve nekaterih mest v severni Italiji, verjetno pa tudi njegovo raziskovanje Gradišča v Velikih Malencah, kjer je prvo fazo datiral prav tako v »nevarni čas« 3. st.18 Gradnjo zapornih zidov je podobno kot Vulić stavil v čas okoli 400, to je v čas po padcu donavskega limesa, saj se mu je zdelo istočasno funkcioniranje utrdbe na Vrhniki in zapornega zidu za njo nezdružljivo.19 S. Stucchi je leta 1945 domneval, da so kasteli v sistemu Klavster različno stari in kot najstarejšega označil tistega v Vrhniki, ki ga je prav tako postavil v Galijenov čas, gradnjo zapornih zidov pa v leto 388, torej v čas Andragatijevih posegov.20 Močen vpliv na poznejše raziskovalce so imele ugotovitve A. Degrassija, ki je s pronicljivo študijo virov podal svojo sliko razvoja zapornega sistema.21 Najstarejša naj bi bila trdnjava v Ajdovščini, ki se omenja kot Castra že v Hierosolimitanskem itinerariju in je zato starejša, vendar ne starejša od konstantinskega obdobja, saj je domneval, da prej ni mogel nastati nepravilen tloris trdnjave. Gradnjo zapornih zidov je omejil z letnicama 374 in 420. Njegova razlaga geneze je za daljši čas opredeljevala časovno umestitev zapor.22 Pregled starejših datacij kaže, da so pretežno temeljile na (različnem) razumevanju pisnih virov, širši vpetosti v zgodovinske dogodke in le delno na primerjavi s takrat odkritimi podobnimi kasteli ob limesu, ne pa na izsledkih arheoloških raziskovanj. Zato so bile temeljnega pomena arheološke raziskave zapornega sistema, ki so jih opravili v šestdesetih letih prejšnjega stoletja, ko so pod vodstvom J. Šašla in P. Petruja sistematično rekognoscirali, kartirali in sondirali posamezne odseke zapornega sistema ter razi15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Pick, Schmid 1922–1924, 296; Schmid 1923–1924, 185. Citirano po Degrassi 1954, 138, op. 185. Saria 1939, 145–146. Saria 1929, 17. Saria 1939, 146. Citirano po Degrassi 1954, 139, 140, op. 195, 196. Degrassi 1954, 140–151. Prim. pri Šašel 1971d, 52. 389 ready in the Itinerarium Hierosolymitanum and hence earlier than the text, but not earlier than the Constantinian period as suggested to him by the irregular plan of the fort. He limited the construction of the barrier walls to a period between 374 and 420. His interpretation of the genesis and hence chronological framework of the barrier walls was accepted by scholars for a considerable number of years.22 In overviewing the dates proposed by earlier scholars, we should bear in mind that these were mostly based on the (difering) readings of the literary sources, their inclusion into historical events and partly on comparisons with the then known and similar fortiications along the limes, but not on the indings of archaeological investigations of the barrier system. he latter inally began to be undertaken in the 1960s and lent great impetus to the research of the system. he investigations were headed by Jaroslav Šašel and Peter Petru, who conducted systematic reconnaissance, mapping and trial trenching of individual sections of the barrier, as well as investigations of the fortlets on Lanišče and Martinj hrib. he irst part of the investigation was crowned by a monographic publication that brought detailed descriptions of the surveyed sectors together with maps and plans as well as a systematic presentation of the ancient texts mentioning the barrier system.23 his was followed in the 1970s by systematic investigations of the key site in the system, namely Hrušica (Ad Pirum). he teams from the National Museum of Slovenia, headed by Petru, and the Institute for Prehistory and Early History from München, headed by hilo Ulbert, conducted systematic excavation within the fort and partly outside of it, in the towers along the barrier walls. he investigation was concluded with a detailed publication of the German part of the excavation,24 while a comprehensive publication of the Slovenian excavations is still pending. Of the latter, we only have the unpublished dissertation by Veronika Plaum as well as partial analyses of inds, primarily pottery.25 Further small investigations, primarily of a rescue character, were conducted on Hrušica in 1975–1980.26 Petru was the irst to make a considerable use of the archaeologically obtained data from the 1960s and 70s in his study of the Claustra.27 For the fortlet on Lanišče, he thus mentions only a thin layer from the 4th century and dates the fortlet to the late 4th century on the basis of coin inds.28 skali manjši utrdbi na Lanišču in Martinj hribu. Zaključek prve etape raziskav je bila monograija z natančnimi popisi topografsko raziskanih sektorjev, s priloženimi zemljevidi in kartami ter sistematičnim zbirom antičnih tekstov, ki ta sistem omenjajo.23 V sedemdesetih letih dvajsetega stoletja so sledile sistematične raziskave ključnega najdišča v sistemu zapor, Hrušice (Ad Pirum). Tam sta ekipi Narodnega muzeja iz Ljubljane pod vodstvom P. Petruja in Inštituta za pred- in zgodnjo zgodovino iz Münchna pod vodstvom T. Ulberta sistematično izkopavali v trdnjavi in delno tudi zunaj nje v stolpih ob zapornih zidovih. Raziskave so se delno zaključile s podrobno objavo nemškega dela izkopavanj,24 rezultati slovenskega dela izkopavanj pa še vedno niso ustrezno objavljeni. Omeniti je mogoče le neobjavljeno disertacijo V. Plaum ter parcialne obravnave predvsem keramičnega gradiva.25 Manjše, predvsem zaščitne raziskave na Hrušici so bile opravljene še v letih 1975–1980.26 P. Petru je bil prvi, ki je pri obravnavi sistema Klavster izdatneje uporabil arheološke rezultate, pridobljene pri raziskavah v šestdesetih in sedemdesetih letih 20. st.27 Tako je pri utrdbi na Lanišču omenjal le tenko plast iz 4. st. in na osnovi novcev utrdbo datiral v pozno 4. st.28 Dragoceno je njegovo opažanje o poznejši vzidavi stolpa na Lanišču v zaporni zid, kar je eden prvih zanesljivih arheoloških podatkov o starosti zapornih zidov.29 V sintetično zasnovanem delu Arheološka najdišča Slovenije je P. Petru v zgoščenem prikazu povzel dotedanje izsledke raziskav in ugotovil, da je bil sistem zapor dograjen v celotnem obsegu v drugi polovici 4. st., čeprav naj bi segali njegovi zametki že v zgodnejše obdobje. Trdnjave Nauportus, Ad Pirum in Castra naj bi bile konstantinske, zaporni zidovi pa iz leta 388.30 Predvsem z zgodovinskega stališča je svoje mnenje o nastanku zapor izoblikoval tudi A. Marcone, ki je na osnovi podatka Marcelina domneval, da je celotni sistem začel funkcionirati šele po bitki pri Adrianoplu 378, podobno kot sta to nakazala že N. Vulić in B. Saria.31 Na drugem mestu dopušča tudi drugačen, starejši razvojni model.32 23 24 25 22 23 24 25 26 27 390 28 Cf. Šašel 1971d, 52. Šašel, Petru, 1971. Ulbert 1981. Pröttel 1996, 133–137; Plaum 2004; Vidrih Perko, Župančič 2003, 460–461; Vidrih Perko, Župančič 2005, 522. Osmuk 1990b; Svoljšak 1990; Svoljšak 1997a; Svoljšak 1997b. Petru 1967; Petru 1969; Petru 1972. Petru 1967, 123. 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 Šašel, Petru, 1971. Ulbert 1981. Pröttel 1996, 133–137; Plaum 2004; Vidrih Perko, Župančič 2003, 460–461; Vidrih Perko, Župančič 2005, 522. Osmuk 1990b; Svoljšak 1990; Svoljšak 1997a; Svoljšak 1997b. Petru 1967; Petru 1969; Petru 1972. Petru 1967, 123. Petru 1967, 124. Petru 1975. Marcone 2002, 175–176. Marcone 2004, 353. Also valuable is his observation of a subsequent addition of a tower on Lanišče to the barrier wall, which represents one of the irst reliable archaeological data concerning the age of the barrier walls.29 he synthetic publication of Arheološka najdišča Slovenije includes a contribution by Petru that summarizes the results of the investigations conducted up to that point and dates the conclusion of the construction of the barrier system as a whole into the second half of the 4th century, with its beginnings to be sought in an earlier time. More precisely, the Nauportus, Ad Pirum and Castra forts were supposedly of Constantinian date, while the barrier walls dated to 388.30 Another opinion as to the beginning of the barrier system was expresses by Arnaldo Marcone, primarily from a historical point of view. On the basis of information provided by Marcellinus, he supposed that the entire system only began functioning after the Battle of Adrianople in 378, as had previously been indicated by Vulić and Saria.31 In another passage, Marcone also allows for a diferent, earlier model of development.32 In 1985, I drew attention to the fact that the road across Hrušica was abandoned in the irst half of the 5th century, the same road that most scholars continued to see as crossing Hrušica throughout the 5th and 6th centuries in spite of a complete lack of evidence along the communication line from Ljubljana to Ajdovščina.33 he investigations on Korinjski hrib in 1982 and 1983 showed that, in the 5th and 6th century, the road usually taken was the one leading towards Italy south of Emona that avoided the latter city completely. his was primarily indicated by a line of Late Antique sites along the road protected with one the longest sections of the barrier walls near Rob.34 An important numismatic contribution to understanding the chronology of the barrier system as a whole, as well as individual fortiications within it (for dates see below), was recently published by Peter Kos.35 He examines the substantial increase in the number of coins from this area and ofers a supplement to his 1986 study that was made on the basis of considerably less material.36 An important methodological observation he makes is that a relatively small number of coins or even individual coin inds from a particular area suice to fairly accurately relect the pattern of the past monetary circulation (the almost ivefold increase in the 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 Petru 1967, 124. Petru 1975. Marcone 2002, 175–176. Marcone 2004, 353. Ciglenečki 1985. Ciglenečki 1985, 267–270. Kos 2012. Kos 1986, 195–207. Sam sem opozoril na opustitev ceste čez Hrušico v prvi polovici 5. st., ceste, ki jo je večina sodobnih avtorjev, kljub pomanjkanju vsakršnih argumentov, po inerciji vlekla čez Hrušico še v 5. in 6. st., za kar ob celotni liniji od Ljubljane do Ajdovščine ni nikakršnih dokazov.33 Ob raziskavah na Korinjskem hribu 1982 in 1983 sem uvidel, da je v 5. in 6. st. bila pogosteje v rabi cesta, ki je vodila iz vzhoda proti Italiji južneje od Emone in omogočala njen obvoz. Na to je kazala predvsem linija poznoantičnih najdišč, nameščenih ob cesti, ki je bila v poznorimskem času zavarovana z enim izmed daljših odsekov zapornega zidu pri Robu.34 Pomemben prispevek k razumevanju kronologije celotnega zapornega sistema in tudi posameznih utrdb v njem (datacije glej spodaj) je pred nedavnim z numizmatičnega stališča podal P. Kos.35 Analiza, v kateri prikazuje močno naraslo število novcev s tega območja, odlično dopolnjuje njegovo študijo iz leta 1986, pri kateri je imel na razpolago bistveno manj gradiva.36 Pomembna je njegova metodološka ugotovitev, da že razmeroma majhno število novcev ali celo posamezne novčne najdbe z nekega omejenega najdišča razmeroma točno razkrivajo vzorec nekdanjega denarnega obtoka (tako na primer skoraj petkratno povečanje števila novcev iz utrdbe Hrušica ne spreminja kronološke sheme, izoblikovane že po prvih numizmatičnih analizah!). V obravnavo je pritegnil tudi sočasne novčne depoje z jugovzhodnoalpskega območja, ki dobro zrcalijo trajanje obtoka posameznih novcev. 1.2 Utrdbe S sistematičnimi slovensko-nemškimi raziskavami na Hrušici (Ad Pirum) so bili ugotovljeni velikost trdnjave, potek zidov in vsi bistveni elementi obrambe. V notranjosti so v osrednjem delu utrdbe našli tudi skromne, strokovni javnosti večinoma nepredstavljene ostanke zgradb. Raziskave so pokazale, da je bil intenzivno poseljen le spodnji del, zgornji pa se je uporabljal kot pribežališče v času nevarnosti ali po potrebi za stacioniranje dodatnih čet vojaštva (sl. 2).37 Ob izkopavanjih na Hrušici je P. Petru zapisal: najstarejši zidani ostanki naj bi segali v začetek 4. st., obzidje je bilo v drugi polovici tega stoletja dvakrat obnovljeno, poslednjič pa v začetku 5. st. dodatno utrjeno.38 Nekoliko za tem je datacijo utrdbe na Hrušici preciziral v čas okrog 300, nakar naj bi bila nekaj časa neuporabljena, sredi 4. st. ponovno obzidana in na prehodu v 5. st. dodatno utrjena.39 Prvi določnejši arheološki podatek glede časa nastanka trdnjave na Hrušici je dal T. Ulbert v prvi monografski obdelavi Hrušice. Na osnovi 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 Ciglenečki 1985. Ciglenečki 1985, 267–270. Kos 2012. Kos 1986, 195–207. Ulbert 1981; Plaum 2004. Petru 1976, 30. Petru 1977, 536. 391 Figure 2. Hrušica. Plan of the fort (ater Ulbert 1981). Slika 2. Hrušica. Tloris utrdbe (po Ulbert 1981). number of coins at the Hrušica, for example, did not alter the chronological framework established after initial numismatic analyses!). His analysis included the contemporary coin hoards from the south-eastern Alpine area that are a good indicator of the duration of the use of a particular coin. 1.2 Fortiications he systematic Slovenian-German investigations on Hru šica (Ad Pirum) have established the size of the fort, the course of its defence walls and all the essential elements of defence. he interior, in the central part, revealed modest remains of buildings that have, for the most part, not yet been published. Investigations have also shown that only the lower part of the fort’s interior saw intensive occupation, while the upper part served as a refuge in times of peril or, when necessary, as a place for stationing additional troops (ig. 2).37 In connection with his investigations, Petru wrote that the earliest built remains dated to the beginning of the 4th century, that the defence walls were renovated on two occasions in the second half of the 4th century and that the last addition to them was a refortiication in the beginning of the 5th century.38 Soon after, he dated the construction of the fort at Hrušica more precisely to around 300, after which time he supposed it to be abandoned, rebuilt in the mid-4th century and additionally fortiied in the transition into the 5th century.39 More precise archaeological information on the beginning of the fort on Hrušica was provided by Ulbert in the irst monographic publication. Based on a coin of Licinius from 312/13, found in a more revealing trial trench on the east side of the fort along the defence walls, he dated the construction of the defence walls into a time before this date.40 In the same year, Michael Mackensen drew attention to a concentration of coins on Hrušica that dates as early as the 270s.41 his was conirmed by Kos several years later as well as recently, having considerably more coins at his disposal.42 However, it was the date proposed by Ulbert that remained valid all to the investigation at Ajdovščina, in foreign literature even to this day, which set the beginning of the fort on Hrušica, but indirectly also the whole barrier system, broadly into the DiocletianConstantinian period. his date can be found in all major overviews that included the Alpine Claustra. Stephen Johnson, for example, in his synthetic publication on the Late Roman fortiications, adopted Ulbert’s conclusions and set the duration of the fort on Hrušica between 320 and 400.43 In his presentation of the Roman fortiications in the Alps, Neil Christie adopted Ulbert’s observations in his date of the fortiications and the barrier system as a whole, dat37 38 39 40 41 42 392 43 Ulbert 1981; Plaum 2004. Petru 1976, 30. Petru 1977, 536. Ulbert 1981, 42–43. Mackensen 1981, 147. Kos 1986, 199–200; Kos 2012, 285. Johnson 1983a, 217. Licinijevega novca iz let 312/313 v nekoliko bolj izpovedni sondi na vzhodni strani ob obzidju je gradnjo obzidja postavil v čas pred tem datumom.40 Hkrati je M. Mackensen opozoril na koncentracijo novcev na Hrušici že v osmem desetletju 3. st.41 Ob močno povečanem številu novcev na Hrušici je nekaj let pozneje to potrdil tudi P. Kos.42 Z Ulbertovim datiranjem nastanka utrdbe na Hrušici je tako do raziskav v Ajdovščini, v tuji literaturi pa do zdaj veljala datacija gradnje Hrušice in s tem posredno celotnega sistema v širši razpon dioklecijansko-konstantinskega obdobja, kar se kaže v vseh večjih pregledih, ki so zajeli problematiko alpskih zapor. S. Johnson je tako v svoji sintezi poznoantičnih utrdb povzel Ulbertove ugotovitve in trajanje kastela Hrušica umestil med leti 320 in 400.43 V predstavitvi rimskih fortiikacij v Alpah se je N. Christie pri dataciji utrdb in zapornega sistema v celoti naslonil na delo T. Ulberta in gradnjo Hrušice datiral v zgodnje obdobje Konstantinove vlade.44 To datacijo navaja tudi J. Wilkes v svojem pregledu izsledkov novejših raziskav v donavskih provincah.45 Ph. M. Pröttel se je pri obravnavi ine keramike iz območja vzhodnih Alp v veliki meri posvetil tudi problematiki utrdb zapornega sistema ter poskušal na osnovi novejših izsledkov, posebej novcev in boljše keramike ter amfor, preveriti datacije posameznih utrdb. Tako 40 41 42 43 44 45 Ulbert 1981, 42–43. Mackensen 1981, 147. Kos 1986, 199–200; Kos 2012, 285. Johnson 1983a, 217. Christie 1991, 416; Christie 2001. Wilkes 2005, 260–261. Figure 3. Hrušica. Selected metal inds. 1–3, 5–16 bronze; 4, 17–19 iron, 21–22 lead; 20 iron and lead. Scale = 1 : 2 (ater Ciglenečki 1994). Slika 3. Hrušica. Izbor značilnejših kovinskih najdb. 1–3, 5–16 bron; 4, 17–19 železo, 21–22 svinec; 20 železo in svinec. M = 1 : 2 (po Ciglenečki 1994). ing the construction of the Hrušica fort in the early years of Constantine’s reign.44 his date can also be found with John J. Wilkes, in his overview of the indings from recent investigations in the Danubian provinces.45 Philipp M. Pröttel treated the ine ware from the area of the eastern Alps and also discussed the fortiications of the barrier system, attempting to verify the dates of individual forts on the basis of recent indings, particularly on the coin inds and iner wares as well as amphorae. For Hrušica, he suggested the construction in the second half of the 3rd century 44 45 Christie 1991, 416; Christie 2001. Wilkes 2005, 260–261. je pri Hrušici postavil domnevo, da je bila utrdba zgrajena v drugi polovici 3. st. (v 70. letih?), kar naj bi potrjevala tudi novčni in keramični spekter.46 Pokazal je tudi, da je mogoče njen konec premakniti čez letnico 401, kot je to storil P. Kos, in pri tem omenjal na osnovi nekaterih drobnih najdb in predvsem zlatnika Valentinijana III možnost, da je po začetku 5. st. na Hrušici delovala še manjša posadka, katere zoženo območje bivanja je skušal locirati v predel okoli najdene cisterne (sl. 3).47 46 47 Pröttel 1996, 134–136. Pröttel 1996, 137. 393 (270s?), which he based on the ranges of both coins and pottery.46 He also wrote that the end of the fort could be moved to a time after 401, as suggested by Kos, mentioning the possibility of a small garrison operative and living at the fort, in the area of the cistern, after the beginning of the 5th century, as suggested to him by several small inds and primarily the gold coin of Valentinian III (ig. 3).47 he last important archaeological work is the unpublished dissertation by Veronika Plaum, in which she partly analyzed the results of the Slovenian excavations on Hrušica between 1970 and 1980.48 An important inding is that the three well-documented stratigraphic units indicate several phases of the life at the fort. Her discussion concentrates on the inal period and the great amount of the early material was thus not included. She agrees with Pröttel’s indings in principle, but does not conirm the hypothesis of the last inds concentrating on the spot where he supposed the living area of the last small garrison; she rather sees these inds as scattered across the lower part of the fort.49 Together with the arguments ex silentio, she conirms that the fort on Hrušica entirely lost its importance after the beginning of the 5th century in comparison to other contemporary fortiications.50 In preparing his most recent article, Kos had the opportunity to consult the Hrušica excavation diaries and thereby to verify certain stratigraphically closed units of importance for dating individual phases of the fort. He establishes that the irst noticeable activities date to the middle of the second half of the 3rd century, but this cannot be tied with the beginning of the defence walls construction. he increased quantity of coins from the 315–324 period suggests to him an intensive presence of the army in the fort, which he connects with the construction of the defence walls in the 320s. He also inds that the coin of Constantius II in a layer of mortar along the defence walls chronologically determines the renovation of the defence walls. As for the abandonment of the fort, he notes that fresh inlux of coins ceases from the 410s onwards.51 An indirect conirmation of this date for the abandonment of the fort is provided by the coins from well-documented sites in the Gorenjska and Notranjska regions in Slovenia, located along roads that were defended by other sections of barrier walls that saw increased traic after the beginning of the 5th century (coins from the irst three decades of the 5th century).52 he largest fort and supposed headquarters of the barrier system at Ajdovščina (Castra) has been, until the recent 46 47 48 49 50 51 394 52 Pröttel 1996, 134–136. Pröttel 1996, 137. Plaum 2004. Plaum 2004, 151–152. Plaum 2004, 147–149. Kos 2012, 288–289. Ciglenečki 1985, 267–270; Ciglenečki 2011, 260–268. Zadnje pomembno arheološko delo je neobjavljena disertacija V. Plaum; predstavila in delno analizirala je rezultate izkopavanj slovenske ekipe na Hrušici v letih 1970–1980.48 Pomembna je njena ugotovitev o treh dobro dokumentiranih stratigrafskih enotah, ki kažejo na več faz življenja v utrdbi. Glede na to, da je delo usmerila predvsem v zaključno obdobje utrdbe, se zgodnejšim fazam zaradi velike količine gradiva ni mogla posvetiti. Načelno se strinja z ugotovitvami Pröttla, ni pa potrdila njegove teze, da se zaključne najdbe osredotočajo na mestu, kjer naj bi bila po Pröttlu nameščena zadnja manjša posadka, ampak so razpršene po spodnjem delu utrdbe.49 Tudi z argumenti ex silentio je potrdila dejstvo, da je postojanka na Hrušici v primerjavi z drugimi sočasnimi utrdbami po začetku 5. st. popolnoma izgubila pomen.50 P. Kos je pri pripravi svojega zadnjega članka imel možnost vpogleda v zapisnike izkopavanj na Hrušici in je preverjal nekatere stratigrafsko zaključene celote, pomembne za datacijo posameznih faz utrdbe: ugotavlja, da je prišlo do prvih opaznejših aktivnosti v trdnjavi Ad Pirum v sredini druge polovice 3. st., česar pa ni mogoče povezati z začetkom gradnje obzidja. Na osnovi povečanega pojavljanja denarja v obdobju od 315 do 324 ugotavlja intenzivno navzočnost vojske v utrdbi, kar povezuje z gradnjo obzidja v dvajsetih letih 4. st. Novec Konstancija II v plasti malte ob obzidju trdnjave Hrušica naj bi časovno opredeljeval obnovo obzidja. Glede opustitve Hrušice ugotavlja, da v drugem desetletju 5. st. vanjo ni več dotekal svež denar.51 Posredno opustitev utrdbe na Hrušici potrjujejo tudi z novci dobro dokumentirane postojanke ob cestah na Gorenjskem in Notranjskem, ki so jih zapirali drugi odseki zapornih zidov, na katerih se je po začetku 5. st. intenziviral promet (novci iz prvih treh desetletij 5. st.).52 Pri največji utrdbi in domnevno štabni bazi zapornega sistema v Ajdovščini (Castra) so se avtorji do novejših izkopavanj v zvezi z datacijo sklicevali predvsem na ugotovitve prej omenjenih Cuntza in Degrassija. Tako S. Johnson omenja, da jo na osnovi analogij z utrdbami v Porenju datirajo v konstantinski čas, vendar nič ne govori proti temu, da bi lahko bila tudi že dioklecijanska.53 Precejšnji premik v razumevanju trdnjave pomenijo zaščitna izkopavanja N. Osmuk; ugotovila je dokončni obseg in število obrambnih stolpov, v notranjosti pa raziskala dele dveh poslopij in vojaške terme.54 Stratigrafsko zanesljivo opredeljene sklope z naborom novcev Galijena, Klavdija II, Avrelijana v najzgodnejši plasti ob obzidju, v njem in 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 Plaum 2004. Plaum 2004, 151–152. Plaum 2004, 147–149. Kos 2012, 288–289. Ciglenečki 1985, 267–270; Ciglenečki 2011, 260–268. Johnson 1983a, 218. Osmuk 1990a; Osmuk 1997. Figure 4. Ajdovščina. Plan of the fort (ater Osmuk 1997). Slika 4. Ajdovščina. Tloris utrdbe (po Osmuk 1997). excavations, dated primarily on the basis of the abovementioned works by Cuntz and Degrassi. Johnson, for example, states that it can be dated to the Constantinian period on the basis of analogies with the sites in the Rhineland, but that nothing speaks against it being dated already to the Diocletian time.53 An important shift in the understanding of the fort was brought about by the rescue excavations headed by Nada Osmuk. She was able to establish the inal extent of the fort and the number of defence towers, while in the interior she investigated parts of two buildings as well as military baths.54 he stratigraphically reliably dated complexes with series of coins of Gallienus, Claudius II and Aurelianus in the earliest layer along and in the defence walls, but also under the foundations of buildings and under the pavements date the beginning of the fort to the 270s.55 Probably not knowing of the original report by Osmuk, Pröttel doubted the construction of the fort in the 270s, arguing that the coins of Gallienus and Claudius II only provided a date post quem, thereby underestimating the numbers and preservation, but most importantly also the context of these inds (ig. 4).56 celo pod temelji zgradb ter tlakov v Ajdovščini datirajo nastanek utrdbe v sedemdeseta leta 3. st.55 Ph. Pröttel je, najverjetneje zaradi nepoznavanja originalnega teksta poročila N. Osmuk, podvomil o dataciji gradnje v sedemdeseta leta 3. st., češ da gre pri najdenih Galijenovih in Klavdijevih novcih le za datacijo post quem, očitno pa podcenil številnost, ohranjenost, predvsem pa kontekst, v katerem so bili novci najdeni (sl. 4).56 P. Kos postavlja gradnjo obzidja Kaster po novcih v sredino sedemdesetih let 3. st., življenje v trdnjavi pa naj bi zanesljivo trajalo še v prvih treh desetletjih 5. st.57 V kastelu Hrib (Gradišče) na Vrhniki večjih raziskav ni bilo. Starejši podatki o manjših zaščitnih izkopavanjih na njegovem obzidju in bližnjih najdiščih so le pregledno objavljeni.58 To podobo dopolnjujejo v letih 1974–1976 raziskane ostaline samostojnega stolpa Turnovšče, ki so pokazale sočasnost in funkcionalno povezanost z bližnjim kastelom na Hribu (Gradišče) in z odličnim razgledom na ravnico ter proti jugu na območje zapornih zidov.59 Njegov nastanek je M. Slabe umestil v konec 3. st. predvsem glede 55 53 54 55 56 Johnson 1983a, 218. Osmuk 1990a; Osmuk 1997. Osmuk 1990a, 189–190; Osmuk 1997, 122, 126–127. Pröttel 1996, 139. 56 57 58 59 Osmuk 1990a, 189–190; Osmuk 1997, 122, 126–127. Pröttel 1996, 139. Kos 2012, 285, 289. Horvat 1990, 74–77. Slabe 1979. 395 On the basis of coin inds, Kos dates the construction of the Castra defence walls into the middle of the 270s, but also inds that they point to life at the fort continuing in the irst three decades of the 5th century.57 he barrier system included several other fortiications. No major investigations have been conducted in the fort on Hrib (Gradišče) above Vrhnika. he site is summarily included in an overview of the early small-scale rescue excavations of the defence walls on this and on nearby sites.58 Not far away, on Turnovšče, stands an individual tower with a good view over the plain below and the area of the barrier walls. he tower was investigated in 1974–1976 and revealed a contemporaneity and functional connection with the fort on Hrib (Gradišče).59 Slabe dates its beginning to the end of the 3rd century, primarily on the basis of the then known historical situation and less on the scarce small inds that point roughly to the 4th century.60 Also of interest are the indings of the recent investigations and measurements at Dolge njive in Vrhnika, in a bend of the Ljubljanica river, on the spot of the earlier Republican settlement.61 hese revealed, among buildings of the early settlement, also two buildings of a diferent construction (nos. 6 and 24), with column bases in the interior and measuring 14 × 10 m. hey also stand apart from other buildings in the thickness of their walls, measuring 1m as opposed to 0.6 m in earlier buildings. Based on analogies, they can be attributed to the Late Roman period.62 he area of Dolge njive also revealed several coin inds that date to the Late Roman period. Moreover, Jana Horvat raised the possibility that the Verd coin hoard dated to 270 actually originated from Dolge njive.63 he investigations of the fortlet on Gradišče near Mar tinj hrib were published in a summary report, while the tower on Lanišče was presented in some more detail only in short overviews.64 Petru dated the Martinj hrib fortlet from the second half of the 3rd to the end of the 4th century on the basis of small inds and coins.65 Kos, in his recent numismatic analysis of the two sites, showed that intense habitation can only be proven for the Valentinian period and that the site were destroyed in 388 or soon after and not renovated.66 his short duration is conirmed also by the chronologically sensitive small inds.67 na takratne zgodovinske okoliščine in manj glede na skromne najdbe, ki v grobem kažejo na obstoj v 4. st.60 Zanimivi so tudi izsledki novejših raziskav in meritev na lokaciji Dolge njive na Vrhniki, v okljuku Ljubljanice, na mestu stare republikanske naselbine.61 Tam je mogoče opaziti med zgradbami starejše naselbine tudi dve drugače grajeni stavbi (št. 6 in 24), ki sta veliki po 14 × 10 m in imata v notranjosti baze stebrov. Izstopata po debelini zidov (1 m), ki so znatno močnejši kot drugi (0,6 m). Glede na analogije ju je mogoče označiti za poznorimski.62 Na območju Dolgih njiv je bilo najdenih tudi nekaj poznoantičnih novcev. J. Horvat nakazuje možnost, da je bil novčni depo z Verda iz leta 270 odkrit prav na lokaciji Dolge njive.63 O raziskavah manjše utrdbe Gradišče pri Martinj hribu je izšlo sumarno poročilo o izkopavanju, stolp na Lani šču pa je bil nekoliko podrobneje predstavljen le v krajših preglednih člankih.64 Pri opisu izsledkov izkopavanj na Martinj hribu je P. Petru objekt datiral na osnovi drobnih najdb in novcev v čas od druge polovice 3. st. do konca 4. st.65 P. Kos je v dokončni numizmatični analizi obeh najdišč dokazal, da je intenzivno poselitev mogoče zaslediti šele v valentinijanskem obdobju, porušeni pa sta bili leta 388 oziroma kmalu zatem in nič več obnovljeni.66 S tako kratko omejenim trajanjem utrdbe se skladajo tudi značilnejše drobne najdbe.67 Za razumevanje celovitosti alpskih zapor in predvsem datacije začetkov izgradnje so zelo pomembna zaščitna izkopavanja, ki so potekala v zadnjem desetletju na Reki, v središču rimske Tarsatike, kjer so izkopali del velike osrednje zgradbe, v kateri so prepoznali poveljniško poslopje (principium) in rekonstruirali njegovo tlorisno zasnovo.68 Arheološke raziskave so pokazale, da je stavba, velika 45 × 45 m in zelo kvalitetno grajena, nastala že v času cesarjev Galijena oz. Avrelijana.69 P. Kos glede na zamik pri datacijah novcev domneva, da je gradnja potekala konec sedemdesetih let oziroma v osemdesetih letih 3. st., pozneje pa povečano navzočnost vojske ugotavlja šele v valentinijanskem obdobju.70 Zaradi kratke poseljenosti je kronološko izpovedna utrdba Pasjak, odkrita ob itinerarski cesti Tarsatica–Tergeste.71 Z manjšimi raziskavami so ugotovili potek obzidja z dobro 60 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 396 67 Kos 2012, 285, 289. Horvat 1990, 74–77. Slabe 1979. Slabe 1979, 139. Mušič, Horvat 2007. Mušič, Horvat 2007, 264–265. Mušič, Horvat 2007, 261. Leben, Šubic 1990; Petru 1967, 122–124; Petru 1969, 5–9. Petru 1967, 125. Kos 2012, 288. Leben, Šubic 1990, 327–331. 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 Slabe 1979, 139. Mušič, Horvat 2007. Mušič, Horvat 2007, 264–265. Mušič, Horvat 2007, 261. Leben, Šubic 1990; Petru 1967, 122–124; Petru 1969, 5–9. Petru 1967, 125. Kos 2012, 288. Leben, Šubic 1990, 327–331. Radić Štivić, Bekić 2009. Bekić 2009, 220–225. Kos 2012, 287. Starac 2009. Of great importance for the understanding of the Alpine barrier system and even more so the dating of its beginnings is the rescue excavations conducted in the recent decade at Rijeka, Croatia, in the centre of the Roman city of Tarsatica. he excavations revealed a headquarters (principium), of which the ground plan could be reconstructed.68 his building of a very solid construction measured 45 × 45 m and was built already in the time of Emperors Gallienus or Aurelianus.69 Taking into consideration the delay in coin dates, Kos supposes that the building was constructed at the end of the 270s or in the 280s and observes an increased military presence in the Valentinian period.70 A revealing fort in spite of its short duration is that on Pas jak, located along the main road from Tarsatica to Tergeste.71 Limited investigations at the site traced the outlines of its defence walls with a well-fortiied entrance and a supposed defence tower. A thin cultural layer as well as a coin hoard found under the ruins of the defence walls suggest the end of the fort to be relatively reliably dated to around 270.72 he inal site to be included into the barrier system is the unfortiied road post on Vodice near Kalce. It was not of a military character, but did possess a source of water and was located on a spot where the road begins a steep ascent towards the hills of Hrušica and was, as such, of utmost importance for traic as well as military operations. he architecture, unearthed in advance of pipeline construction, was made of wood, while the unsystematically collected small inds date the site between the 1st and the 4th century BC.73 Of particular importance here is the hoard of Late Roman implements reportedly found within the site.74 1.3 Barrier walls utrjenim vhodom in domnevnim obrambnim stolpom. Tenka kulturna plast in novčni depo, najden pod ruševino obzidja, sta omogočila zanesljivo datacijo propada utrdbe v čas okoli leta 270.72 Ob koncu tega kratkega pregleda je v sklop zapornega sistema mogoče umestiti tudi neutrjeno obcestno postajo Vo dice pri Kalcah, ki sicer ni imela vojaške vloge, vendar je bila naselbina z močnim izvirom vode in na mestu, kjer se je cesta strmo dvignila v hribovje Hrušice, zelo pomembna za funkcioniranje prometa in vojaške operacije. Arhitektura, ugotovljena ob izkopu plinovoda, je bila lesena, nesistematično zbrane številne najdbe pa naselbino datirajo v čas med 1. in 4. st.73 Posebej značilen je v tej zvezi depo poznorimskega orodja, ki naj bi bil najden v naselbini.74 1.3 Zaporni zidovi 1.3.1 Raziskave Zidovi zapornega sistema so zelo slabo raziskani. To velja predvsem za starejše Schmidove izkope, ki niso podrobneje dokumentirani in zato ne omogočajo natančnejših datacij.75 Tudi v novejšem času so bile raziskave zapornih zidov skromne. Po objavi starejših rezultatov leta 1971 je mogoče omeniti le nekatera topografska in zaščitna dela na hrvaškem delu zapornega sistema76 ter topografske ugotovitve pri pregledu zidov v slovenskem delu.77 Pred nedavnim je bil odkrit tudi nov, krajši sektor zapor (pribl. 250 m dolg zaporni zid), ki je zapiral cesto med Runarskim in Novim Potom.78 Leži med že prej znanima sektorjema zapor pri Robu in Benetah. Arheološko še ni raziskan, opravljeni so bili le preliminarni pregledi.79 1.3.1 Investigations 1.3.2 Kronologija he walls of the barrier system are very poorly investigated. he available data mainly come from early trial trenching by Schmid that was not well documented and thus does not allow for more precise dates to be proposed.75 In spite of later investigations, the knowledge on the barrier walls has not improved considerably, not even in recent years. he results of earlier investigations were published in 1971. After this date, there were only some topographic and rescue investigations on the Croatian part of the barrier system76 and topographic surveys of the walls on the 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 Radić Štivić, Bekić 2009. Bekić 2009, 220–225. Kos 2012, 287. Starac 2009. Starac 2009, 286. Frelih 1985; Frelih 2003, 26–27; Plaum 2004, 118–144. Plaum 2007. Šašel 1971d, 51. Lipovac Vrkljan, Šiljeg 2007; Starac 2009. Kronologija posameznih odsekov zapornih zidov je še premalo jasna, ponuja le nekaj skromnih opor in malo primerjav. Poseben problem je dejstvo, da pri novejših raziskavah trdnjave na Hrušici zaradi starejše konservacije zidov utrdbe pred drugo svetovno vojno, ki jo je opravil G. Brusin, niso ugotovili zanesljivo stika zapornih zidov, ki se na kar treh mestih navezujejo na trdnjavo.80 G. Brusin piše o stiku jugovzhodnega vogala z zapornim zidom, kjer naj 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 Starac 2009, 286. Frelih 1985; Frelih 2003, 26–27; Plaum 2004, 118–144. Plaum 2007. Šašel 1971d, 51. Lipovac Vrkljan, Šiljeg 2007; Starac 2009. Vuga 1972; Brank 1979. G. Pucelj, Kamenje, ki vodi dva tisoč let v preteklost, Delo, 21. 4. 2012, str. 18. Ustno J. Kusetič in Kusetič 2014, 58–60. Neobjavljene raziskave slovenske ekipe na Hrušici; Kos 2014, 44. 397 Slovenian part.77 Recently, a short, roughly 250 m long section of the barrier walls, across the road between Runarsko and Novi Potok, was newly detected.78 It is located between the already known sections near Rob and Benete. It has, however, not yet been investigated archaeologically with the exception of preliminary archaeological surveys.79 1.3.2 Chronology he chronology of individual sections of the barrier walls is poorly known and its research is based on few points of reference or analogy. In view of that, it is unfortunate that the recent investigations at the fort on Hrušica could not reliably establish the three points of contact between the walls of the fort and the barrier walls, prevented by conservation eforts conducted before World War II by Giovanni Brusin.80 Brusin did write of a contact between the southeastern corner of the fort and one of the barrier walls that clearly showed a discontinuation.81 his probably led Ulbert to state that the barrier walls were constructed separately from the fort’s defence walls.82 On the other hand, the diaries of the Slovenian investigations on Hrušica state that the north barrier wall, beside the north tower, was built contemporaneously with the fort.83 Early investigations of secondary sections of the barrier walls also failed to give reliable chronological points of reference, both the investigations at Rob84 and at Benete.85 What is certain is that the barrier wall near Lanišče stood already before the fortlet was constructed, because the excavators report that the fortlet cut across the earlier barrier wall.86 he construction of the site is determined by the concentration of coins in the 351–361 period,87 which means that the barrier wall in this spot can be dated to the pre-Valentinian period. We could infer from this that barrier walls elsewhere, on strategically more prominent locations, were constructed at least at the same time if not earlier. he question that remains open is whether the barrier walls retained their function even after the fortlet had been abandoned, or whether the defence was transferred in its entirety to the last fortiied line near Hrušica. bi bila vidna cezura.81 Na to se najverjetneje navezuje T. Ulbert, ko ugotavlja pri zapornih zidovih, da so bili zgrajeni ločeno.82 V dnevnikih slovenske ekipe, ki je izkopavala na Hrušici, piše, da je bil severni zaporni zid pri severnem stolpu trdnjave zidan sočasno s trdnjavo.83 Prav tako starejše raziskave stranskih odsekov zapor doslej niso dale zanesljivih kronoloških opor; to velja za raziskave pri Robu84 in tudi pri Benetah.85 Zaporni zid pri Lanišču je obstajal že pred gradnjo utrdbe, saj je ta po poročilu izkopavalcev presekala starejši zaporni zid.86 Tako je mogoče zaporo na tem mestu datirati v predvalentinijansko obdobje, saj je bila trdnjava zgrajena šele v času, ki ga opredeljuje večja intenziteta novcev kovnega obdobja 351–361.87 Sklepati smemo, da so bili tudi drugi zaporni zidovi, na strateško še bolj izpostavljenih položajih, zgrajeni vsaj istočasno, če ne že prej. Odprto ostaja vprašanje, ali je po opustitvi trdnjave na Lanišču tamkajšnji zaporni zid še opravljal svojo vlogo ali pa so obrambo v celoti prenesli na zadnjo utrjeno linijo pri Hrušici. Pomemben podatek glede datacije zapornih zidov omogočata dva stolpa južno pod utrdbo Hrušica, ki sta varovala pot, ki je vodila od Hrušice na Razdrto. Prvi (vzhodni) je varoval prehod v zapornem zidu, ki se je navezoval na kastel na Hrušici. V njem sta bili odkriti dve žganinski plasti: v zgornji so našli 6 konic izstrelkov in Honorijev novec, kovan 394–402.88 V njegovem zaledju je isto pot dodatno varoval še en stolp (zahodni), pri katerem so prav tako odkrili dve plasti; spodnja je datirana z novcem Konstancija II in Valentinijana (sl. 5).89 V sektorju Zaplana–Strmica je bil v stolpu 52 odkrit novec Konstancija II, ki daje termin ante quem za gradnjo stolpa.90 Pri manjših raziskavah na Benetah so izkopali del obrambnega stolpa in hkrati našli zid, ki je bil prigrajen k stolpu in dokazuje, da je stolp funkcioniral nekaj časa samostojno.91 81 82 83 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 398 87 Vuga 1972; Brank 1979. G. Pucelj, Kamenje, ki vodi dva tisoč let v preteklost, Delo 21. 4. 2012, p. 18. Personal communication by J. Kusetič and Kusetič 2014, 58–60. Upublished investigations by the Slovenian team on Hrušica; Kos 2014, 44. Brusin 1959, 42, ig. 3. Ulbert 1981, 18. Personal communication by Peter Kos on 18 January 2013. Pick, Schmid 1922–1924, 304; Schmid 1923–1924, 189. Šašel, Urleb 1971. Petru 1969, 5–6. Kos 2012, 288. 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 Brusin 1959, 42, sl. 3. Ulbert 1981, 18. Ustno P. Kos 18. 1. 2013. Pick, Schmid 1922–1924, 304; Schmid 1923–1924, 189. Šašel, Urleb 1971. Petru 1969, 5–6. Kos 2012, 288. Ulbert 1981, 35. Petru 1980–1981, 133; Kos 2012, 288; Petru govori pri spodnji plasti o dveh novcih Konstancija II, zato je prvo plast datiral v čas spopada Konstancija II z Magnencijem 352. P. Kos je po pregledu dnevnikov izkopavanj ugotovil, da je bil poleg Konstancija II najden še novec Valentinijana, kar datacijo porušitve stolpa prestavlja v poznejše obdobje, vsaj že v čas Valentinijana. Kos 2012, 286. Šašel, Urleb 1971, 33. Important information in connection with the date of the barrier walls is provided by two towers below the Hrušica fort to the south, which defended the road leading from Hrušica to Razdrto. he irst (eastern) tower defended the road through the barrier wall that led to Hrušica. Its interior revealed two layers of burnt remains; the upper one contained 6 projectile points and a coin of Honorius minted between 394 and 402.88 In its hinterland, the same road was defended by the second (western) tower, which also revealed two layers in the interior, the lower one dated with a coin of Constantius II and Valentinianus (ig. 5).89 Figure 5. Fort and barrier walls on Hrušica (ater Ulbert 1981). Slika 5. Utrdba in zaporni zidovi pri Hrušici (po Ulbert 1981). he section of the barrier walls between Zaplana and Strmica included Tower 52 that revealed a coin of Constantius II, which gives a date ante quem for the construction of the tower.90 Small-scale investigation at Benete also revealed a part of a defence tower and a wall later added to it, which indicates that the tower functioned independently for a while.91 he Martinj hrib fort revealed a wall added at a right angle to the fortlet’s defence walls, though it is not clear whether this suggests chronological diferences or merely a constructional feature devoid of a chronological signiicance. Inasmuch as discernible from the reports, the construction technique of the barrier walls is the same on all sections. It has to be said, however, that the internally projecting towers as well as the wallwalk supports are unusual features for Late Antiquity. he well-researched Hexamilion Wall at the Isthmus of Corinth, built in the beginning of the 5th century to fortify the access to the Peloponnesian Peninsula, for example, has externally projecting towers.92 he investigations of the towers along the barrier walls have shown that they were of short duration and only used on rare occasions, which suggests that the soldiers lived elsewhere, in permanent posts nearby, and took defensive position only in times of peril. he barrier walls are, with the exception of the 2 m wide walls on Hrušica, rather thin and measure 0.9–1.2 m, only at places thicker at the foundation level. If compared to other defence installations, they are much thinner than the 88 89 90 91 92 Ulbert 1981, 35. Petru 1980–1981, 133; Kos 2012, 288; Petru writes of two coins of Constantius II in the lower layer, which led him to date the upper layer into the time of the conlict between Constantius II and Magnentius in 352. Ater a careful inspection of the excavation diaries, Kos established that a coin of Valentinian was found beside the coin of Constantius II, which pushes the date of the destruction of the tower forward, at least to the time of Valentinian (Kos 2012, 288). Kos 2012, 286. Šašel, Urleb 1971, 33. Gregory 1993, 132–134. Pri utrdbi Martinj hrib ni jasno, ali gre pri zidu, ki se je naslonil na objekt, za kronološko razlikovanje ali samo tehnično gradbeni podatek, ki nima kronološke vrednosti. Tehnika gradnje zidov na vseh odsekih je – kolikor je razvidno iz skopih poročil – enaka. Stolpi na notranji strani in oporniki za mostovž so nenavadni za gradnje v poznoantičnem obdobju. Tako npr. so bili pri dobro raziskanem obzidju Hexamilion v Isthmusu, ki je bil zgrajen v začetku 5. st., da bi varoval dostop na polotok Peloponez, stolpi grajeni na zunanji strani.92 Raziskave stolpov ob zapornih zidovih kažejo, da so jih uporabljali kratkotrajno in ob redkih priložnostih, kar pomeni, da so vojaki prebivali drugje, v stalnih postojankah v bližini, obrambne položaje pa so zasedli le, če je bilo to potrebno. Pri zapornih zidovih je treba opozoriti, da gre – z izjemo zidov na Hrušici, ki so debeli 2 m – za zelo tenek zid, debel zgolj od 0,9–1,2 m in le ponekod v temelju nekoliko močnejši. Če ga primerjamo z drugimi, podobnimi obrambnimi napravami, vidimo, da je mnogo tanjši kot na primer starejši Hadrijanov ali Antoninski zid in prav tako mnogo tanjši od poznejših pomembnejših zapornih zidov, kakršen je Dolgi zid v Trakiji in Hexamilion na Peloponezu, ki je debel 2,94 m, zidovi pa so bili okrepljeni s stolpi na zunanji strani.93 Tako neposrednih primerjav za naše zaporne zidove nimamo, primerjamo lahko delno le način postavljanja stolpov na notranji strani obzidij pri starejših vojaških kastelih, ki so bili večinoma opuščeni že v 3. st. 92 93 Gregory 1993, 132–134. Gregory 1993, 135. 399 earlier Hadrian’s or Antonine Walls, but also much thinner than later barrier walls of importance, such as the Long Walls of hrace or the Hexamilion on the Peloponnese, which measure 2.94 m in thickness and show reinforcement in the shape of externally projecting towers.93 he Alpine barrier walls can, however, be partially compared with the internally projecting towers in earlier military fortiications that were, for the most part, abandoned already in the 3rd century. One of these analogies is the defence walls of the Veli grad fort on the island of Krk, with wallwalk supports in the interior and a pair of gate towers, as pointed out already by Aleksandra Faber.94 Unfortunately, no inds are known from the interior of the site and it is only possible to establish that it difers considerably from the later, Justinian forts in Kvarner and Dalmatia. A further analogy can be found in the barrier walls in Macedonia, connected with the Rogle fort and at Demir kapija, the construction of which Ivan Mikulčić dates to the second half of the 3rd century.95 here is also a similar short wall along the fort near Porečka reka in the Iron Gates, the construction of which is reliably dated on the basis of inds into the 260s.96 As seen above, the available data and the analogies is insuicient basis for a reliable date of the barrier walls to be proposed. he analogies for the relatively thin barrier walls with internally projecting towers indicate that they could have been built in some places together with the irst forts, while the reliable archaeological inds conirm their existence only from the mid-4th century onwards. hese observations also raise the question of whether the walls defending secondary roads (near Rob, Zarakovec and elsewhere) continued to function even after the abandonment of the Hrušica fort in the beginning of the 5th century. In view of an absence of well datable inds from the early excavations, this can as yet not be entirely answered, though it is suggested for the route fortiied by the barrier walls near Rob on the basis of the coin inds from the irst three decades of the 5th century as well as several pieces of military equipment found on the sites on Korinjski hrib, Limberk, Križna gora, Predjama and Šmihel.97 1.3.3 Problematic sections of the barrier walls he literature on the barrier walls also includes instances of uncritical citing of certain early and unveriied statements. One of these is the often-cited supposition of the longest section of the barrier walls running across the eastern slope of Mount Snežnik, between Železna vrata and Babno Že A. Faber je opozorila na veliko podobnost zapornih zidov sistema Klavster z obzidjem utrdbe Veli grad na otoku Krku, kjer se pojavljajo oporniki za mostovž na notranji strani in dva stolpa pri vhodu.94 Žal v notranjosti te utrdbe ni bilo odkrito arheološko gradivo, ugotoviti je mogoče le, da se v veliki meri razlikuje od poznejših justinijanskih utrdb v Kvarnerju in Dalmaciji. Podobnost se kaže tudi pri zapornih zidovih v Makedoniji, ki se navezujejo na trdnjavi Rogle in pri Demir kapiji. I. Mikulčič njihovo postavitev datira v drugo polovico 3. st.95 Prav tako obstaja podobnost s krajšim zidom ob trdnjavi pri Porečki reki v Đerdapu; njegova postavitev je glede na najdbe zanesljivo datirana v šestdeseta leta 3. st.96 Ob pregledu navedenih argumentov in primerjav je mogoče zapisati, da doslej opravljene raziskave ne omogočajo zanesljive datacije zapornih zidov. Glede na primerjave relativno šibkih zapornih zidov s stolpi na notranji strani bi bilo mogoče domnevati, da so bili postavljeni ponekod že hkrati z dograditvijo prvih trdnjav, zanesljive arheološke najdbe pa njihov obstoj potrjujejo šele od sredine 4. st. Ob navedenih dejstvih se zastavlja tudi vprašanje, ali so po opustitvi ceste čez Hrušico v začetku 5. st. morda še opravljali svojo obrambno vlogo zidovi, ki so varovali stranske ceste (zapora pri Robu, Zarakovec itd.), ker zanesljivo opredeljivi predmeti že opravljenih starejših izkopavanj manjkajo. Posebej verjetno je to za traso, ki jo je varovala zapora pri Robu, ob njej pa so na utrdbah Korinjski hrib, Limberk, Križna gora, Predjama, Šmihel odkrili novce iz prvih treh desetletij 5. st. in tudi nekaj delov vojaške opreme.97 1.3.3 Problematični odseki zapornih zidov Prav tako se zdi potrebno opozoriti na dokaj nekritično prevzemanje nekaterih starejših podatkov, ki arheološko doslej niso bili preverjeni ali potrjeni. Najprej je treba opozoriti na večkrat izraženo domnevo o najdaljšem odseku zapornih zidov, ki naj bi potekal po vzhodnih pobočjih Snežnika, med Železnimi vrati in Babnim poljem, saj se opira zgolj na nepreverjene navedbe in zapise starejših avtorjev.98 Takšne domneve sta odločno zavrnila že K. Pick in W. Schmid, ki sta zapisala, da zapora ne poteka celovito, ampak so bili pri zapornem zidu med Reko in Prezidom zgolj trije sektorji, ki so jih zidovi zapirali.99 Tudi sicer se zdi potek tako dolgega obzidja v še zdaj težko prehodnih gozdovih vzhodnih pobočjih Snežnika (1797 m n. m.) nesmiseln. Pomisleke zbuja dejstvo, da je bil ob glavni vpadnici v Italijo zgrajen kot najdaljši zaporni zid le pribl. 10 km dolg odsek nad Vrhniko v mnogo lažje prehodnem svetu, 94 93 94 95 96 400 97 Gregory 1993, 135. Faber 1986–1987, 119. Mikulčić 2002, 66–67. Petrović 1984, 285–288; Špehar 2010, 20–22. Ciglenečki 1985, 267–269. 95 96 97 98 99 Faber 1986–1987, 119. Mikulčić 2002, 66–67. Petrović 1984, 285–288; Špehar 2010, 20–22. Ciglenečki 1985, 267–269. Pregledno pri Šašel 1971e. Pick, Schmid 1922–1924, 305. polje, which is based solely on unveriied writings of early authors.98 his supposition was refuted already by Pick in Schmid, who wrote that the barrier wall between Rijeka and Prezid does not run uninterruptedly and is rather composed of three sections.99 Constructing a roughly 20 km long (as the crow lies) wall across the eastern slopes of Snežnik (1797 m a.s.l.), between Železna vrata and Prezid, across very harsh mountainous terrain without important communications and on average altitudes above 1000 m, does seem unreasonable. It is all the more unreasonable when compared to the longest conirmed barrier wall, constructed at the main route leading into Italy above Vrhnika, on far less diicult terrain, which is only 10 km long. he investigations conducted on the Croatian side thus far have only detected the extension of the wall near Prezid.100 Having said that, the problem could inally be solved only by detailed investigation of the area, possibly even lidar terrain mapping. A similar problem is the barrier wall and associated fort mentioned at San Pietro di Natisone (Špeter Slovenov).101 his as well is based solely on early mentions of a supposed barrier wall and a small fort on the hill of Barda, unconirmed by investigations carried out thus far. Archaeological investigations did conirm the existence of a prehistoric hillfort, a thick Early Roman settlement layer as well as a ibula and a coin from the 5th or 6th century,102 while inds from the Late Roman period are entirely absent. he site, supposedly with a smaller version of the ground plan of the Hrušica fort, is not observable in terrain, neither is the barrier wall. As written above, the centre of defence for this area was undoubtedly located near Kobarid, on the hill of Tonovcov grad, where a strong military post from the Late Roman period was partly investigated and intense Late Roman settlement of the area evidenced by stray inds from the Kobarid area.103 Furthermore, the access into Italy was most easily blocked in the gorge of the Natisone (Nadiža) river, at the entrance of which a Late Roman site of Molida is located. his site has not been investigated in more detail due to a large part of it being buried under a landslide from Mount Matajur.104 kot je ta pod Snežnikom. Zato se zdi pribl. 20 km dolg zaporni zid (v zračni črti) med Železnimi vrati in Prezidom, na najtežje prehodnem gorskem svetu brez pomembnejših komunikacij in v povprečni nadmorski višini čez 1000 m, malo verjeten. Tudi dosedanje raziskave hrvaških kolegov so odkrile zgolj podaljšek zidu pri Prezidu.100 Zato bodo problem lahko dokončno osvetlile šele podrobne raziskave ali morda celo že lidarsko snemanje terena. Drug podoben problem je omemba zapornega zidu in pripadajoče trdnjave v kraju San Pietro di Natisone (Špeter Slovenov/Špietar).101 Tudi tam gre zgolj za starejše omembe domnevnega zapornega zidu in manjše trdnjave na hribu Barda, ki pa jih dosedanje raziskave niso potrdile. Arheološki izsledki dokazujejo le obstoj prazgodovinskega gradišča, močno zgodnjerimsko naselbinsko plast, najdena ibula in novec izvirata iz 5. oz. 6. st.102 V celoti pa manjkajo najdbe iz poznorimskega obdobja! Tudi trdnjave, ki naj bi v pomanjšani obliki ponavljala tloris utrdbe na Hrušici, na terenu ni opaziti, kot tudi ne v literaturi omenjenega zapornega zidu. Kot smo to predstavili že drugje, je bilo središče obrambe za ta sektor nedvomno pri Kobaridu, kjer smo na Tonovcovem gradu delno raziskali močno vojaško postojanko iz poznorimskega obdobja, intenzivno poznorimsko poselitev pa nakazujejo tudi posamezne najdbe v okolici Kobarida.103 Razen tega je bilo dostop v Italijo najlažje zapreti v soteski Nadiže, kjer je bilo pri vstopu vanjo nakazano poznorimsko najdišče Molida, ki pa podrobneje ni raziskano, saj v večjem delu leži pod plazom z Matajurja.104 Nenavadni so tudi ostanki zapornega zidu na skrajni severozahodni točki sistema v dolini Zile na Koroškem, pri kraju Rotna ves (Rattendorf im Gailtal).105 Zid se razlikuje od tistih, ki so bili doslej raziskani v slovenskem in hrvaškem delu in ima kontrafore oziroma nosilce za mostovž razporejene po vsej dolžini, in sicer na vzhodni strani zidu. Fronta naj bi bila obrnjena proti zahodu! Dolenz ga je datiral na osnovi težko opredeljivih najdb in pravilne gradnje v 2. st. namenjen pa je bil obrambi pred Markomani.106 1.4 Geneza zapornega sistema Also suspicious are the remains of a barrier wall on the north-westernmost point of the system in the Gail valley in Carinthia, near Rattendorf im Gailtal/Rotna ves.105 he wall here difers from those investigated in Slovenia and Croatia and has wallwalk supports positioned along the entire length on the eastern side of the wall, whereby the battle front supposedly faced the west! Dolenz dated the 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 In overview by Šašel 1971e. Pick, Schmid 1922–1924, 305. Lipovac Vrkljan, Šiljeg 2007, 81. In overview by Šašel 1971f. Rupel 2005, 73–75. Ciglenečki 2011, 268–270. Župančič 1991. Šašel 1971g. Po tem zgoščenem pregledu interpretacij kronologije posameznih sklopov in tudi celote zapornega sistema je potrebno še enkrat zbrati doslej pridobljene arheološke rezultate, da bi lahko ob primerjavi z redkimi konkretnejšimi podatki v pisnih virih ter z umestitvijo v širšo poselitveno sliko izoblikovali okvirno podobo geneze zapornega sistema Klavster. 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 Lipovac Vrkljan, Šiljeg 2007, 81. Pregledno pri Šašel 1971f. Rupel 2005, 73–75. Ciglenečki 2011, 268–270. Župančič 1991. Šašel 1971g. Dolenz 1952, 174–177. 401 wall on the basis of poorly datable inds and regular construction into the 2nd century, interpreting it as defence against the Marcomanni.106 1.4 Genesis of the barrier system Apart from the chronologies of individual sections and the barrier system as a whole, a rough understanding of the system’s genesis also involves an overview of the archaeological indings compared against the few more concrete pieces of information provided by the ancient literary sources as well as against the settlement pattern in the Claustra area. Če povzamemo nesporne ugotovitve, lahko spoznanja o genezi strnemo v naslednje trditve: – Postavitev utrdb zapornega sistema v sedemdesetih letih 3. st. se zdi nesporna za Ajdovščino, v neki provizorični obliki verjetna za Hrušico, domnevna za Hrib (Gradišče) na Vrhniki in Turnovšče pri Vrhniki. Dejstvo je, da je bila štabna baza v Ajdovščini smiselna le, če je bil zavarovan tudi prelaz na najlažje branljivem delu alpskega prehoda, prav tako pa tudi vhod v hribovje Hrušice pri Vrhniki. – Postavitev obeh manjših utrdb Lanišče in Martinj hrib je mogoče zanesljivo umestiti v sedmo ali osmo desetletje 4. st. in njun propad kmalu za tem, najverjetneje celo v čas spopada med Teodozijem in Maksimom leta 388. – Daljši obstoj (vsaj dela) sistema dokazuje več faz bivanja v utrdbi Hrušica ter prenove njenega obzidja in stolpov. – Sistem je bil opuščen (dokazljivo le za osrednji sektor zapor ob cesti čez Hrušico) najverjetneje v prvem desetletju 5. st. – Doslej ugotovljeni podatki gradnjo zapornih zidov ob glavni vpadnici čez Hrušico zanesljivo postavljajo vsaj že v sredino 4. st., kar pa ne izključuje njihove postavitve že prej; skromne analogije nakazujejo možnost gradnje celo že v zadnji tretjini 3. st. Z datacijo nastanka v sredino 4. st. se dobro ujema Julijanov podatek o Magnencijevi pospešeni gradnji utrdbenega sistema. Zgodnejši gradnji zapornih zidov v prid govori nedvomno postavitev stolpov na notranji strani, saj je ta način bil dokumentiran pri vseh doslej bolje poznanih zapornih odsekih. Nedvomno je bila različna tudi kronologija posameznih sektorjev, kot nakazujeta raziskani utrdbi na Lanišču in Martinj hribu. Based solely on the incontestable indings, our knowledge of the system’s genesis can be summarized in the following statements: – he construction of the fortiications of the barrier system in the 270s seems incontestable for Ajdovščina, probable in a provisional form for Hrušica and supposed for Hrib (Gradišče) in Vrhnika and Turnovšče near Vrhnika. he existence of the headquarters at Ajdovščina only seems reasonable if the the pass across the most easily defendable part of the Alpine passage and the entrance into the hills of Hrušica at Vrhnika were fortiied as well. – he construction of the two fortlets on Lanišče and Martinj hrib can reliably be set into the 360s or the 370s and their abandonment soon afterwards, most probably to the time of the battle between heodosius and Maximus in 388. – A lengthy existence (of at least a part) of the system is evidenced by the several phases of habitation at the Hrušica fort and the renovation of its defence walls and towers. – he abandonment of the system (only provable for the central section of the barrier walls near the road leading across Hrušica) occurred in the irst decade of the 5th century. – he information obtained thus far allows us to reliably date the construction of the barrier walls at the main road of access into Italy across Hrušica at least to the middle of the 4th century; this mid-4th century date would correspond well with the information provided by Julian on Magnentius’ accelerated construction of a fortiication system. However, there are indications of a possible construction already in the last third of the 3rd century. One of these indications is certainly the internally projecting defence towers, which were documented on all betterknown sections of the barrier walls. he investigated fortlets on Lanišče and Martinj hrib also show that the system was not built as a whole in a single go. Ob problemu nastanka zapornega sistema je smiselno opozoriti tudi na spremembe poselitvene slike, ki sovpadajo z začetki zapornega sistema. Pri tem mislim predvsem na prvo dokazljivo ponovno poselitev starih prazgodovinskih gradišč in tudi mnogih novonastalih višinskih naselbin ali pribežališč v zadnji tretjini 3. st.107 Na osnovi manjših raziskav se nam je namreč leta 1985 posrečilo ugotoviti kratek čas poseljeno višinsko utrdbo Veliki vrh nad Osredkom pri Podsredi, ki jo novci in nekateri značilnejši predmeti dokaj natančno umeščajo v sedemdeseta leta 3. st. Pri tem je pomembno predvsem dejstvo, da je bila postojanka pozneje le sporadično obiskana in je bil zato poselitveni sunek iz zadnje tretjine 3. st. mnogo bolje viden. Posredno to prvo utrjevanje oziroma sunek v hribe potrjujejo zgostitve novcev iz tega obdobja na številnih drugih višinskih najdiščih (Rifnik, Vranje, Brinjeva gora, Zbelovska Gora itd.).108 he discussion on the genesis of the barrier system should also consider the changes in the settlement pattern that 107 108 402 106 Dolenz 1952, 174–177. Ciglenečki 1987, 123–124; Ciglenečki 1990. Prim. pri Kos 1986, 208–217; Ciglenečki 1987, 161–162; Ciglenečki 1990, 154–156. coincide with the beginnings of the system. hese changes are primarily visible in the repopulation of the old prehistoric hillforts and the appearance of new settlements or refuges on hilltops in the last third of the 3rd century.107 Of the latter, small-scale investigations on Veliki vrh above Osredek pri Podsredi in 1985 revealed a hilltop site inhabited during a short period, dated on the basis of coins and other characteristic inds to the 270s. An important observation is that after this time the site was only sporadically visited, which makes the settlement wave from the last third of the 3rd century all the more apparent. his irst fortiication or population move towards the hills is indirectly conirmed by concentrations of coins from this time on numerous other hilltop sites (Rifnik, Vranje, Brinjeva gora, Zbelovska gora and others).108 he archaeological information above shows a wider scale of events taking place across a vast area at the end of the 260s and the beginning of the 270s, the consequence of which were extensive – albeit short-lived – movements of the population towards the hills and other fortiied locations that coincided with the abandonment of several old settlements and the construction of new ones after this date. In short, there is a dividing line clearly observable in the settlement pattern of the eastern Alpine area.109 Another compelling argument for dating the construction of the barrier system in the 270s is the fortiication of cities in north Italy that took place in the same period, but also additional fortiication of Rome as well as cities in Gallia and Hispania, the defence walls of the latter in most cases datable to the last third of the 3rd century.110 If the cities in the heart of the Empire needed fortifying, the latter was all the more important on the most exposed points of access into Italy, which included the strategically vital Alpine passes. Indirectly, these fortiication eforts along the main roads into Italy are indicated by the presence of garrisons at Poetovio in the time of Gallienus.111 If Saria’s date of the barrier system into the time of Gallienus was rather intuitive, based primarily on his good knowledge of the wider historical context and his archaeological experiences in excavating the contemporary fort on Velike Malence, the recent archaeological indings now point to the irst forts of the Claustra system really being constructed at this time, more precisely in the 270s. Moreover, the construction of such a complex in Constantinian time seems illogical because the outside danger at the time was not great and a fortiication of outer boundaries suf107 108 109 110 111 Ciglenečki 1987, 123–124; Ciglenečki 1990. Cf. Kos 1986, 208–217; Ciglenečki 1987, 161–162; Ciglenečki 1990, 154–156. Ciglenečki 1990, 154–156; Santoro Bianchi 1992, 183–185. Johnson 1983a, 113–121; Johnson 1983b; Brogiolo 2006, 9; Christie 2001, 112–114. Saria 1939, 141; Ragolič, in this book. S pomočjo primerjav arheoloških podatkov na obsežnejšem območju je bilo mogoče pokazati na širše razsežnosti dogajanj ob koncu šestdesetih in začetku sedemdesetih let 3. st., katerih posledica so bili obsežni – sicer kratkotrajni – premiki na hribe in v druga utrjena mesta, z opustitvijo nekaterih starejših naselij in gradnjo novih po tem datumu. Skratka, opaziti je bilo mogoče ločnico v poselitvi, ki se razločno kaže na vzhodnoalpskem območju.109 Med tehtne argumente za gradnjo zapornega sistema v sedemdesetih letih 3. st. je mogoče šteti tudi takratno utrjevanje mest v severni Italiji, predvsem Rima, pa tudi galskih in španskih mest, pri katerih je nastanek obzidja največkrat mogoče datirati v zadnjo tretjino 3. st.110 Če so utrjevali mesta že tako globoko v osrčju imperija, je bilo toliko nujneje utrditi kritične obrambne položaje na najbolj izpostavljeni poti proti Italiji, posebej na strateško pomembnih mestih v območju alpskih prelazov. Posredno ta utrjevanja vzdolž vpadnic v Italijo nakazuje tudi zadrževanje večjih vojaških oddelkov v Petovioni v Galijenovem času.111 Če je bila datacija zapornega sistema pri Sariji v galijenski čas še bolj intuitivna, utemeljena predvsem na njegovem dobrem poznavanju širšega zgodovinskega konteksta in njegovih arheoloških izkušnjah ob izkopavanju sočasne utrdbe v Velikih Malencah, pa novejši arheološki rezultati premikajo čas gradnje prvih utrdb sistema Klavster določneje v sedemdeseta leta 3. st. Nerazumljivo je, da bi v konstantinskem času gradili tak kompleks, saj zunanja grožnja ni bila velika oziroma je zadoščala okrepitev zunanjih mej. Zato je postavitev sistema proti večjim množicam, kot ga nakazuje obravnavani sklop zidov in ga razumejo vsi sodobni avtorji, verjetnejša v času, ko se je zdelo, da sovražnik lahko vdre v Italijo in je zato prišlo do okrepljene gradnje obzidij mest, in drugih varovalnih naprav znotraj imperija. Tenki zidovi v zapornem sistemu kažejo, da so bili narejeni v bran pred sovražnikom, ki ni imel večjih oblegovalnih naprav in znanja, torej proti vdoru barbarskih množic. 2 Vojaške utrdbe zunaj ožjega območja Klavster Sočasno z obstojem sistema Klavster in tudi še nekaj desetletij pozneje pa so obstajale vojaške postojanke, o katerih viri molčijo in jih je težko zanesljivo prepoznati. Vzroki za to so – kot smo omenili že zgoraj – spremenjena struktura vojske v poznorimskem času, drugačna taktika in predvsem mnogo bolj terenu prilagojene utrdbe, ki jih je brez podrobnejših raziskav težko prepoznati kot vojaške. Pomembno spremembo pomeni dejstvo, da so bile vojaške posadke pogosto stacionirane tudi v dobro utrjenih me109 110 111 Ciglenečki 1990, 154–156; Santoro Bianchi 1992, 183–185. Johnson 1983a, 113–121; Johnson 1983b; Brogiolo 2006, 9; Christie 2001, 112–114. Saria 1939, 141; Ragolič, v tem zborniku. 403 Figure 6. Late Roman sites mentioned in the text (M. Belak). Slika 6. Pregled v tekstu omenjenih poznorimskih najdišč (izdelava M. Belak). iced. he construction of a barrier system against masses of enemies, as observable on the above-discussed barrier walls and as understood by modern scholars, seems more credible for a period when it was believed that the enemy can invade Italy, as a response to which cities in Italy itself reinforced their defence walls and took other defence measures. he thin walls of the barrier system further suggest that they were made to defend against an enemy without major siege machines and siege knowledge, i.e. against the masses of barbarians. 2 Fortiications outside the narrow area of the Claustra 404 Existing at the same time as the Claustra system as well as some time afterwards was a series of fortiications, which are not mentioned in ancient literary sources and are not readily identiiable in nature. his is – as mentioned above – stih. Ta pojav je značilen za širši ozemlje imperija,112 navzočnost poznorimske vojske pa je mogoče zaznati tudi v mestih vzhodnoalpskega območja (sl. 6).113 2.1 Mesta Vojaške navzočnosti v mestih obravnavanega območja ni mogoče podrobneje obravnavati zaradi pomanjkanja ustrezne značilne arhitekture. Izjemo pomeni le odkritje manjše utrdbe na grajskem hribu sredi antične Petovione, ki so jo je ob koncu štiridesetih let 20. st. izkopali pod vodstvom J. Klemenca.114 Glede na slabo opredeljene drobne najdbe in predvsem z opiranjem na pisne vire je utrdbo datiral v obdobje vzhodnogotske navzočnosti na tem ob112 113 114 Liebeschutz 1992, 30; Poulter 1992, 108–109. Sivec 1997, 144; Ladstätter 2002, 318; Christie 2007, 566. Klemenc 1950. the consequence of a diferent structure of the army in the Late Roman period, diferent tactics and, in a large measure, the fact that these are much better adapted to the surrounding terrain and not easily identiiable as military without detailed investigations. Another important change in the Late Roman period was the frequent presence of a garrison in the now well-fortiied cities. his phenomenon is observable in a greater part of the Empire,112 also in the towns of the eastern Alpine area (ig. 6).113 2.1 Towns Military presence in the cities of the eastern Alpine area cannot be discussed in detail due to a lack of knowledge on the architecture that characterizes it. he only exception is a small fortlet discovered on the castle hill in the centre of Roman Poetovio and excavated by Josip Klemenc at the end of the 1940s.114 He dated it to the time of the Ostrogothic presence in the area on the basis of an inadequate interpretation of the small inds and a reading of ancient literary sources.115 Subsequent investigations have shown it to be a typical Late Roman fortlet, such as was marked as type Budakalasz in the Hungarian part of the limes and dated to the Valentinian period.116 Such a date of the tower on the castle hill at Ptuj is conirmed by a cemetery in its immediate vicinity from the end of the 4th and the beginning of the 5th centuries with characteristic inds of the foederati.117 A supposedly similar fortlet stood on the neighbouring hill of Panorama, for which no detailed documentation is available.118 he two fortlets are characteristically located just above the road from Carnuntum to Aquileia, with the irst site also controlling the crossing of the River Drava. Apart from the fortlets, in the whole city area, inds of militaria found either in settlement layers or graves, indicate the presence of Late Roman army in Poetovio, in buildings not yet investigated in detail.119 močju.115 Poznejše raziskave so pokazale, da gre za tipičen poznorimski burgus, kakršne so v madžarskem delu limesa označili za tip Budakalász in njihov nastanek datirali v valentinijansko obdobje.116 Takšno datacijo stolpa na Ptujskem gradu potrjuje v neposredni bližini odkrito grobišče s konca 4. in začetka 5. st. z značilnimi elementi federatov.117 Domnevno sorodna utrdba naj bi stala na sosednjem griču Panorama, vendar pa podrobnejša dokumentacija o njej manjka.118 Lega utrdb je značilna, obe sta bili umeščeni tik nad cesto Carnuntum–Aquileia (Karnunt–Akvileja), prva pa je nadzirala tudi prehod čez Dravo. Ob teh doslej edino zanesljivo prepoznanih ostankih utrdb pa tudi najdbe militarij v celotnem mestnem arealu Petovione, tako posamezno, v naselbinskih plasteh, pa tudi v grobnih celotah, nakazujejo navzočnost enot poznorimske vojske v še podrobneje neugotovljenih objektih.119 Kot pomembno vojaško postojanko so Emono omenjali že B. Saria, J. Šašel, in L. Plesničar.120 V mestu vojaško navzočnost poleg ponovne utrditve obzidja dokazujejo številne najdbe vojaške opreme in posamezni sledovi federatov (sl. 7).121 he city of Emona was considered as an important military post already by Saria, Šašel and Plesničar.120 he military presence in this city is evidenced by the renovation of the defence walls as well as by numerous small inds of military equipment and individual traces of the foederati (ig. 7).121 Množica elementov vojaške opreme priča o navzočnosti rimske vojske v slabo raziskanem Neviodunu.122 Tam nameščeni vojaški oddelki so lahko po potrebi hitro zasedli strateška mesta na območju Čateža, predvsem v utrdbi na gradišču v Velikih Malencah, kjer so sondiranja opozorila na odsotnost bivalnih stavb v notranjosti.123 A multitude of military equipment speaks of a military presence also for the otherwise poorly investigated city V Celeji so doslej delno raziskali močno poznorimsko obzidje, katerega gradnjo je bilo mogoče na zahodni strani 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 Liebeschutz 1992, 30; Poulter 1992, 108–109. Sivec 1997, 144; Ladstätter 2002, 318; Christie 2007, 566. Klemenc 1950. Klemenc 1950, 80–81. Soproni 1985, 36–37, 99; Ciglenečki 1993, 506–507. Jevremov et al. 1993. Korošec 1950, 77. Cf. Mikl-Curk 1966; Vomer-Gojkovič 1997; Tušek 1997. Saria 1930, 9–10; Saria 1939, 144; Šašel 1971a, 213; PlesničarGec 2005, 403–404. Plesničar, Sivec 1978, 59–60; Vuga 1985, 244–247; Sivec 1997; Plaum 2001, 23–24, cat. nos. 48–52. Figure 7. Part of the south defence walls of Emona with towers (photo S. Ciglenečki). Slika 7. Del emonskega južnega obzidja s stolpi (foto S. Ciglenečki). 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 Klemenc 1950, 80–81. Soproni 1985, 36–37, 99; Ciglenečki 1993, 506–507. Jevremov et al. 1993. Korošec 1950, 77. Prim. pri Mikl-Curk 1966; Vomer-Gojkovič 1997; Tušek 1997. Saria 1930, 9–10; Saria 1939, 144; Šašel 1971a, 213; PlesničarGec 2005, 403–404. Plesničar, Sivec 1978, 59–60; Vuga 1985, 244–247; Sivec 1997; Plaum 2001, 23–24, kat. št. 48–52. Petru, Petru 1978, 43. Saria 1929, 16; Saria 1930, 8. 405 of Neviodunum.122 he garrisons stationed here could, if necessary, quickly take their strategic positions in the area of Čatež, primarily on the fort on Velike Malence, where trial trenching showed an absence of residential buildings in the interior.123 mesta okvirno datirati v sredino 4. st.124 Številnejše značilne vojaške najdbe, ki bi dokazovale obsežnejšo navzočnost vojske v mestu, do zdaj niso znane. he thick Late Roman defence walls of Celeia were thus far only partly investigated and their construction in the west could roughly be dated to the mid-4th century.124 he city has so far not yielded characteristic military inds proving a signiicant presence of the army. Poleg mest pa je obstajala cela vrsta utrdb, pri katerih strateška lega, raziskana arhitektura in tudi različne militarije nakazujejo pomemben delež pri poznoantični obrambi v globino. Poznoantična mobilna vojska (comitatense) je svoje postojanke vedno pogosteje gradila na naravno bolje zaščitenih mestih, izrabila spretno vse terenske danosti, zato se je prej značilna pravilno oblikovana arhitektura vojaških postojank spremenila do te mere, da je velikokrat ni več mogoče ločiti od funkcionalno drugačnih sočasnih postojank, predvsem naselbin.125 Zaradi poslabšane varnosti civilnega prebivalstva je namreč to postopno opuščalo ravninske nezaščitene naselbine in se selilo v višinske, naravno mnogo bolje zavarovane naselbine. Sprememba naselbinske slike je v poznoantičnem času pojav, značilen za velik del imperija in še posebej za izpostavljeno območje Ilirika.126 2.2 Fortiications with an exclusively military function Apart from cities, important role in the Late Antique system of defence-in-depth was played by a series of fortiications, as suggested by their strategic position, investigated architecture and inds of various militaria. he Late Antique mobile ield army or comitatenses most frequently built its forts on naturally well-protected spots and took full advantage of the shape of the terrain. Consequently, the previously regularly planned military architecture changed to the point that it is often impossible to diferentiate between military posts and other contemporary sites, primarily settlements.125 he compromised safety of the civilians led them to gradually abandon the unfortiied settlements in the lowland and move to higher-lying, naturally well-protected locations. he change of the settlement pattern is a phenomenon that characterizes a great part of the Empire in Late Antiquity and is particularly visible in the exposed area of Illyricum.126 It is diicult to deine criteria that would help us to reliably identify the posts of an exclusively military function among the multitude of hilltop sites.127 However, an overview of the posts that are more reliably identiiable shows that the military posts are located on hills, even low ones, usually in the immediate vicinity of important lines of communication or other strategically important points. he second identiication criterion is strong defence walls, which difer from contemporary refuges in their thickness and a more regular course. he third criterion is the frequent inds of pieces of the military dress and weapons on the better investigated sites. Based on these criteria, a group of fortiications was selected, although the diferentiation between these and the group of sites discussed further down is not always clear 122 123 124 125 126 406 127 Petru, Petru 1978, 43. Saria 1929, 16; Saria 1930, 8. Bausovac, Krempuš 2009. Ciglenečki 1987, 110–111. Basler 1972, 47–61; Ciglenečki 1987; Mikulčić 2002; Milinković 2008; Dinchev 2007. Ciglenečki 2008, 490–496. 2.2 Utrdbe z izključno vojaško namembnostjo Težko je izoblikovati kriterije, s katerimi bi v množici višinskih postojank na podeželju zanesljivo prepoznali tiste z izključno vojaško namembnostjo.127 Pregled zanesljiveje ločljivih pokaže, da so bile umeščene že na manjše vzpetine, če že ne na višje hribe, navadno v neposredni bližini važnejših prometnic ali drugih strateško pomembnih točk. Na drugem mestu je kot razlikovalni kriterij mogoče upoštevati močno obrambno arhitekturo, ki se že po debelini in v veliki meri pravilneje zasnovanem poteku zidov razlikuje od sočasnih pribežališč. Kot dodatni element je treba pri bolje raziskanih utrdbah omeniti pogoste najdbe moške noše in orožja. Na podlagi naštetega smo pripravili izbor utrdb, pri čemer je potrebno poudariti, da ni mogoče postaviti povsem eksaktnih mej med to skupino in tisto, ki jo obravnavamo pozneje. Pri večini vojaških postojank je relativna višina manjša, do okoli 50 m, so pa tudi nekatere izjeme, postojanke, zgrajene na višjih hribih. Prav tako ni mogoče postaviti povsem zanesljive ločnice pri debelini obrambnega zidu, saj je bila ta v veliki meri odvisna od naravne zavarovanosti hriba, na katerem je utrdba stala. Po pomenu in velikosti izstopa v tej skupini postojanka na Gradišču pri Velikih Malencah.128 Ima izredno strateško lego na prostoru med zadnjimi obronki Gorjancev in izlivom reke Krke v Savo. Skozi to utesnjeno območje je tekla pomembna rimska cesta Siscija–Emona, ki je tik 124 125 126 127 128 Bausovac, Krempuš 2009. Ciglenečki 1987, 110–111. Basler 1972, 47–61; Ciglenečki 1987; Mikulčić 2002; Milinković 2008; Dinchev 2007. Ciglenečki 2008, 490–496. Saria 1929; Saria 1930. cut. Most of the selected fortiications are located on lower elevations, rising up to roughly 50 m above the surrounding area, and only a small number of them are located on higher-lying elevations. It is also not possible to exactly determine the demarcating thickness of the defence walls, since this largely depended on the natural protection of the hill on which the fortiication was built. he fort that stands apart in signiicance and size is that on Gradišče near Velike Malence.128 It has an excellent strategic position on the fringes of the Gorjanci Hills and at the point where the Krka lows into the Sava River. his spot represented a narrow passage, through which ran an important Roman road from Siscia to Emona that crossed the Krka just below Gradišče. he fort was constructed on a plateau below the summit of the hill overlooking the river. It is triangular in ground plan and measures 430 × 270 m (ig. 8). he west and north sides are naturally protected by steep slopes, while the south side is only slightly raised above the surroundings. he defence walls with towers are built on top of the rampart of the prehistoric hillfort. Saria saw two phases of defence walls: the early phase represented by construction of 2.10 m thick walls, only 1.90 m thick on the east side, and the second phase by a reuse of these walls and its refortiication with hastily gathered material, parts of the walls pulled down every 35–40 m to insert towers of a rectangular ground plan. he east and west fronts are reinforced by buttresses, while the north side has a single tower and the south side, being least naturally protected, has as many as 14. Two of these lank the south entrance gate, which was additionally protected by a pair of small guardhouses in the interior. Saria trial trenched the interior and established that it was not built-up in the irst phase, wherefore he supposed wooden barracks.129 In the second phase, it is presumed that an Early Christian church was built in the interior, thought the unusual orientation and thick walls of the building are not comparable with the Early Christian churches found in Late Antique fortiications. Hence, its function and date should be considered questionable.130 Saria’s interpretation of the two phases was more historically than archaeologically based. He initially dated the irst phase into the ‘dangerous time of the 3rd century’ and later into the Diocletian time. He set the second phase into the end of the 4th or beginning of the 5th century.131 Saria considered Gradišče as an exposed fort, a sort of an outpost of the barrier system of the Claustra. Jaroslav Šašel justiiably supposed a part of the legio pseudocomitatensis 128 129 130 131 Saria 1929; Saria 1930. Saria 1939, 144. Saria 1929, 16; Ciglenečki 2003, 586–587. Saria 1929, 17; Saria 1939, 145. Figure 8. Gradišče near Velike Malence. Plan of the fort (ater Ciglenečki 1987). Slika 8. Gradišče pri Velikih Malencah. Tloris utrdbe (po Ciglenečki 1987). pod Gradiščem prečkala Krko. Tloris postojanke na nižjem platoju nad reko kaže trikotno obliko in meri 430 × 270 m (sl. 8). Zahodna in severna stranica sta že naravno dobro zavarovani s precejšnjo strmino, južna stran pa je le neznatno dvignjena nad bližnjo okolico. Obrambni zid s stolpi je bil zgrajen na okopu nekdanjega prazgodovinskega gradišča. Saria je razlikoval dve fazi obzidja: v starejši je bil zgrajeni zid širok 2,10 m, na vzhodni strani le 1,90 m, pozneje so ta zid ponovno uporabili in okrepili z materialom, nabranim v naglici, v razmikih 35–40 m so ga predrli in zazidali vanj pravokotne stolpe. Na vzhodni in zahodni fronti ni bilo stolpov, najdeni so bili le oporniki. Severna stranica je bila okrepljena samo z enim stolpom, 14 pa so jih našli na naravno najslabše zavarovani južni strani. Južna vrata so zavarovali z dvema stolpoma in v notranjosti še z manjšima stražarnicama. Saria je s sondami preiskal notranjost in ugotovil, da je bila v prvi fazi nezazidana, zato je domneval, da so bile barake lesene.129 V drugi fazi naj bi bila najverjetneje zgrajena zgodnjekrščanska cerkev, ki pa z nenavadno orientacijo in zelo debelimi zidovi nikakor ne spominja na zgodnjekrščanske cerkve, kakršne so bile odkrite v poznoantičnih utrdbah. Zato je njeno namembnost in datacijo nujno označiti za negotovi.130 Saria je obe fazi utrdbe utemeljeval bolj na historični kot arheološki podlagi. Tako je v začetku datiral prvo v »nevarni čas 3. st.«, pozneje pa v dioklecijanski čas. Drugo fazo je postavil v konec 4. ali začetek 5. st.131 Gradišče je Saria imel za izpostavljeno trdnjavo, predstražo zapornega sistema Klavster. J. Šašel je upravičeno domneval, da je bil v njej nameščen tudi del legije pseudocomitatensis za Ilirik.132 Prvi fazi Gradišča v Velikih Malencah se zdi zelo sorodna utrdba Lorenzberg v Reciji sekundi, ki je bila obdana le z močnim, terenu prilagojenim obrambnim 129 130 131 132 Saria 1939, 144. Saria 1929, 16; Ciglenečki 2003, 586–587. Saria 1929, 17; Saria 1939, 145. Šašel 1988, 109. 407 Figure 9. Gradišče, Zalog. Plan of the fort (ater Mikl-Curk 1986). Slika 9. Gradišče, Zalog. Tloris utrdbe (po MiklCurk 1986). for Illyricum stationed at the site.132 he Gradišče fort in its irst phase seems very similar to the fort on Lorenzberg in Raetia secunda, only defended by thick defence walls with four small towers and well adapted to the terrain. Joachim Werner dates the construction of the latter to the 290s.133 he second phase at Gradišče, with towers characteristically protruding from the walls in half of their length, has parallels in the fortiications from the Tetrarchic period, but also in several later sites.134 he ground plan and position of towers, however, are not suicient for a date of the second phase to be proposed.135 Considerably less well known is the post on Gradišče at Zalog near Ljubljana, located on a low promontory over the old conluence of the Ljubljanica and Sava Rivers. Saria observed here a fort of a rectangular ground plan with 2 m thick walls. He dated it to Late Antiquity on the basis of the construction technique and believed it had been built with the aim of controlling the traic along the Ljubljanica.136 Later trial trenching, conducted by Iva Mikl Curk, revealed a thin cultural layer from the 4th century. Mikl Curk also established 2.80 m thick foundation walls and estimated the size of the fort at 135 × 60 m with towers supposedly standing at least in the corners (ig. 9).137 he rescue excavations conducted in the 1990s in the city centre of Črnomelj revealed another, previously unknown fortiication.138 he naturally excellently protected river terrace, surrounded on three sides by the Dobličica stream and the Lahinja river, revealed several traces of defence walls measuring 1.6–2 m in thickness, additionally fortiied by externally projecting towers. A round tower was found zidom in s štirimi manjšimi stolpi. Njen nastanek datira J. Werner v zadnje desetletje 3. st.133 Druga faza Gradišča z značilnimi, le polovično presegajočimi stolpi ima primerjave v kastelih iz obdobja tetrarhije, pa tudi v nekaterih poznejših trdnjavah,134 vendar zgolj na osnovi tlorisa in umeščenosti stolpov ni mogoče natančneje datirati druge faze.135 Mnogo slabše je raziskana utrdba Gradišče v Zalogu pri Ljubljani, na nizkem pomolu nad starim sotočjem Ljubljanice in Save. Tu je B. Saria opazil pravokotno zasnovo utrdbe z 2 m debelimi zidovi, pri katerih je glede na tehniko gradnje ugotavljal postavitev v poznoantičnem obdobju in sklepal na nekak burgus za nadzor prometa po reki Ljubljanici.136 Sondiranja I. Curk so razkrila šibko kulturno plast iz 4. st. Velikost kastela je ocenila na 135 × 60 m, ugotovila 2,8 m debele temelje obrambnega zidu in domnevala, da so stolpi stali vsaj na vogalih (sl. 9).137 Zaščitna izkopavanja v zadnjem desetletju 20. st. v današnjem mestnem jedru Črnomlja so opozorila na še eno prej neznano vojaško postojanko.138 Na naravno odlično zavarovani terasi, ki jo s treh strani oblivata Dobličica in Lahinja, so na več mestih odkrili sledove močnega obrambnega obzidja debeline od 1,6 do 2 m, ki je bilo dodatno okrepljeno s stolpi na zunanji strani. V jugovzhodnem vogalu so odkrili okrogel stolp, ob vzhodni stranici pa še pravokotnega. Kastel je meril v dolžino ok. 245 m, na najširšem mestu pa dosegal 133 m širine.139 Izmere kažejo, 133 134 135 136 137 132 133 134 135 136 137 408 138 Šašel 1988, 109. Werner 1969, 248–250. Petrikovits 1971, 197–198; Pröttel 1996, 138–139. Cf. Wilkes 2005, 261–264. Saria 1939, 147. Mikl-Curk 1986. Mason 1998; Mason 2006. 138 139 Werner 1969, 248–250. Petrikovits 1971, 197–198; Pröttel 1996, 138–139. Prim. pri Wilkes 2005, 261–264. Saria 1939, 147. Mikl-Curk 1986. Mason 1998; Mason 2006. Pri drugem poročilu navedene dimenzije najdišča »vsaj 300 × 200 m« (Mason 2006, 115) se zdijo nekoliko predimenzionirane. Meritve naravno zavarovanega prostora na pomolu (ob upoštevanju severne stene srednjeveškega gradu na severni strani kot skrajne meje) so na satelitskem posnetku dale naše, nekoliko skrčene dimenzije. in the south-eastern corner and a rectangular one along the eastern side. he fort measured roughly 245 m in length and 133 m at maximum width.139 hese measurements show a size similar to that of the Castra in present-day Ajdovščina (220 × 160 m). Phil Mason, who investigated the Črnomelj fort, established several phases. Of these, the irst phase marking the construction and irst use of the site is of interest to us. he inds of the irst phase, as published thus far, can be dated to the late 4th or early 5th century primarily on the basis of imported ine ware and amphorae. he end of the irst phase, however, cannot be reliably established, though we know that renovation only took place in the irst half of the 6th century.140 he rescue investigations in the fort’s interior were thus far able to establish mostly wooden residential buildings arranged along the road leading along the defence walls. A particularity of the site is a supposed Early Christian church in the south-eastern corner, underneath the Late Gothic church of the Holy Spirit (Sv. Duh in Slovenian).141 Of the building, a small apse with a partition wall was found as well as the remains of a multi-coloured mosaic loor in the nave, the motifs of which can be ascribed a sacred character. However, churches within fort walls are extremely rare and the question of the form and function of the building at Črnomelj should be left open. In the wider Alpine area, a single such example is known, namely at castrum Rauracense, the large legionary fort at Kaiseraugst, where the church was added around 400 or in the early 5th century.142 Considering the small size of the apse at Črnomelj (mere 2.5 m in interior width), the building could also be interpreted as part of a baths. An example of such a building can be found in the fort at Ajdovščina. he baths there were situated along the south defence walls and the shape and even more so the size of the apses correspond with that at Črnomelj.143 Comparing the size of the Črnomelj apse with that of the Early Christian church on Korinjski hrib, on the other hand, shows that the interior width of the latter measures 4 m even though the fort itself is considerably smaller than that at Črnomelj. A further reservation is the loamy looring in the apse which would be unexpected in a mosaic-decorated church. In view of this, two explanations can be proposed: either the initially apsidal architecture (baths?) was later given a diferent function and equipped with Early Christian mosaic loor or the building always had a civil function. Based on the size and richness of the cultural layer, with numerous pieces of imported pottery from the Mediter139 140 141 142 143 Mason states the size of ‘at least 300 × 200 m’ (Mason 2006, 115) in his second report, which seems somewhat oversized. The smaller size stated here is based on measuring the naturally protected area on the promontory on a satellite image (taking the north wall of the medieval castle on the north as the border). Mason 2006, 115. Mason 1998, 288–289. Glaser 1997, 172. Osmuk 1997, 123–126. da gre za podobno veliko poznorimsko utrdbo, kot je trdnjava Castra v sedanji Ajdovščini (vel. 220 × 160 m). Raziskovalec Ph. Mason je v črnomaljski utrdbi ugotovil več faz, tu nas zanima predvsem prva, torej gradnja trdnjave in njena prva uporaba. Glede na doslej objavljene najdbe, katerih datacija temelji predvsem na številni uvoženi ini keramiki in amforah, jo je moč postaviti v pozno 4. ali zgodnje 5. st., njenega trajanja pa ni mogoče zanesljivo omejiti navzgor: vsekakor je bila prenovljena šele v prvi polovici 6. st.140 Z doslej opravljenimi večjimi zaščitnimi izkopi in sondami so v notranjosti ugotovili pretežno lesene bivalne strukture, razvrščene ob cesti, ki je vodila vzdolž obzidja. Posebnost je domnevna zgodnjekrščanska cerkev, najdena v jugovzhodnem vogalu utrdbe, pod poznogotsko cerkvico Sv. Duha.141 Našli so majhno apsido s predelnim zidom in v domnevni ladji ostanke barvnega mozaika, katerega motiviko je mogoče pripisati sakralnemu objektu. Zdi se, da bo potrebno do nadaljnjih raziskav pustiti vprašanje oblike in namembnosti te zgradbe odprto: v primerjavi z doslej poznanimi iz tega obdobja so cerkve v notranjosti kastelov redkost. Na širšem alpskem območju je doslej cerkev znana le iz velike legijske trdnjave castrum Rauracense (Kaiseraugst), kjer je bila vanj vgrajena okoli leta 400 ali v zgodnjem 5. st.142 Glede na zelo majhne dimenzije črnomaljska apsida (širina odprtine je le 2,5 m) prej spominja na ostanke term – podobno kot so v kastelu v Ajdovščini na južni strani ob obzidju odkrili terme, pri katerih se oblikovanost in predvsem velikost apsid ujemata s črnomaljsko.143 Primerjave velikosti apside s tisto pri zgodnjekrščanski cerkvi na Korinjskem hribu pokaže, da je odprtina korinjske apside široka kar 4 m, čeprav je utrdba, v kateri je stala cerkev, znatno manjša. Pomislek zbuja tudi ilovnat tlak v apsidi, kar je zelo nenavadno za cerkev, okrašeno z mozaikom. Ob tem se nakazujeta dve možnosti: v začetku zgrajena nekakšna apsidalna arhitektura (terme?) in pozneje vanjo vgrajen zgodnjekrščanski mozaik in sprememba funkcije, ali pa že od začetka drugačna, civilna namembnost zgradbe. Glede na velikost in bogato kulturno plast s številnimi najdbami uvožene keramike iz mediteranskega okolja Ph. Mason domneva, da je bil tam administrativni center belokranjske regije, kateremu naj bi bil dopolnilo sakralni center na Kučarju iz istega časa. Hkrati naj bi utrdba varovala severni del pomembne ceste iz Kvarnerja v Panonijo.144 Vsekakor bi smeli videti v črnomaljski utrdbi vojaško postojanko, v kateri je, podobno kot drugod, velik del notranjosti sčasoma zasedlo civilno prebivalstvo in je kmalu postala osrednje naselbinsko poznoantično jedro v Beli krajini. Mogočna obrambna arhitektura s stolpi kaže značilno vojaško utrdbo, ki ima zanesljive primerjave v številnih poznorimskih utrdbah (na Slovenskem predvsem v 140 141 142 143 144 Mason 2006, 115. Mason 1998, 288–289. Glaser 1997, 172. Osmuk 1997, 123–126. Mason 2006, 128. 409 ranean, Phil Mason supposes that the fortiication functioned as the administrative centre for the Bela krajina region, pendant to which could be seen in the church centre on Kučar from the same period. At the same time, the site defended the northern section of the important road leading from Kvarner to Pannonia.144 What is certain is that the Črnomelj fort can be seen as a military post gradually occupied by civilians, as is observable elsewhere, and began functioning as the main settlement centre of Bela krajina in Late Antiquity. he mighty defence architecture with towers reveals a typical fort with close analogies in numerous Late Roman fortiications (in Slovenia primarily at Ajdovščina, Vrhnika and Zalog), also the nearby Hungarian, so-called inner Pannonian forts, constructed in lowland and largely accommodating civilian population.145 A further site that could be ascribed to this group is that on Ajdovski gradec near Bohinjska Bistrica.146 It is a partially investigated and poorly published Late Roman fort rising 50 m above the surrounding plain, the thick defence walls, coins and stray inds from which reveal its importance in the Late Roman period.147 Schmid, who excavated there, brought its existence in connection with the road and barrier walls at Bača.148 he group of strategically located fortiications includes small stone fortlets, two of which have been mentioned above at Ptuj when discussing the military presence in Roman cities. hey may be paralleled to fortiications such as are known from the limes area.149 Another one is the tower on Gradišče above Pivka near Naklo. It measures 10 × 10 m and was defended by a ditch. he small inds do not allow it to be dated more precisely than broadly into Late Antiquity.150 Its location on a low hill and the broadly dated Late Antique pottery, however, allow for the possibility of it dating already to the Late Roman period. Even less is known of the site on Gradišče above Soteska near Jesenice, a hill with steep slopes rising 100 m above a very narrow stretch of the Sava valley, on top of which a Late Roman tower of a polygonal ground plan and a wall thickness of 1.1 m is discernible.151 Unusual though important remains are those now known as Gledanica in Štanjel. It is a tower, preserved to a relatively great height, of irregular ground plan, a semi-circu- kastelih v Ajdovščini, Vrhniki in Zalogu), primerjati pa jo je mogoče tudi z bližnjimi madžarskimi, t. i. panonskimi notranjimi utrdbami, zgrajenimi prav tako v nižinskem svetu in ob veliki udeležbi civilnega prebivalstva.145 Morda smemo v to skupino postaviti tudi delno raziskani, a pomanjkljivo objavljeni Ajdovski gradec pri Bohinjski Bistrici.146 Gre za poznorimsko utrdbo, ki je za 50 m dvignjena nad ravnico in pri kateri močen obrambni zid, novci in posamezne najdbe izpričujejo njen pomen v poznorimski dobi.147 W. Schmid, ki je vodil izkopavanja postojanke, je njen obstoj povezal s cesto in zaporami v Bači.148 V skupino strateško umeščenih utrdb sodijo tudi manjši zidani objekti, od katerih smo prva dva omenili že na Ptuju pri obravnavi vojaške navzočnosti v rimskih mestih. V njih je mogoče videti vzporednico burgom, kakršne poznamo na območju limesa.149 Na Gradišču pri Pivki pri Naklem, najdbe ne omogočajo natančnejše datacije z jarki utrjenega, 10 × 10 m velikega stolpa znotraj celotnega razpona poznoantičnega obdobja.150 Lega na nižjem griču nad pomembno cesto in le okvirno datirana poznoantična groba lončenina dopuščata datacijo že v poznorimsko obdobje. Še slabše je raziskano Gradišče nad Sotesko v bližini Jesenic, kjer se na vrhu strmega hriba, 100 m nad močno zoženim predelom savske doline, nakazuje poznorimski stolp s poligonalno tlorisno zasnovo in debelino zidu 1,1 m.151 Nenavaden, a pomemben je objekt Gledanica v Šta njelu. Še zdaj visoko ohranjeni stolp nepravilne oblike s polkrožnim zaključkom in 2 m debelimi zidovi stoji na vrhu štanjelskega hriba, od koder je zelo dober razgled nad velikim delom kraške planote. Zaščitna izkopavanja v notranjosti so potrdila poznorimski nastanek stolpa, ki pa so ga uporabljali tudi v mlajših obdobjih.152 S poznejšimi zaščitnimi raziskavami je bila ugotovljena naselbinska poznorimska plast tudi v širši okolici stolpa.153 Pozornost zbuja najdba Honorijevega zlatnika in še treh podrobneje neopredeljenih zlatnikov v bližini stolpa, ki jo omenja Moser (korespondenca Moser–Szombathy, 17. 2. 1887).154 Glede na zgolj nakazano domnevno zakladno najdbo bi bilo mogoče previdno sklepati na depo zlatnikov z začetka 5. st. Morda gre za ostanke vojaške plače posadke v stra145 146 147 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 410 151 Mason 2006, 128. Heinrich-Tamaska 2009. Gabrovec 1975. Kos 1988a, 128–129, cat. no. 96; Mušič 1999, 370–376. Gabrovec 1975. Cf. Hock 2001, 144. Valič 1968. Leben, Valič 1978, 534; Ciglenečki 1987, 87; Valič 1997, 263. 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 Heinrich-Tamaska 2009. Gabrovec 1975. Kos 1988a, 128–129, kat. št. 96; Mušič 1999, 370–376. Gabrovec 1975. Prim. pri Hock 2001, 144. Valič 1968. Leben, Valič 1978, 534; Ciglenečki 1987, 87; Valič 1997, 263. Vuga 1974. Harej 1988. Na najdbo me je opozoril kolega Dragan Božič, za kar se mu na tem mestu zahvaljujem. Figure 10. Ančnikovo gradišče, Jurišna vas. Plan of the fortiication (ater Strmčnik 2012). Slika 10. Ančnikovo gradišče, Jurišna vas. Tloris utrdbe (po Strmčnik 2012). lar termination and 2 m thick walls. It is located on top of the hill in the village of Štanjel and commands an excellent view over a large part of the Kras plateau. Rescue excavation in its interior has conirmed a Late Roman origin of the tower with use in later periods.152 Subsequent rescue investigations have also unearthed a settlement layer from the Late Roman period in the wider surroundings of the tower.153 Of importance is also the ind of a coin of Honorius and further three undetermined gold coins in the vicinity of the tower, as reported by Moser (Moser– Szombathey correspondence, 17 January 1887).154 Bearing in mind the very limited data available, the supposition of a hoard of gold coins from the beginning of the 5th century should be taken with caution. he inds may represent the remains of a garrison stationed in a watch tower in the Kras.155 he existence of a fortlet in the irst half of the 5th century is conirmed by ceramic inds of foreign provenance that could possibly indicate the annona.156 Standing apart from the sites discussed above, primarily characterized by their strategic location, is the post on Ančnikovo gradišče near Jurišna vas. It can only hypothetically be classiied among military posts, on the basis of the excellent view it commands, thus afording a watch and a signalling function, but also its thick walls and some small inds.157 he rescue excavations at the site were conducted during more than twenty years, revealing a 150 × 50 m large fortiication at 700 m a.s.l., afording an excellent view over the plain of Poetovio, but also a visual connection with numerous Late Roman sites in the hinterland of Celeia (ig. 10). In the Late Roman period, the site was 152 153 154 155 156 157 Vuga 1974. Harej 1988. It was my colleague, Dragan Božič, who drew my attention to the ind, for which I thank him. Ciglenečki, Milavec 2009, 180. Vidrih Perko 1997b, 349; Vidrih Perko, Župančič 2003, 463– 467, ig. 1; Vidrih Perko, Župančič 2005, 522. Pröttel 1996, 153, note 19; Strmčnik 1997, 272–279; Strmčnik Gulič, Ciglenečki 2003. žnem stolpu na Krasu.155 Obstoj utrdbe v prvi polovici 5. st. dodatno potrjujejo keramične najdbe tujega izvora, ki bi utegnile kazati na anono.156 Od naštetih utrdb, za katere je v prvi vrsti značilna strateška lega, pa močno odstopa postojanka na Ančnikovem gradi šču pri Jurišni vasi. V sklop vojaških postojank jo je hipotetično mogoče uvrstiti zaradi njene zelo dobre razgledne lege, ki je omogočala posadki v njej opazovalno in signalno funkcijo, močnega obzidja in tudi posameznih najdb.157 V več kot dvajsetletnih izkopavanjih je bila zaščitno raziskana 150 × 50 m velika postojanka v nadmorski višini 700 m z odličnim razgledom po ravnici pri Petovijoni in tudi z optično povezavo s številnimi poznorimskimi utrdbami v zaledju Celeje (sl. 10). V poznorimskem obdobju so jo na najbolj izpostavljenih delih obdali z močnim obzidjem (debelina 1,4–1,8 m, na naravno bolje zaščitenih delih pa le 0,65–0,95 m), na katerega so bile v notranjosti naslonjene dve večji zidani in nekaj manjših lesenih stavb.158 Največji del notranjosti je bil povsem prazen. Vojaška posadka je bila nedvomno manjša in najverjetneje jo je moč locirati v stavbe v bližini najvišjega in hkrati najbolj ogroženega dela utrdbe. V lesenih hišah bi smeli videti bivališča kmetov in pastirjev, velik prazen prostor pa so lahko v času nevarnosti uporabili za varstvo pribežnikov iz doline. Nenavadna in glede na slabo raziskano omrežje poznorimskih cest nerazumljiva je utrdba Šumenje pri Podturnu. Težko je govoriti o pomenu njene umeščenosti, a že na površini dobro vidno, 0,8–0,9 m debelo obzidje in raziskan, s stolpom okrepljen vhod v utrdbo na nižjem hribcu nakazujejo prej vojaško namembnost. Skromne najdbe 155 156 157 158 Ciglenečki, Milavec 2009, 180. Vidrih Perko 1997b, 349; Vidrih Perko, Župančič 2003, 463– 467, sl. 1; Vidrih Perko, Župančič 2005, 522. Pröttel 1996, 153, op. 19; Strmčnik 1997, 272–279; Strmčnik Gulič, Ciglenečki 2003. Strmčnik Gulič, Ciglenečki 2003, 10–11. 411 fortiied in its most exposed parts with thick defence walls (1.4–1.8 m, only 0.65–0.95 m in naturally well-protected parts), onto which two large stone-built and several small wooden houses were added the interior.158 he interior was for the most part found to be empty. he garrison was undoubtedly small and probably lived in the buildings near the highest part of the fort that was also most vulnerable. he wooden houses could be seen as dwellings of farmers and shepherds, while the large empty space could have been used to receive the population from the lowland in times of peril. An unusual and, in view of our poor knowledge of the Late Roman road network, incomprehensibly located site is that on Šumenje near Podturn. It is diicult to understand the reason behind its location, but the 0.8–0.9 m thick defence walls, well visible on the surface, together with the investigated entrance gate fortiied with a tower on a lower peak indicate a military function. he scarce inds of military dress as well as the completely empty interior point to either a relatively short or periodical occupation of the fort.159 Hypothetically, the fortiication on Sv. Pavel above Plan ina could also be ascribed to this group. It has a dominant position above the entrance into the Vipava Valley and above the crossroads between the main road across Hrušica and the detour across Razdrto.160 It is ascribed to this group on the basis of its strategic location and 2 m thick defence walls; it can also very probably be tied with the events of the Battle at the Fluvius Frigidus in 394.161 It rises roughly 250 m above the valley, which is a deviation from other sites in this group. A complete absence of investigation in its interior and a lack of archaeological inds prevent us from suggesting a date of the fortiication. A good analogy for the sites discussed above can be found in the Prigorje region of Croatia, in the fort on Kuzelin near Donja Glavnica, which has been subject to extensive systematic investigation.162 It is located on the north-eastern end of the ridge of Mount Medvednica, on a naturally well-protected and 507 m a.s.l. high summit rising 50 m above the surrounding in its most accessible part, in the immediate vicinity of the important road connecting Andautonia and Poetovio. he fortiied area on the summit measures 200 × 40 m. he investigations at the fort have been ongoing since 1978 and revealed a stone-built defence architecture and small inds that concentrate on a very long terrace of average width of 8 m, located several metres below the summit. 158 159 160 161 412 162 Strmčnik Gulič, Ciglenečki 2003, 10–11. Breščak, Dular 2002. Svoljšak 1966; Osmuk 1991; Ciglenečki 1997, 197–198. Ciglenečki 1997, 197–198. Sokol 1994; Sokol 1998. moške noše in povsem prazna notranjost kažejo na kratek čas oziroma le občasno uporabljano utrdbo.159 Povsem na koncu lahko hipotetično v to skupino postavimo tudi Sv. Pavla nad Planino. Ima dominantno lego nad vhodom v Vipavsko dolino in se dviga nad križiščem itinerarske ceste čez Hrušico kot tudi obvozne ceste čez Razdrto.160 Strateška lega in močen, 2 m debel zid mu odrejata mesto v tej skupini, zelo verjetna je tudi povezava z dogajanjem v bitki pri Mrzli reki leta 394.161 Na drugi strani je potrebno omeniti njegovo lego pribl. 250 m visoko nad dolino, ki močno odstopa v tej skupini, poleg tega pa tudi popolno neraziskanost notranjosti in pomanjkanje arheoloških najdb, ki bi omogočile zanesljivo kronologijo utrdbe. Kot odlično primerjavo za obravnavane vojaške utrdbe je mogoče v našo obravnavo pritegniti v bližnji soseščini v veliki meri že sistematično raziskani Kuzelin pri Donji Glavnici v hrvaškem Prigorju.162 Leži na severovzhodnem podaljšku hrbta Medvednice, na naravno zelo dobro zavarovanem hribu, v nm. v. 507 m. Na najlažje dostopni strani se 50 m dviga nad okolico; velikost branjenega prostora na vrhu znaša 200 × 40 m. Postavljen je bil v neposredni bližini pomembne magistrale Andautonija–Petoviona. Na postojanki, kjer že od leta 1978 potekajo sistematične raziskave, so zidana obrambna arhitektura in drobne najdbe zgoščene predvsem na povprečno 8 m široki, zelo dolgi terasi nekaj metrov pod vrhom. Utrdba je bila na severni strani zavarovana s 185 m dolgim in 1 m debelim obrambnim zidom, pri katerem so na zunanji strani našli tudi kontrafor. Druge strani je varovala naravna strmina. Manjše, domnevno lesene stavbe, od katerih je bil ohranjen le estrih, so stale na terasi tik za obzidjem. Vrh hriba in večji del notranjosti je bil neposeljen. Tik ob obzidju so našli ženski grob, ki ga pridatki datirajo v konec 4. st. V. Sokol ugotavlja več faz utrdbe, pomembni sta predvsem njegova 2. faza, datirana v zadnjo tretjino 3. st., in 3. faza, v kateri je bil v drugi polovici 4. st. zgrajen močen obrambni zid. Zelo zgovorne so drobne najdbe in številni novci, ki dobro datirajo obe fazi. Še posebej pomembni so elementi značilne moške noše in predvsem množica puščičnih osti, ki jih je mogoče pripisati napadalcem ali pa tudi branilcem utrdbe.163 Druga zanesljivo prepoznana vojaška utrdba je bila ugotovljena v neposredni bližini itinerarske ceste Tarsatica– Tergeste, na Pasjaku v bližini Klane. Tam so pri manjših sondiranjih na nižjem hribcu v nm. v. 619 m odkrili ostanke približno pravokotne utrdbe velikosti 100 × 80 m (sl. 159 160 161 162 163 Breščak, Dular 2002. Svoljšak 1966; Osmuk 1991; Ciglenečki 1997, 197–198. Ciglenečki 1997, 197–198. Sokol 1994; Sokol 1998. Sokol 1994; Sokol 1998. he fort is strengthened on the north side by a 185m long and 1 m thick defence wall reinforced by a buttress. Other sides were naturally protected by steep slopes. Small and presumably wooden houses, of which only the mortar loors have been preserved, were located on a terrace just behind the defence wall. he summit of the hill and the fort interior was uninhabited. A female burial was found beside the defence wall, dated by the grave goods into the end of the 4th century. Vladimir Sokol established several phases of the fortiication, of which Phase 2, dated to the last third of the 3rd century, and Phase 3, represented by thick defence walls from the second half of the 4th century, are of greatest importance here. Both phases are reliably dated by small inds and numerous coins. Particularly revealing are the items of the military dress and a multitude of arrow heads that could have belonged either to the attackers or the defenders of the fort.163 he second positively identiied fortiication is located on the hill of Pasjak near Klana in Croatia, in the immediate vicinity of the main road from Tarsatica to Tergeste. Smallscale trial trenching on a low summit of 619 m a.s.l. have revealed the remains of a subrectangular fort measuring 100 × 80 m (ig. 11).164 he 3 m thick defence walls, bound by good-quality mortar, had three entrance gates and a presumed tower on the south-western side. he excavated entrance gate was fortiied by two walls built at a right angle to the defence walls. he destruction layer revealed a hoard of 12 Roman coins. he better preserved coins, of Gallienus, Claudius II and Quintilianus, point to the deposition of the hoard in 270 and concurrent destruction of the fort, which was never again renovated. To the west of present-day Slovenia, but very close to the border, is the fortiication on Castelazzo di Doberdo in Italy (Gradina near Doberdob). It is located on a hill above Lake Doberdo, on an altitude of 168 m a.s.l. Rising several tens of metres above the surroundings with rocky south slopes falling steeply towards the lake, it is naturally well-protected. he surface enclosed within defence walls measures 260 × 120 m. Small-scale investigations at this site, heavily damaged during World War I, were conducted in 1965 and 1989.165 hey revealed 3 m thick defence walls constructed in three phases: two stone-built fronts gradually added to a prehistoric rampart. Also visible are the remains of a semicircular tower. Nothing is known of the architecture in the interior. Numerous small inds and most importantly coins date the fort from the 3rd to the beginning of the 7th cen163 164 165 Sokol 1994; Sokol 1998. Starac 1993. Furlani 1969; Maseli Scotti, Montagnari Kokelj 1989; Maseli Scotti 1992. Figure 11. Pasjak. Plan of the fort (ater Starac 1993). Slika 11. Pasjak. Tloris utrdbe (po Starac 1993). 11).164 Zid, debel 3 m, je bil vezan s solidno malto, v njem pa so bili ugotovljeni trije vhodi, na JZ strani pa naj bi stal stolp. Izkopani vhod je bil utrjen z dvema prečno na obzidje postavljenima zidovoma. V ruševinski plasti je bil najden depo 12 rimskih novcev, od katerih bolje določljivi novci Galijena, Klavdija II in Kvintilijana kažejo, da je bil zakopan leta 270 in takrat uničena tudi utrdba. Pozneje ni bila več obnovljena. Zahodno od sedanjega slovenskega ozemlja, povsem v bližini meje stoji utrdba Gradina pri Doberdobu (Castelazzo di Doberdo). Postavljena je bila na hribu nad Doberdobskim jezerom, v nm. v. 168 m. Naravno je dobro zavarovana, saj se nekaj deset metrov dviga nad okolico, na njeni južni strani pa skalne stene strmo padajo proti jezeru. Z obzidjem obdana površina na vrhu je velika 260 × 120 m. Manjše raziskave so na najdišču, ki je bilo močno poškodovano v prvi svetovni vojni, opravili v letih 1965 in 1989.165 Ugotovili so 3 m debelo obzidje, ki je bilo grajeno v treh fazah: na prazgodovinski okop so v poznoantičnem času postopoma prizidali dve zidani fronti. Vidni so ostanki polkrožnega stolpa. O arhitekturi v notranjosti ne vemo ničesar, so pa bogato zastopane drobne najdbe in predvsem novci, ki omogočajo datacijo od 3. st. do začetka 7. st., s pripombo, da je največja zgostitev opazna v drugi polovici 4. in v prvi polovici 5. st. Utrdba je varovala pomembno prečno cesto, ki je povezovala najpomembnejši vpadnici z vzhoda v Italijo, cesti Tarsatica–Tergeste in Emona–Aquileia.166 Velike podobnosti z obravnavanimi vojaškimi postojankami kaže tudi le delno raziskana avstrijska utrdba Schlos sbühel pri Gröbmingu. Le 40 m nad dolino dvignjena 164 165 166 Starac 1993. Furlani 1969; Maseli Scotti, Montagnari Kokelj 1989; Maseli Scotti 1992. Maselli Scotti 1992. 413 tury, with a concentration in the second half of the 4th and irst half of the 5th century. he post protected an important connection between the two arteries leading into Italy from the east, namely the roads from Tarsatica to Tergeste and from Emona to Aquileia.166 Close similarities are observable in the partly investigated fortiication on Schlossbühel near Gröbming in Austria. It rises only 40 m above the valley and shows 1m thick defence walls, enclosing a 100 × 35 m large area, as well as a tower of square ground plan located on the most easily accessible side. he trial trenching in the interior did not reveal traces of structures.167 Summarizing the characteristics of the above-discussed Late Roman military fortiications located outside the defence system, I should irst emphasize their location along important roads; only in some cases the forts merely have a watch or signalling function. I should also underline the possibility of civilian population, as well as refugees, living in these sites together with soldiers. A further characteristic is that these forts were located on rather low elevations. heir defence walls are 0.6–1.5 m thick, in several cases as much as 1.8–3 m, which is on average slightly less than in the fortiications of the barrier system (2–3.4 m). Of importance for the dating of their defence walls are the fortlets on Gradišče near Martinj hrib and Lanišče, reliably dated by coin inds into the Valentinian time.168 he defence walls of these two sites are rather thin, measuring 1.4 and 1.5–1.7 m, respectively. his shows that the defence walls become considerably thinner when passing from the lowland to the better-protected elevations. he defence walls tend to be rectilinear, but are largely adapted to the terrain. Some are contemporaneous with the beginning of the barrier system construction, for example the fort on Pasjak from the 270s, while the defence walls in some, particularly on Kuzelin and in Črnomelj, can be reliably dated to the second half of the 4th century.169 Also observable is a considerable similarity in the manner of fortifying entrances in the sites on Pasjak, Šumenje and Gröbming, either with parallel abutting walls or with a gate-tower constructed above it. 2.3 Hilltop fortiications with traces of military presence It should again be emphasised that the dividing line between civilian and military posts in the Late Roman period is blurred, in the south-eastern Alpine area even more than elsewhere.170 166 167 168 169 414 170 Maselli Scotti 1992. Modrijan 1978; Steinklauber 2005, 136. Kos 1986, 195–196. Sokol 1994, 202–203; Mason 2006, 115. Cf. Dunn 2002; Mikulčić, 2002, 65; Poulter 2007, 93. utrdba je imela 1 m debelo obzidje in kvadraten stolp na najlažje dostopni strani. Merila je 100 × 35 m. Sondaže v notranjosti niso odkrile sledov stavb.167 Če povzamemo še enkrat značilnosti obravnavanih poznorimskih vojaških utrdb, ugotovljenih zunaj sistema Klavster, je treba ponovno poudariti njihovo lego ob pomembnih vpadnicah in le v posameznih primerih zgolj opazovalno in signalno vlogo. Prav tako je pri njih nujno opozoriti na možnost povezave vojaške posadke s civilnimi naseljenci in pribežniki. Pretežno so bile postavljene na nižje vzpetine. Obrambni zidovi so debeli od 0,6–1,5 m, a večkrat tudi močnejši, 1,8–3 m, kar je v povprečju nekoliko manj kot pri utrdbah iz zapornega sistema (debelina 2–3,4 m). Za datacijo obzidij utrdb zunaj sistema Klavster se zato zdita pomembnejši manjši utrdbi na Gradišču pri Martinj hribu in Lanišču, katerih nastanek je z novčnimi najdbami odlično datiran v valentinijanski čas.168 Obe kažeta že znatno ožje obzidje, debelo 1,4 m ter 1,5–1,7 m. Tako se s prehodom iz ravnic na naravno bolje zavarovane vzpetine močno stanjšajo obrambni zidovi. Obzidja so speljana, kolikor je le mogoče, v ravni liniji, a v veliki meri prilagojena terenu. Nekatera so sočasna z nastankom gradnje zapornega sistema, tako Pasjak iz sedemdesetih let 3. st., pri nekaterih – posebej pri Kuzelinu in Črnomlju – pa je mogoče zanesljivo datirati nastanek obzidij v drugo polovico 4. st.169 Precejšnja je tudi podobnost pri utrjevanju vhodov postojank Pasjak, Šumenje in Gröbming, kjer je mogoče opaziti s paralelno grajenima zidovoma okrepljen vhod, oziroma stolp nad vhodom. 2.3 Višinske utrdbe z znaki vojaške navzočnosti Pri tej skupini je treba znova podčrtati, da je problem brisanja meje med civilnimi in vojaškimi postojankami poznorimskega obdobja na jugovzhodnoalpskem območju še posebej očiten, čeprav ga zaznavajo tudi drugod.170 Sem uvrščamo zato utrdbe na hribih z večjo relativno višino, ki sicer nimajo za vojaške objekte značilne obrambne arhitekture (morda ponekod, a doslej ni bila ugotovljena), a drobne najdbe v notranjosti kažejo podoben spekter, kot je bil ugotovljen pri bolje raziskanih poznorimskih kastelih v utrdbah sistema Klavster in zunaj njih. Koncentracija značilnih poznorimskih elementov moške noše in orožja na obravnavanih postojankah daleč vstran od mestnih središč pa nedvomno kaže, da gre pretežno za vojaške ostanke.171 Obzidje je pri njih že povsem prilagojeno terenu in znatno tanjše (deb. 0,6–0,8 m), kar je precej manj kot pri omenje167 168 169 170 171 Modrijan 1978; Steinklauber 2005, 136. Kos 1986, 195–196. Sokol 1994, 202–203; Mason 2006, 115. Prim. pri Dunn 2002; Mikulčić, 2002, 65; Poulter 2007, 93. O tem več pri Plaum 2002, 275–276; Milavec 2011, 40–42. he fortiications of this group are located on higher altitudes without defence architecture characteristic of military fortiications (at least not conirmed on any of the sites in this group), but with the small inds that show a range similar to those unearthed in the better-investigated Late Roman forts inside and outside of the Claustra defence system. A concentration of characteristic Late Roman items of the military dress and weapons found in these sites, far away from towns, certainly indicates a predominantly military character.171 he defence walls in these fortiications are completely adapted to the terrain and considerably thinner (0.6–0.8 m) in comparison to the above-discussed Late Roman forts. Often defence walls were not detected and the naturally protected location or prehistoric ramparts probably suiced. Wooden palisades may have existed, but this cannot be conirmed without systematic investigations. he sites with numerous stone buildings in the interior certainly also indicate a strong civil component. hus the less investigated sites are classiied into this group only conditionally, inal answers will only be provided by future investigations. In many cases the real character is diicult to determine due to the lack of knowledge of the Late Roman communications network. Better identiiable are the sites on strategic locations along major arteries, particularly when supported by inds of weapons and characteristic items of the military dress, such as is the case with Gradišče near Dunaj. On the other hand, the locations of some of these sites suggest sections of contemporary roads.172 he site that illustrates the diiculty in distinguishing between the fortiications of the previous and of this group is that of Zbelovska gora. I put it in this group primarily because of the somewhat higher altitude, though the thick defence walls could also point to its classiication as a military post. he early archaeologists studying military forts particularly emphasized the role of the fortiied settlements in the defence system established across a wide area in front of and behind the Claustra.173 hey ascribed a watch and intelligence role to these sites. Jaroslav Šašel also believed that the concept of defence on the territory of presentday Slovenia in Late Antiquity could not be understood without including and studying the role of the refugia, by which – according to the established belief of the time – he meant all the Late Antique hilltop sites.174 nih poznorimskih kastelih. Marsikje sploh ni bilo ugotovljeno in je domnevno zadoščala naravno zavarovana lega ali prazgodovinski okop. Morda so bile narejene palisade, česar pa brez sistematskih raziskav ni mogoče potrditi. Pri postojankah, kjer so bile v notranjosti odkrite številnejše zidane zgradbe, bi vsekakor smeli pričakovati tudi močno civilno komponento. Tako je uvrstitev nekaterih, slabše raziskanih utrdb v to skupino le pogojna, potrdila ali ovrgla jo bodo prihodnja raziskovanja. Marsikje je pravi značaj utrdb težko ugotoviti tudi zaradi slabega poznavanja poznorimske mreže cest in poti. Lažje prepoznavne so postojanke na strateških mestih ob pomembnejših vpadnicah na tem tranzitno pomembnem ozemlju, posebno še, kadar so z njih ugotovljeni značilni elementi poznorimske moške noše in orožje, kot npr. pri Gradišču pri Dunaju. Ponekod pa prav geografska razvrščenost takšnih postojank nakazuje posamezne takrat pomembne poti.172 Kot smo že omenili, je večkrat slabo prepoznavna meja med utrdbami obravnavane in prejšnje skupine. Tako je npr. uvrstitev Zbelovske Gore v to skupino arbitrarna in nakazana predvsem zaradi nekoliko višje relativne višine utrdbe, čeprav bi po drugi strani močnejše obrambno obzidje dopuščalo uvrstitev že v skupino prej obravnavanih vojaških utrdb. Starejši arheologi, ki so se ukvarjali s problematiko vojaških utrdb, so poudarjali predvsem pomembno vlogo ki so jo imele v varovalnem sistemu utrjene naselbine v širokem pasu pred zaporami in za njimi.173 Pripisovali so jim zgolj opazovalno in obveščevalno vlogo. J. Šašel ugotavlja, da je brez vključevanja in preučevanja vloge refugijev nerazumljiva tudi zasnova obrambe pozne antike na Slovenskem, pri čemer je z refugiji mislil – po takrat uveljavljenem gledanju – na vse utrjene višinske poznoantične postojanke.174 Strateško lego na robu Panonske nižine ima Zbelovska Gora, ki je sicer skromno raziskana (ugotovljeno poznorimsko obzidje), a bogati predmeti poznorimske moške noše nedvomno kažejo na vojaški pomen utrdbe (sl. 12).175 Kakšna natančno je bila njena vloga, je ob sedanjem stanju raziskanosti težko ugotoviti, pomisliti bi smeli predvsem na kontrolo variante ceste med Celejo in Petoviono, kakor so jo domnevali nekateri raziskovalci, predvsem t. im. Ferkovo varianto ceste.176 172 173 171 172 173 174 For more on the subject see Plaum 2002, 275–276; Milavec 2011, 40–42. Ciglenečki 2007b. Saria 1939, 147–148; Šašel 1971c, 99; Petru 1972, 356–362. Šašel 1988, 112. 174 175 176 Ciglenečki 2007b. Saria 1939, 147–148; Šašel 1971c, 99; Petru 1972, 356–362. Šašel 1988, 112. Pirkmajer 1986; Ciglenečki 1992, 81–85; Ciglenečki 1994, 242, t. 3; Kos, Šemrov 1995, 169; Šemrov 1998, 175; Šemrov 2004, 140. Pahič 1984, 254. 415 Figure 12. Gradišče, Zbelovska gora. Selected items of the military dress characteristic of the Late Roman period. 13 silver; 12 gilded bronze; rest bronze. Scale = 1 : 2 (drawing D. Kniic Lunder). Slika 12. Gradišče, Zbelovska gora. Izbor predmetov značilne moške poznorimske noše. 13 srebro; 12 pozlačeni bron; drugo bron. M = 1 : 2 (risba D. Kniic Lunder). he fortiication with a strategic location on the fringes of the Pannonian Plain is that on Zbelovska gora. he site is poorly investigated (established Late Roman defence walls), but the rich items of the Late Roman military dress undoubtedly reveal its military character (ig. 12).175 he current state of research does not allow us to exactly determine its role, but the location does indicate control of a variant of the road connection between Celeia and Poetovio as suggested by some scholars, especially the one known as the Ferk variant.176 An important site in this group is that on Brinjeva gora above Zreče. It includes Late Roman defence walls with a thickness of 60 cm on average, individual stone buildings in the more exposed part of the settlement and a large empty space in the interior,177 but more importantly, it is located in the immediate vicinity of the itinerary road and thus of a great strategic importance. he small inds recov175 176 416 177 Pirkmajer 1986; Ciglenečki 1992, 81–85; Ciglenečki 1994, 242, t. 3; Kos, Šemrov 1995, 169; Šemrov 1998, 175; Šemrov 2004, 140. Pahič 1984, 254. Pahič 1960; Pahič 1980; Pahič 1981; Pahič, Koprivnik 2002. Pomembno mesto v tej skupini ima Brinjeva gora nad Zrečami: poznorimski obrambni zid, debel povprečno 60 cm, posamezne zidane zgradbe v bolj izpostavljenem delu naselbine, sicer pa v notranjosti velik prazen prostor.177 Tokrat je treba podčrtati predvsem lego postojanke v neposredni bližini itinerarske ceste in zato njen velik strateški pomen. Dosedanje najdbe kažejo posamezne elemente vojaške navzočnosti (sl. 13).178 Zaradi intenzivne poznejše poselitve je precej nejasna vloga Rifnika v tem času. Nedvomno je takrat že obstajal obrambni zid brez stolpov, debel 1 m. Glede na dominantno in daleč vidno lego postojanke ob eni izmed tras ceste proti Ptuju in številnih poznorimskih najdbah (tudi deli značilne moške noše) bi smeli pričakovati vsaj manjšo vojaško posadko.179 Poznorimska postojanka Gradišče pri Dunaju ima zelo dobro strateško lego tik nad državno cesto Celeia–Neviodunum in ob ugodnem prehodu čez reko Savo pri Brestani177 178 179 Pahič 1960; Pahič 1980; Pahič 1981; Pahič, Koprivnik 2002. Ciglenečki 1994, 244–245, t. 2. Bolta 1981; Ciglenečki 2007b, 323. ered thus far show certain elements of military presence at the site (ig. 13).178 he intense use of the site of Rifnik in later periods destroyed the evidence of the role of the site in the Late Roman period. Undoubtedly from this period are the 1m thick defence walls without towers. Considering the dominant location of the site, visible from afar and positioned along one of the supposed routes of the road towards Poetovio, but also the numerous Late Roman inds (including characteristic items of the military dress), we could assume the presence of at least a small garrison.179 he Late Roman post on Gradišče near Dunaj enjoys a prominent strategic location immediately above the state road from Celeia to Neviodunum, overlooking an easy crossing point of the Sava River at Brestanica. It has been poorly investigated, but the small inds do include numerous items of the Late Roman military dress (sl. 14).180 he large quantity of coins suggests that the site was most intensely inhabited in the last third of the 4th and in the beginning of the 5th century.181 here were no traces of defence walls detected on this hill, which had already been fortiied in prehistory. Simon Rutar observed the remains of ‘baths’ (building with a central heating?). In this it is comparable with the site on Tscheltschnigkogel, where a building with a central heating was found, suggesting a garrison with a well-equipped oicer’s quarters and soldiers living either in towers or wooden buildings along the defence walls. he location of the two sites is of similar strategic importance.182 A poorly investigated, but well discernible on the surface is the site on Gradec near Velika Strmica, the Late Roman small inds from which also indicate the presence of a small garrison. Military presence is conirmed by the location in a gorge, which is completely inappropriate for a settlement; it can only be understood as protection of a road or a crossing of the Radulja river.183 he defence walls on the more readily accessible side are 0.75 m thick, but it is impossible to conirm their Late Roman date without further investigation. he road from Celeia to Neviodunum, which was renovated in the Late Roman period as evidenced by milestones, is lined with small Late Roman fortiications on Gradec near Lisca, Svinjski rt near Radeče, Stražnik, Kincl near Čelovnik and on Vipota (ig. 15). hey are positioned so as to aford a visual control all along the road and could thus 178 179 180 181 182 183 Ciglenečki 1994, 244–245, pl. 2. Bolta 1981; Ciglenečki 2007b, 323. Ciglenečki 1992, 25–27; Ciglenečki 1994, 242, ig. 2; Plaum 2001, 25–26, cat. nos. 57, 58; Plaum 2002, 263–264. Šemrov 2004, 119. Ciglenečki 1992, 25; Glaser 1996, 68. Božič, Ciglenečki 1995. ci. Kljub slabi raziskanosti so znane številne najdbe poznorimske moške noše (sl. 14).180 Velika količina odkritih novcev kaže, da je bila postojanka najintenzivneje obljudena v zadnji tretjini 4. in na začetku 5. st.181 Sledov obzidja na sicer že v prazgodovini utrjenem gradišču ni opaziti. S. Rutar je v utrdbi videl še ostanke »term« (stavba s centralnim ogrevanjem?), nakazuje se podobnost z utrdbo na Tscheltschnigkoglu, kjer so prav tako našli stavbo s centralnim ogrevanjem, kar bi kazalo na posadko z dobro opremljenimi oicirskim bivališčem in vojaki v stolpih ali lesenih stavbah ob obzidju. Njuna lega je primerljivo strateško pomembna.182 Figure 13. Brinjeva gora. View of the fortiied settlement from the south (photo S. Ciglenečki). Slika 13. Brinjeva gora. Pogled na utrjeno naselbino z južne strani (foto S. Ciglenečki). Slabo raziskana, a površinsko dobro vidna je utrdba Gra dec pri Veliki Strmici, kjer nabor poznorimskega gradiva prav tako nakazuje obstoj manjše vojaške posadke. Temu pritrjuje lega utrdbe v soteski, ki je za naselbino povsem neprimerna. Razumljiva je le kot utrdba za varstvo poti ali prehoda čez reko Raduljo.183 Obrambni zid na lažje pristopni strani je debel 0,75 m, a zanj brez raziskav ni mogoče reči, da je bil zgrajen že v poznorimskem obdobju. Vzdolž ceste od Celeje do Nevioduna, katere obnovo dokazujejo miljniki iz poznorimskega obdobja, so bile odkrite manjše poznorimske postojanke Gradec pri Lisci, Svinjski rt pri Radečah, Stražnik, Kincl pri Čelovniku in Vipota (sl. 15). Razvrščene so tako, da so omogočale optično povezavo vzdolž ceste, zato bi jim še najlažje pripisali vlogo stražarnic in obveščevalnih oziroma signalnih postaj. Doslej najdeno gradivo, posebej novci, jih zanesljivo postavlja predvsem v čas druge polovice 4. in začetka 5. st.184 Poskus povezave nekaterih postojank z izrazitejšim poznorimskim gradivom in elementi značilne moške noše in 180 181 182 183 184 Ciglenečki 1992, 25–27; Ciglenečki 1994, 242, sl. 2; Plaum 2001, 25–26, kat. št. 57, 58; Plaum 2002, 263–264. Šemrov 2004, 119. Ciglenečki 1992, 25; Glaser 1996, 68. Božič, Ciglenečki 1995. Ciglenečki 2007a; Ciglenečki 2007b. 417 Figure 14. 1–7 Gradec near Prapretno; 8–10 Kozjek; 11–22 Gradišče near Dunaj. All bronze. Scale = 1 : 2 (ater Ciglenečki 2007b). Slika 14. 1–7 Gradec pri Prapretnem; 8–10 Kozjek; 11–22 Gradišče pri Dunaju. Vse bron. M = 1 : 2 (po Ciglenečki 2007b). most easily be interpreted as watch and signalling posts. he small inds, particularly coins recovered thus far reliably date them primarily in the second half of the 4th and the beginning of the 5th century.184 here are also several sites, for which the study of the more telling small inds, particularly items of the military dress, from the Late Roman period, indicates the existence of auxiliary roads between Celeia and Neviodunum in the area delimited by the Savinja, Sava and Sotla rivers. his was an area of a great strategic importance in the second half 418 184 Ciglenečki 2007a; Ciglenečki 2007b. orožja je nakazal tudi možnost obstoja pomožnih cest med Celejo in Neviodunom, torej v notranjosti območja med Savinjo, Savo in Sotlo, ki je imelo v drugi polovici 4. st. velik strateški pomen. Med njimi izstopajo Gradec pri Prapretnem, Rudna pri Rudnici in Kozjek.185 Pomen teh točk je mogoče razložiti le s tem, da so varovale stranske poti na občutljivem, strateško pomembnem ozemlju med najvažnejšima vpadnicama v Italijo s severa in vzhoda (sl. 16). 185 Ciglenečki 1981; Bausovac 2003; Ciglenečki 1992, 21–23; Istenič 2001; Plaum 2001, 21, kat. št. 39–40; Ciglenečki 2007a, 247–248. of the 4th century, located between the two most important arteries towards Italy from the north and the east. he most important among these fortiications are on Gradec near Prapretno, Rudna near Rudnica and Kozjek (ig. 16).185 Posts of great strategic importance and characteristic military inds were also identiied in west Slovenia. Despite a lack of investigation, the multi-layered settlement on Puštal above Trnje near Škoja Loka, for example, revealed several elements conirming its strategic importance along the road leading from the Ljubljana basin along the valley of the Selščica River towards the Primorska region and the littoral.186 he defence walls at the site are less than a metre thick, inside Late Roman coins as well as a so-called nomadic mirror from the end of the 4th and the beginning of the 5th century and probably belonging to a garrison of the foederati were found.187 A recently identiied fortiication is that on Mali Njivč near Cerkno. It is a small and naturally protected site, which I place in this group because of the small inds of characteristic military dress and weapons from the Late Roman period.188 Another post is the multi-period hilltop and fortiied settlement on Tonovcov grad near Kobarid. he systematic investigation at the site revealed, among other things, a well-discernible phase of Late Roman habitation and a predominantly military character of the site during the second half of the 4th and even more so in the irst third of the 5th century, also evidenced by numerous parts of Late Roman belt sets.189 he defence walls of the site have not yet been investigated, though the traces visible on the surface point to a thickness of 0.80 m (igs. 17 and 18). 185 186 187 188 189 Ciglenečki 1981; Bausovac 2003; Ciglenečki 1992, 21–23; Istenič 2001; Plaum 2001, 21, cat. nos. 39–40; Ciglenečki 2007a, 247–248. Ciglenečki 1987, 89; Štukl 2004. Kos, Šemrov 1995, 130–131; Šemrov 1998, 153–154; Šemrov 2004, 117, cat. no. 53/1; Plaum 2000, 129–130; Plaum 2001, 31, cat. no. 83; Ciglenečki, Milavec 2009, 180. See Istenič, in this book. Ciglenečki, Milavec 2009, 177–179; Ciglenečki 2011. Utrjene postojanke, ki so imele velik strateški pomen, in značilne vojaške najdbe se pojavljajo tudi v zahodni Sloveniji. Večplastna utrjena naselbina Puštal nad Trnjem pri Škoji Loki kaže kljub slabi raziskanosti več elementov, ki potrjujejo njen velik strateški pomen ob poti, ki je iz Ljubljanske kotline vodila po dolini Selščice proti Primorski.186 Na z manj kot meter debelim obzidjem obdani višinski utrdbi so bili odkriti poznorimski novci ter t. im. nomadsko ogledalce, datirano v konec 4. in predvsem v 5. stoletje, ki bi ga smeli pripisati federatski posadki.187 Pred nedavnimi so odkrili na vzpetini Mali Njivč pri Cer knem tudi manjšo, naravno zavarovano utrdbo, ki pa jo sledovi značilne poznorimske noše in orožja uvrščajo med tovrstne postojanke.188 Sistematično raziskovanje multiperiodne višinske utrjene naselbine na Tonovcovem gradu pri Kobaridu je razkrilo tudi zelo dobro vidno fazo poznorimske poseljenosti in pretežno vojaški značaj postojanke iz druge polovice 4. in 186 187 188 Ciglenečki 1987, 89; Štukl 2004. Kos, Šemrov 1995, 130–131; Šemrov 1998, 153–154; Šemrov 2004, 117, kat. št. 53/1; Plaum 2000, 129–130; Plaum 2001, 31, kat. št. 83; Ciglenečki, Milavec 2009, 180. Glej pri Istenič, v tem zborniku. Figure 15. Stražnik. View of the fort on the hill from the southeast (photo S. Ciglenečki). Slika 15. Stražnik. Pogled na hrib z utrdbo z jugovzhodne strani (foto S. Ciglenečki). Figure 16. Area between Celeia and Neviodunum with a reconstructed network of roads and paths as well as Late Roman fortiications (ater Ciglenečki 2007b). Slika 16. Območje med Celejo in Neviodunom z vrisanimi rekonstruiranimi cestnimi povezavami in potmi ter poznorimskimi utrdbami (po Ciglenečki 2007b). 419 Figure 17. Tonovcov grad near Kobarid. View of Kobarid and the fort in the gorge of the Soča river from the south (photo S. Ciglenečki). Slika 17. Tonovcov grad pri Kobaridu. Pogled z južne stran na Kobarid in utrdbo v soteski Soče (foto S. Ciglenečki). Several years of investigation on the site on Ajdovščina above Rodik, an exposed fortiied hilltop settlement (804 m a.s.l.) along the road from Emona to Tergeste, yielded rich settlement remains.190 For defence a thick prehistoric rampart with a stone superstructure that enclosed a roughly 260 × 200 m large area was used. he interior holds the ruins of numerous buildings, of which only a part of a building with an apse was excavated, revealing two phases. he settlement was reliably dated to the irst half of the 5th century on the basis of pottery inds, which could be tied to the annona.191 Apart from this, its location just above a very important intersection of roads immediately behind the barrier walls on the Kras plateau as well as its uninterrupted view of the surrounding area indicate a connection with military events in the area and an increasing role of the site in the time after the abandonment of the main road leading to Aquileia across Hrušica.192 he hilltop fortiication on Sv. Martin above Škrbina near Komen revealed Late Roman coins and a strap end with chip-carved decoration.193 he location of the site at the point of access to the important Kras plateau points to a strategic signiicance of the fortiication. he important hilltop fortiications in the Notranjska region not forming part of the barrier system include poorly investigated Gradišče at Čepna,194 Sv. Primož above Ra dohova vas near Pivka195 and Gradišče near Dolnji Ze mon.196 All are located in the vicinity of important lines of communication and revealed the remains of Late Roman military dress, individually even the remains of foederati, which would allow us to see them as sites of a pronounced military importance. A very particular site is one located in a cave, namely Jama under Predjamski grad, in the vicinity of an intersection of Roman roads. he cave boasts excellent natural protection and revealed clear traces of Late Roman habitation, which were found during the investigation of the cave positioned in a vertical rock face. he inds include parts of belt sets, single-sided combs with a bell-shaped handle and closest analogies in the area of the Sintana de Mures–Černjahovo culture, as well as horse-gear strap distributors.197 he date of the site into the irst half of the 5th 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 420 Slapšak 1978; Slapšak 1985; Slapšak 1997. Vidrih Perko 1997a, 349; Vidrih Perko 1997b; Vidrih Perko, Župančič 2003, 463–467, ig. 1; Vidrih Perko, Župančič 2005, 522. Slapšak 1978, 546–547. Šemrov 2004, 39, cat. no. 18; Plaum 2002, 272–274, pl. 3: 30. Kniic, Tomanič-Jevremov 1996, 374–375; Laharnar, in this book. Plaum 2001, 22, cat. no. 45; Laharnar, in this book. ANSl 1975, 152. Korošec 1983, pls. 1, 2, 4, 5; Kniic, Tomanič-Jevremov 1996, 376–377; Plaum 2000, 132–134. predvsem prve tretjine 5. st. s številnimi deli poznorimskih pasnih garnitur.189 Obzidje še ni raziskano, na površini vidni sledovi kažejo debelino 0,80 m (sl. 17 in 18). Na Ajdovščini nad Rodikom, izpostavljeni veliki višinski utrjeni naselbini (nm. v. 804 m) ob cesti Emona–Tergeste, so z dolgoletnimi raziskavami ugotovili bogate naselbinske sledove.190 Za obrambo postojanke je bil uporabljen močen prazgodovinski nasip s kamnito konstrukcijo, ki zaobjema pribl. 260 × 200 m velik prostor. V notranjosti so številne, na površini opazne ruševine velikih zgradb, od katerih so izkopali le del zgradbe z apsido, pri kateri sta vidni dve časovni stopnji. Naselbina je s keramiko dobro datirana v prvo polovico 5. stoletja, kar bi bilo mogoče povezati z anono.191 Lega tik nad pomembnim križiščem cest v neposrednem zaledju kraških zapor in odličen pregled nad okolico poleg že nakazanih elementov upravičujeta njeno povezavo z vojaškimi dogajanji in njen naraščajoči pomen v času po opustitvi glavne ceste proti Akvileji čez Hrušico.192 Na utrjeni višinski postojanki Sv. Martin nad Škrbino pri Komnu so našli poznorimske novce in poznorimski jermenski zaključek, okrašen v tehniki klinastega vreza.193 Lega utrdbe ob pomembnem dostopu na kraško planoto dokazuje strateški pomen utrdbe. 189 190 191 192 193 Ciglenečki, Milavec 2009, 177–179; Ciglenečki 2011. Slapšak 1978; Slapšak 1985; Slapšak 1997. Vidrih Perko 1997a, 349; Vidrih Perko 1997b; Vidrih Perko, Župančič 2003, 463–467, sl. 1; Vidrih Perko, Župančič 2005, 522. Slapšak 1978, 546–547. Šemrov 2004, 39, kat. št. 18; Plaum 2002, 272–274, t. 3: 30. Figure 18. Tonovcov grad near Kobarid. Selected metal items of the military dress from the Late Roman period. All bronze (ater Ciglenečki 2008). Slika 18. Tonovcov grad pri Kobaridu. Izbor značilnih kovinskih predmetov poznorimske moške noše. Vse bron (po Ciglenečki 2008). century is conirmed by pottery198 and coin inds.199 For this site, the presence of foederati in the Roman garrison seems particularly plausible. he list of the fortiications of this group is concluded with sites, on which soldiers were stationed within naturally protected areas or within fortiications dating to the prehistory. hese are poorly investigated and have not yielded inds of apparent military character. A watch and signalling role can thus be ascribed to the site on Donačka gora (883 m a.s.l.) that commands an excellent view over a large part of north-eastern Slovenia.200 Considering the size of the naturally protected area, the site certainly also served as a refuge. A similar role can be ascribed to Pleš above Do brljevo (909 m a.s.l.), a site that ofered excellent control over the saddle at Trojane, i.e. the crossing point from Italy Med pomembnimi višinskimi utrdbami, ki niso sodile v sklop Klavster, je na Notranjskem treba omeniti slabo raziskane utrdbe Gradišče na Čepni,194 Sv. Primož nad Radohovo vasjo pri Pivki195 in Gradišče pri Dolnjem Zemonu.196 Pri vseh je opazna bližina važnih komunikacij, ostanki poznorimske moške noše in posamično celo sledovi federatov, zato bi smeli videti v njih postojanke z močneje poudarjenim vojaškim pomenom. Posebnost med utrdbami je najdišče v Jami pod Pred jamskim gradom v bližini križišča rimskih cest. Tam so v imenitno zavarovani jami sredi navpične skalne stene pri raziskovanjih našli zanesljive znake poselitve v poznorimskem obdobju. Izstopajo deli pasnih garnitur, enovrstni glavniki z zvonastim ročajem, ki imajo najboljše primerjave na območju kulture Sintana de Mures–Černjahovo, ter razdelilni gumbi konjske opreme.197 Datacijo najdišča 194 198 199 200 Vidrih Perko, Župančič 2003, 463–467, ig. 1; Vidrih Perko, Župančič 2005, 522. Kos 1988a, 121–123, cat. no. 92. Kos 1988b, 112–113, cat. nos. 360/1 and 360/2; Ciglenečki 1992, 28–30; Šemrov 1998, 179. 195 196 197 Kniic, Tomanič-Jevremov 1996, 374–375; Laharnar, v tem zborniku. Plaum 2001, 22, kat. št. 45; Laharnar, v tem zborniku. ANSl 1975, 152. Korošec 1983, t. 1, 2, 4, 5; Kniic, Tomanič-Jevremov 1996, 376–377; Plaum 2000, 132–134. 421 into Noricum, while also serving as a refuge to the inhabitants of the Atrans settlement.201 he posts of this group have the following common characteristics: irstly, they are located on high elevations in relation to the surrounding area, higher than was observed in the previous group; secondly, their defence walls are for the most part thinner and without detectable towers, the role of the latter was partly played by buildings leaning against the defence walls; thirdly, the interiors of most are less built-up and thus suggesting tents or wooden buildings, the only reliable evidence of buildings are those from Rodik and Brinjeva gora, but these cannot be reliably dated yet. he indings of the investigations on these sites do not allow us to determine whether the fortiications had an exclusively military character or were, as is more likely, a combination of military sites and refuges, i.e. temporary settlements of the local population. he latter would be indicated by vast empty spaces in the interior of the defence walls on Rifnik and Brinjeva gora that ofered ample space for tents or other temporary dwellings. A similar mixing of the civil population and soldiers has already been observed in the hinterland of the Danube limes following the abandonment of unfortiied cities.202 Another important inding is that some of the geographically exposed sites of supposed military character, namely Ančnikovo gradišče, Brinjeva gora, Gradišče near Zbelovska gora and Gradišče near Dunaj, were not inhabited in the later phase, i.e. the second half of the 5th and the 6th century. heir exposed location on the fringes of the Pannonian Plain and in the vicinity of important lines of communication made them operative whilst hosting regular garrisons, and became too dangerous for permanent settlement of civilian population after these had been removed. he archaeological assessment of the Late Roman posts on strategic locations and sites with commanding views shows that these can very likely be considered as potential military sites comprising large forts on key positions as well as small watch posts that primarily performed watch and signalling tasks. For an integral understanding of the phenomenon better knowledge of the courses of the state roads as well as less important auxiliary roads and tracks will be necessary. Further investigation will also reveal whether and to what degree these fortiications were maintained by the regular army. hey represented a part of the widely organised defence of Italy and may have been populated by regular soldiers as well as Roman civilians organized into militiae. v prvo polovico 5. st. potrjujejo tudi keramične najdbe198 in novci.199 Tu se zdi navzočnost federatov v rimski vojaški posadki še posebej verjetna. Povsem na konec lahko umestimo najdišča, pri katerih so bila za bivanje vojakov uporabljena le naravno zavarovana ali že v prazgodovini utrjena mesta, ki pa so slabše raziskana in ne nudijo zanesljivih vojaških najdb. Opazovalno in signalno vlogo bi smeli pripisati tako postojanki na daleč vidni Donački gori (nm. v. 883 m), od koder je odličen pregled nad velikim delom severovzhodne Slovenije.200 Glede na velikost naravno zavarovanega območja pa se je nedvomno uporabljala tudi kot pribežališče. Podobno vlogo je imela tudi postojanka Pleš nad Dobrljevim (nm. v. 909 m), ki je odlično obvladovala prostor trojanskega sedla, torej prehoda iz Italije v Norik, a je lahko hkrati bila pribežališče za prebivalstvo naselbine Atrans.201 Če pogledamo splošne značilnosti utrdb te skupine, je treba poudariti predvsem nekaj razlikovalnih okoliščin. Izbira mest za utrdbe kaže na večjo relativno višinsko razliko, kot smo jo opazili v prejšnji skupini. Obzidja so v večjem delu tanjša, stolpi niso bili odkriti, delno so bile v ta namen uporabljene stavbe, prislonjene na obzidje. Pri večini utrdb je bila notranjost slabše pozidana, pričakovati bi smeli šotore ali lesene zgradbe. Bolje raziskane so zgradbe le pri najdiščih Rodik in pri Brinjevi gori, ki pa jih še ni mogoče v celoti zanesljivo datirati. Pri obravnavanih postojankah je na osnovi dosedanjih raziskav težko ločiti, ali gre za izključno vojaške postojanke, ali, kar je verjetneje, kombinacijo teh in pribežališč oziroma začasnih naselbin bližnjega prebivalstva. Na to bi kazali veliki prazni prostori znotraj obzidij Brinjeve gore in Rifnika, ki so bili lahko izkoriščeni za postavitev šotorov ali kakih drugih oblik provizoričnih zgradb. Podobno so ugotovili v zaledju donavskega limesa po opustitvi neutrjenih mest mešanje civilnega prebivalstva in vojaštva v bolje utrjenih naseljih.202 Pomemben je tudi podatek, da nekatere geografsko izpostavljene, domnevno vojaške utrdbe niso bile poseljene v poznejši fazi, v drugi polovici 5. in v 6. st. Takšne so predvsem Ančnikovo gradišče, Brinjeva gora, Gradišče pri Zbelovski Gori in Gradišče pri Dunaju. Zaradi izpostavljene lege na robu Panonske nižine in bližine pomembnih cest so bile operativne dokler so bili na njih še redni vojaški oddelki, ob njihovem umiku pa so postale prenevarne za trajnejšo poselitev civilnega prebivalstva. 198 199 200 201 422 202 Ciglenečki, Turk 1984; an unpublished Late Roman coin. Ladstätter 2002, 320. 201 202 Vidrih Perko, Župančič 2003, 463–467, sl. 1; Vidrih Perko, Župančič 2005, 522. Kos 1988a, 121–123, kat. št. 92. Kos 1988b, 112–113, kat. št. 360/1 in 360/2; Ciglenečki 1992, 28–30; Šemrov 1998, 179. Ciglenečki, Turk 1984; neobjavljen poznorimski novec. Ladstätter 2002, 320. 3 Last of the Late Roman military sites and their role in the defence of Italy In the time when settlements also moved onto naturally protected elevations the altered structure of the Late Roman army makes it very diicult to identify the military installations that lost the features that characterized them as such during the irst three centuries. Such identiication of military sites is even more diicult in the last decades of the Roman state. he forts discussed as part of the Claustra system no longer show traces of habitation after AD 400. Only some of the sites of the second, but even more so the third group reveal evidence of further occupation into the irst half of the 5th century. his evidence primarily consists of late coins and well dated ine pottery and amphorae; it only exceptionally includes more characteristic items of the military and foederati costumes.203 he strategic locations of some of the posts suggest a continuation of the defence system in the north-eastern part of Italy, in the context of the Tractus Italiae circa Alpes as presented in Notitia dignitatum. hese last sites with inds from the irst half of the 5th century can primarily be seen on Puštal above Trnje near Škoja Loka, Gledanica near Štanjel, Ajdovščina near Rodik, Ančnikovo gradišče, Tonovcov grad near Kobarid, Gradina near Doberdob (Castelazzo di Doberdo) and Predjama.204 Systematic investigation will undoubtedly reveal numerous other sites, for which no material evidence is available as of yet. he evidence collected thus far shows that the sensitive area of the south-eastern Alps was still carefully protected even in the last days of the Roman administration. But this was managed exclusively through a series of fortiications strategically positioned along the roads leading into Italy. he monetary circulation indicates their existence can be followed up to the 420s, although the better-investigated sites on Rodik and Ančnikovo gradišče allow the possibility of a number of them continuing even after this date. I have argued already in 1985 that in the 5th century, the main connection from Siscia to Aquileia leading across Hrušica was transferred to a previously much less used route more to the south (alternative variant of the road across the barrier wall near Rob).205 Apart from this southern route, the lines of communication that regained their importance in the 5th and 6th centuries were also the old routes to the north of the main artery, which is attested to by a prominent role of Kranj (Carnium) in this period as well as by the appearance of several other sites on strategic locations.206 hey often ran along old routes, which had already been protected by short barrier walls during 203 204 205 206 Ciglenečki, Milavec 2009. For a more detailed overview see Ciglenečki, Milavec 2009. Ciglenečki 1985, 267–270. Ciglenečki 1997, 188–189; Ciglenečki 2011, 260–268. Arheološko vrednotenje omenjenih poznorimskih postojank na strateških mestih in tudi dobrih razglednih položajih kaže na veliko verjetnost domneve o potencialnih vojaških postojankah z večjimi utrdbami na ključnih mestih, kot tudi manjšimi stražarnicami, ki so imele predvsem opazovalne in signalne naloge. Za celovito razumevanje tega problema pa bo treba podrobneje raziskati potek državnih, a tudi manj pomembnih stranskih cest in poti. Raziskave bodo morale pokazati, ali in v kakšni meri je te utrdbe vzdrževala redna vojska. Glede na strateško lego na območju tik pred vhodom v Italijo so te utrdbe sestavljale del širše zasnovane obrambe Italije in jih je poleg redne vojske morda delno poseljevalo tudi romansko prebivalstvo v obliki milic. 3 Zadnje poznorimske vojaške postojanke in njihova vloga v sklopu obrambe Italije Kot smo opozorili že zgoraj, je v spremenjeni strukturi poznorimske vojske zelo težko prepoznati vojaške naprave, ki so v času premika naselbin na naravno zavarovane hribe, izgubile značilnosti, kakršne so jih določale v prvih treh stoletjih. Še težja je ta prepoznavnost vojaških postojank v zadnjih desetletjih obstoja rimske države. Utrdbe, ki smo jih obravnavali v sklopu sistema Klavster, po letu 400 ne kažejo več znakov poselitve. Le v drugi in predvsem tretji skupini je bilo pri nekaterih mogoče zaslediti dokaze o nadaljnji poselitvi še v prvi polovici 5. st. To potrjujejo predvsem pozni novci, bolje opredeljena ina keramika in amfore ter le izjemoma značilnejši predmeti poznorimske moške noše ter noše federatov.203 Po strateški legi nekaterih utrdb je mogoče sklepati na nadaljevanje obrambnega sistema v severovzhodnem delu Italije, in sicer v kontekstu v Noticiji dignitatum predstavljene obrambe Italije Tractus Italiae circa Alpes. Med te zadnje postojanke z najdbami iz prve polovice 5. st. se uvrščajo predvsem Puštal nad Trnjem pri Škoji Loki, Gledanica pri Štanjelu, Ajdovščina pri Rodiku, Ančnikovo gradišče, Tonovcov grad pri Kobaridu, Gradina pri Doberdobu (Castelazzo di Doberdo) in Predjama.204 Sistematične raziskave bodo nedvomno odkrile še mnoge druge, za katere doslej nimamo materialnih dokazov. Zdaj je mogoče že trditi, da so občutljivo jugovzhodnoalpsko območje v zadnjem obdobju rimske uprave še vedno skrbno varovali, vendar izključno s spretno razvrščenimi in strateško umeščenimi utrdbami vzdolž mreže vpadnic v Italijo. Glede na novčni obtok jih lahko sledimo le v tretje desetletje 5. st., čeprav ni izključeno, da so marsikje vztrajale še naprej, kot bi to nakazovala bolje raziskana Rodik in Ančnikovo gradišče. Leta 1985 sem opozoril na premik prometnih povezav v 5. st. z glavne osi Siscija–Akvileja prek Hrušice na prej manj 203 204 Ciglenečki, Milavec 2009. Podrobnejši pregled pri Ciglenečki, Milavec 2009. 423 construction of the Alpine defence system. hese short sections of walls are poorly investigated, which makes it impossible to either conirm or refute their continued existence and use into the 5th or even the 6th century. he possibility of their existence at least in the irst decades of the 5th century, however, might be indicated by the illustration of two symbolic barrier walls defending Italy in the military manual of Notitia dignitatum.207 he above-discussed sites clearly show that the attempt at a linear defence of Italy with barrier walls only represented the irst phase in the development of an integral defence of Italy. Soon after the end of the 4th century, it was replaced by the concept of elastic defence with carefully located fortiications at vital points that provided systematic defence of all the important passages when entering or leaving the hilly and mountainous area in the northeast of Italy. hese forts may have hosted the last garrisons of regular Roman army, possibly aided by local militia, and represent the inal phase of Roman military presence in the territory of present-day Slovenia. Translation: Andreja Maver pomembno prometnico južno od tod (alternativna varianta ceste skozi zaporo pri Robu).205 Seveda pa so poleg te južne povezave v 5. in 6. st. obnovile svoj pomen tudi stare poti severno od opuščene glavne žile, o čemer priča predvsem močno okrepljena vloga Kranja v tem času ter nastanek nekaterih drugih utrdb na strateško pomembnih krajih.206 Pri tem so bile največkrat uporabljene stare poti, ki so jih že v času gradnje alpskih zapor zavarovali s krajšimi zidovi. Ker so ti pomanjkljivo raziskani, njihovega obstoja in uporabe v 5. ali celo v 6. st. ni mogoče niti potrditi niti ovreči. Na njihov morebitni obstoj pa bi vsaj za čas prvih desetletij 5. st. lahko kazala upodobitev dveh simboličnih zapornih zidov na sliki, ki ponazarja obrambo Italije v vojaškem priročniku Notitia dignitatum.207 Zgoraj omenjena najdišča nazorno kažejo, da je bil poskus linearne obrambe v obliki z zidovi varovanih cest in spremljajočih trdnjav le prva faza v razvoju celovite obrambe Italije. Kmalu po koncu 4. st. jo je nadomestil koncept povsem elastične obrambe s spretno umeščenimi utrdbami na vitalnih mestih, s katerimi so sistematično zavarovali vse važnejše prehode pri vstopu in tudi izstopu v težje prehoden hribovski in gorski svet na severovzhodu Italije. V njih smemo videti utrdbe posadk zadnjih oddelkov regularne rimske vojske, ki jim je morda pomagala lokalna milica in predstavljajo zaključno fazo rimske vojaške navzočnosti na Slovenskem. 205 206 424 207 Not. Dign. Occ. XXIV. 207 Ciglenečki 1985, 267–270. Ciglenečki 1997, 188–189; Ciglenečki 2011, 260–268. Not. Dign. Occ. XXIV. BIBLIOGRAPHY / LITERATURA ANSl 1975: Arheološka najdišča Slovenije. – Ljubljana. BASLER, Ð. 1972, Arhitektura kasnoantičkog doba u Bosni i Hercegovini. – Sarajevo. BAUSOVAC, M. 2003, Poznoantični kovinski predmeti z Gradca pri Prapretnem. – Arheološki vestnik 54, 315–324 [summary in German / povzetek v nemščini]. BAUSOVAC, M., KREMPUŠ, R. 2009, Celje – Knežji dvorec. – Varstvo spomenikov, Poročila 45/08, 44–45. BEKIĆ, L. 2009, Antički numizmatički nalazi / Reperti numismatici di età antica. – In/V: N. Radić Štivić, L. Bekić (eds./ur.), Tarsatički principij, Kasnoantičko vojno zapovjedništvo / Principia di Tarsatica, Quartiere generale d’epoca tardoantica, Rijeka, 183–225. BOLTA, L. 1981, Rifnik pri Šentjurju. Poznoantična naselbina in grobišče / Rifnik – spätantike Siedlung und Gräberfeld. – Katalogi in monograije 19, Ljubljana. BOŽIČ, D., CIGLENEČKI, S. 1995, Zenonov tremis in poznoantična utrdba Gradec pri Veliki Strmici / Der Tremissis des Kaisers Zeno und die spätantike Befestigung Gradec bei Velika Strmica. – Arheološki vestnik 46, 247–277. BRANK, R. 1979, Sledovi nasipov poznoantičnih obrambnih zapor pri Novi Oselici. – Loški razgledi 26, 18–23. BREŠČAK, D., DULAR, J. 2002, Prazgodovinsko in poznoantično naselje Šumenje pri Podturnu. – Arheološki vestnik 53, 101–115 [summary in English / povzetek v angleščini]. BROGIOLO, G. P. 2006, Alcuni spunti per lo studio della città altomedievale italiana. – Hortus Artium Medievalium 12, 7–18. BRUSIN, G. 1959, Il vallo romano in alpe Iulia. – In/V: Limes-Studien, Vorträge des 3. Internationalen Limes-Kongresses in Rheinfelden: Basel 1957, Schriften des Institutes für Ur- und Frühgeschichte der Schweiz 14, Basel, 39–44. CAMPBELL, B. 2005, he Army. – In/V: A. K. Bowman, P. Garnsey, A. Cameron (eds./ur.), he Cambridge Ancient History 12, he Crisis of Empire, AD 193–337, Cambridge, 110–130. CHRISTIE, N. 1991, he Alps as a frontier (A. D. 168–774). – Journal of Roman Archaeology 4, 410–430. CHRISTIE, N. 2001, War and order: urban remodelling and defensive strategy in late Roman Italy. – In/V: L. Lavan (ed./ur.), Recent Research on Late Antique Urbanism, Journal of Roman Archaeology, Supplement 42, Ann Arbor, 106–122. CHRISTIE, N. 2007, From the Danube to the Po: the Defence of Pannonia and Italy in the Fourth and Fifth Centuries AD. – In/V: A. G. Poulter (ed./ur.), he Transition to Late Antiquity, On the Danube and Beyond, Proceedings of the British Academy 141, Oxford, 547–578. CIGLENEČKI, S. 1981, Rezultati prvih raziskovanj na Gradcu pri Prapretnem. – Arheološki vestnik 32, 417–453 [summary in German / povzetek v nemščini]. CIGLENEČKI, S. 1985, Potek alternativne ceste Siscija–Akvileja na prostoru zahodne Dolenjske in Notranjske v času 4. do 6. stoletja. Preliminarno poročilo o raziskovanjih Korinjskega hriba in rekognosciranjih zahodne Dolenjske. – Arheološki vestnik 36, 255–284 [summary in German / povzetek v nemščini]. CIGLENEČKI, S. 1987, Höhenbefestigungen aus der Zeit vom 3. bis 6. Jh. im Ostalpenraum / Višinske utrdbe iz časa 3. do 6. st. v vzhodnoalpskem prostoru. – Dela 1. razreda SAZU 31, Ljubljana. CIGLENEČKI, S. 1990, K problemu datacije nastanka rimskodobnih višinskih utrdb v jugovzhodnoalpskem prostoru. – Šašlov zbornik, Arheološki vestnik 41, 147–176 [summary in German / povzetek v nemščini]. CIGLENEČKI, S. 1992, Pólis Norikón. Poznoantične višinske utrdbe med Celjem in Brežicami. – Podsreda. CIGLENEČKI, S. 1993, Arheološki sledovi zatona antične Petovione. – In/V: B. Lamut (ed./ur.), Ptujski arheološki zbornik ob 100-letnici muzeja in Muzejskega društva, Ptuj, 505–520 [summary in English / povzetek v angleščini]. CIGLENEČKI, S. 1994, Höhenbefestigungen als Siedlungsgrundeinheit der Spätantike in Slowenien. – Arheološki vestnik 45, 239–266. CIGLENEČKI, S. 1997, Strukturiranost poznorimske poselitve Slovenije. – Arheološki vestnik 48, 191–202 [summary in German / povzetek v nemščini]. CIGLENEČKI, S. 2003, Frühchristliche Kirchenanlagen in Slowenien. – In/V: H. R. Sennhauser (ed./ur.), Frühe Kirchen im östlichen Alpengebiet, Von der Spätantike bis in ottonische Zeit 2, Abhandlungen, Bayerische Akademie der Wissenschaften, Philosophisch-historische Klasse N. F. 123, München, 581–595. CIGLENEČKI, S. 2007a, Via publica in druge komunikacije med Celejo in Neviodunom v poznorimskem obdobju / Via publica and other communications between Celeia and Neviodunum in the late Roman period. – Prilozi Instituta za arheologiju u Zagrebu 24, 241–250. CIGLENEČKI, S. 2007b, Zum Problem spätrömischer militärischer Befestigungen im südlichen Teil von Noricum Mediterraneum. – Schild von Steier, Archäologische und numismatische Beiträge aus dem Landesmuseum Joanneum 20/2007, 317–328. CIGLENEČKI, S. 2008, Castra und Höhensiedlungen vom 3. bis 6. Jahrhundert in Slowenien. – In/V: H. Steuer, V. Bierbrauer (eds./ur.), Höhensiedlungen zwischen Antike und Mittelalter von den Ardennen bis zur Adria, Ergänzungsbände zum Reallexikon der Germanischen Altertumskunde 58, Berlin, New York, 481–532. CIGLENEČKI, S. 2011, Utrdba Tonovcov grad – pomemben člen poznorimske obrambe Italije / he fort at Tonovcov grad – an important part of the late roman defence system of Italy. – In/V: S. Ciglenečki, Z. Modrijan, T. Milavec, Poznoantična utrjena naselbina Tonovcov grad pri Kobaridu, Naselbinski ostanki in interpretacija / Late Antique fortiied settlement Tonovcov grad near Kobarid, Settlement remains and interpretation, Opera Instituti Archaeologici Sloveniae 23, Ljubljana, 259–271. 425 CIGLENEČKI, S., MILAVEC T. 2009, he defence of northeastern Italy in the irst decennia of the 5th century. – Forum Iulii 33, 175–187. HOCK, J. 2001, Burgi. – In/V: h. Fischer (ed./ur.), Die Römischen Provinzen, Eine Einführung in ihre Archäologie, Stuttgart, 143–151. CIGLENEČKI, S., TURK I. 1984, Dobrljevo. – Varstvo spomenikov 26, 217. HORVAT, J. 1990, Nauportus (Vrhnika). – Dela l. razreda SAZU 33, Ljubljana. CUNTZ, O. 1902, Die römische Strasse Aquileia-Emona, ihre Stationen und Befestigungen. –Jahreshefte des Österreichischen Archäologischen Institutes in Wien 5, Beiblatt, 139–160. ISTENIČ, J. 2001, Katalog št. 38. – In/V: P. Bitenc, T. Kniic (eds./ur.), Od Rimljanov do Slovanov, Predmeti, Ljubljana, 20–21. DEGRASSI, A. 1954, Il conine nord-orientale dell’Italia romana. Ricerche storico-topograiche. – Dissertationes Bernenses I/6, Bern. DINCHEV, V. 2007, he Fortresses of hrace and Dacia in the Early Byzantine Period. – In/V: A. G. Poulter (ed./ur.), he Transition to Late Antiquity, On the Danube and Beyond, Proceedings of the British Academy 141, Oxford, 479–546. DOLENZ, H. 1952, Archäologische Fundberichte aus Kärnten. – Carinthia I 142, 172–191. DUNN, A. 2002, Was there a militarization of the southern Balkans during late antiquity? – In/V: Ph. Freeman, J. Bennett, Z. T. Fiema, B. Hofmann (eds./ur.), Limes XVIII, Proceedings of the XVIIIth International Congress of Roman Frontier Studies held in Aman, Jordan (September 2000), BAR International Series 1084/2, Oxford, 705–712. FABER, A. 1986–1987, Osvrt na neka utvrđenja otoka Krka od vremena prethistorije do antike i srednjeg vijeka / he Strateghic Role of the Island of Krk from Antiquity to the Middle Ages. – Prilozi Instituta za arheologiju u Zagrebu 3–4, (1988), 113–140. FRELIH, M. 1985, Kalce. – Varstvo spomenikov 27, 227–228. FRELIH, M. 2003, Logatec – Longaticum in rimski obrambni sistem Claustra Alpium Iuliarum. S prispevkom o bitki pri reki Frigidus (Soča) leta 394. – Logatec [summary in English / povzetek v angleščini]. FURLANI, U. 1969, Una stazione militare romana sul Castellazzo di Doberdo del Lago. – Aquileia nostra 40, 57–70. JEVREMOV, B., TOMANIČ JEVREMOV, M., CIGLENEČKI, S. 1993, Poznorimsko grobišče na Ptujskem gradu. – Arheološki vestnik 44, 223–233 [summary in German / povzetek v nemščini]. JOHNSON, S. 1983a, Late Roman fortiications. – London. JOHNSON, S. 1983b, Late Roman urban defences in Europe. – In/V: J. Maloney, B. Hobley (eds./ur.), Roman Urban Defences in the West, London, 68–76. KLEMENC, J. 1950, Ptujski grad v kasni antiki. – Dela 1. razreda SAZU 4, Ljubljana [summary in French / povzetek v francoščini]. KNIFIC, T., TOMANIČ-JEVREMOV, M. 1996, Prva znamenja velikega preseljevanja ljudstev v Sloveniji. – Ptujski zbornik 6/1, 369–393 [summary in German / povzetek v nemščini]. KOROŠEC, P. 1950, Slovanske najdbe zgodnjega srednjega veka na Panorami v Ptuju. – In/V: Arheološka poročila, Poročilo o izkopavanjih v Ljubljani, Novem mestu in na Panorami v Ptuju, Dela 1. razreda SAZU 3, Ljubljana, 75–111 [summary in English / povzetek v angleščini]. KOROŠEC, P. 1983, Predjama konec 4. do sredine 5. st. – Arheološki vestnik 33, (1982), 84–114 [summary in German / povzetek v nemščini]. KOS, P. 1986, he monetary circulation in the southeastern Alpine region ca. B.C. 300 – A.D. 1000. – Situla 24, Ljubljana [summary in Slovene / povzetek v slovenščini]. KOS, P. 1988a, Die Fundmünzen der römischen Zeit in Slowenien I. – Berlin. GABROVEC, S. 1975, Ajdovski gradec. – In/V: ANSl 1975, 164. GLASER, F. 1996, Frühchristliche Denkmäler in Kärnten. Ein Führer. – Klagenfurt. GLASER, F. 1997, Frühes Christentum im Alpenraum. Eine archäologische Entdeckungsreise. – Graz, Wien, Köln. GREGORY, T. E. 1993, he Hexamilion and the Fortress. – Isthmia 5, Princeton. HAREJ, Z. 1988, Štanjel, ob Gledanici. – Varstvo spomenikov 30, 256. 426 HEINRICH-TAMASKA, O. 2009, Keszthely-Fénekpuszta und die pannonischen Innenbefestigungen. – In/V: O. Heinrich-Tamaska, P. Straub (eds./ur.), Keszthely-Fenékpuszta im Spiegel der Jahrtausende / Keszthely-Fenékpuszta az évezredek tükrében, Leipzig, Zalaegerszeg, 42–49. KOS, P. 1988b, Die Fundmünzen der römischen Zeit in Slowenien II. – Berlin. KOS, P. 2012, he construction and abandonment of the Claustra Alpium Iuliarum defence system in light of the numismatic material / Gradnja in opustitev obrambnega sistema Claustra Alpium Iuliarum v luči numizmatičnega gradiva. – Arheološki vestnik 63, 265–300. KOS, P. 2014, Ad Pirum (Hrušica) in Claustra Alpium Iuliarum. – Vestnik 26, Ljubljana [elektronski vir: http://www.zvkds.si/ media/images/publications/hrusica8_1.pdf ]. KOS, P., ŠEMROV, A. 1995, Die Fundmünzen der römischen Zeit in Slowenien III. – Mainz. KUSETIČ, J. (ed./ur.) 2014, Claustra Alpium Iuliarum – med raziskovanjem in upravljanjem / Claustra Alpium Iuliarum – Between Research and Management. – Ljubljana. LADSTÄTTER, S. 2002, Die Spätantike. – In/V: V. Gassner, V. Jilek, S. Ladstätter, Am Rande des Reiches, Die Römer in Österreich, Österreichische Geschichte 15, Wien, 285–368. LEBEN, F., ŠUBIC, Z. 1990, Poznoantični kastel Vrh Brsta pri Martinj hribu na Logaški planoti. – Šašlov zbornik, Arheološki vestnik 41, 313–354 [summary in German / povzetek v nemščini]. LEBEN, F., VALIČ, A. 1978, Ajdna / Ajdna. – Arheološki vestnik 29, 532–545. LIEBESCHUTZ, W. 1992, he end of the ancient city. – In/V: J. Rich (ed./ur.), he city in late antiquity, Leicester-Nottingham studies in ancient society 3, New York, 99–135. LIPOVAC VRKLJAN, G., ŠILJEG, B. 2007, Istraživanja Liburnskog obrambenog sustava u Prezidu 2006. – Annales Instituti archaeologici 3, Zagreb, 79–82 [summary in English / povzetek v angleščini]. MACKENSEN, M. 1981, Die römischen Fundmünzen. – In/V: T. Ulbert (ed./ur.), Ad Pirum (Hrušica), Spätrömische Passbefestigung in den Julischen Alpen, Der deutsche Beitrag zu den slowenisch-deutschen Grabungen 1971–1973, Münchner Beiträge zur Vorund Frühgeschichte 31, München, 131–152. MARCONE, A. 2002, Tra Adriatico e Danubio nel IV secolo. – In/V: M. Buora, W. Jobst (eds./ur.), Roma sul Danubio, Da Aquileia a Carnuntum lungo la via dell’ambra, Roma, 173–178. MARCONE, A. 2004, L’Illirico e la frontiera nordorientale dell’Italia nel IV secolo d. C. – In/V: G. Urso (ed./ur.), Dall’Adriatico al Danubio, L’Illirico nell’età greca e romana, Atti del Convegno internazionale, Cividale del Friuli, 25–27 settembre 2003, I convegni della Fondazione Niccolò Canussio 3, Pisa, 343–359. MILAVEC, T. 2011, Kovinske najdbe / Metal inds. – In/V: Z. Modrijan, T. Milavec, Poznoantična utrjena naselbina Tonovcov grad pri Kobaridu, Najdbe / Late Antique fortiied settlement Tonovcov grad near Kobarid, Finds, Opera Instituti Archaeologici Sloveniae 24, Ljubljana, 21–81. MILINKOVIĆ, M. 2008, Die spätantik-frühbyzantinische befestigten Höhenanlagen in Serbien. – In/V: H. Steuer, V. Bierbrauer, M. Hoeper (eds./ur.), Höhensiedlungen zwischen Antike und Mittelalter von den Ardennen bis zur Adria, Ergänzungsbände zum Reallexikon der Germanischen Altertumskunde 58, Berlin, New York, 533–557. MODRIJAN, W. 1978, Gröbming. Der Fundbestand bis in die Spätantike. – In/V: G. Schwarz, E. Pochmarski (eds./ur.), Classica et provincialia, Festschrift Erna Diez, Graz, 125–140. MÜLLNER, A. 1879, Emona. Archäologische Studien aus Krain. – Laibach. MÜLLNER, A. 1893, Die “Gradišča” in Krain. Das römische Castell: “Ad Pirum” in den Julischen Alpen. – Argo 2, 165–170. MUŠIČ, B. 1999, Geophysical prospecting in Slovenia: an overview with some observatons related to the natural environment / Geoizikalna prospekcija v Sloveniji: pregled raziskav z nekaterimi ugotovitvami glede naravnega okolja. – Arheološki vestnik 50, 349–405. MUŠIČ, B., HORVAT, J. 2007, Nauportus – an Early Roman trading post at Dolge njive in Vrhnika. he results of geophysical prospecting using a variety of independent methods / Nauportus – zgodnjerimska trgovska postojanka na Dolgih njivah na Vrhniki. Rezultati geoizikalne raziskave z več neodvisnimi metodami. – Arheološki vestnik 58, 219–283. MASELLI SCOTTI, F. 1992, Due fortiicazioni tardoantiche ad oriente di Aquileia. – In/V: G. Sena Chiesa, E. A. Arslan (eds./ ur.), Felix temporis reparatio, Atti del Convegno Archaeologico Internazionale “Milano capitale dell’impero romano”, Milano, 8–11 marzo 1990, Milano, 369–373. OSMUK, N. 1990a, Obzidje rimske utrdbe Castra v Ajdovščini. – Šašlov zbornik, Arheološki vestnik 41, 183–198 [summary in German / povzetek v nemščini]. MASELLI SCOTTI, F., MONTAGNARI KOKELJ, E. 1989, Notiziario archeologico. – Aquileia nostra 60, 333–336. OSMUK, N. 1991, Planina nad Ajdovščino – sv. Pavel. – Varstvo spomenikov 33, 212. MASON, Ph. 1998, Late Roman Črnomelj and Bela krajina. – Arheološki vestnik 49, 285–313 [summary in Slovene / povzetek v slovenščini]. OSMUK, N. 1997, Ajdovščina – Castra. Stanje arheoloških raziskav (1994). – Arheološki vestnik 48, 119–130 [summary in German / povzetek v nemščini]. MASON, Ph. 2006, Late Roman Bela krajina. – In/V: D. Davison, V. Gafney, E. Marin (eds./ur.), Dalmatia, Research in the Roman Province 1970–2001, BAR International Series 1576, Oxford, 115–131. PAHIČ, S. 1960, Brinjeva gora. Začasen oris njene preteklosti za ljubitelje domače zgodovine. – Raziskovalno poročilo, Maribor. MIKL-CURK, I. 1966, Poznoantično grobišče na Zgornjem Bregu v Ptuju. – Časopis za zgodovino in narodopisje N. V. 2, 46–62 [summary in French / povzetek v francoščini]. MIKL-CURK, I. 1986, Rimski kastel v Zalogu pri Ljubljani. – Arheološki vestnik 37, 227–235 [summary in German / povzetek v nemščini]. MIKULČIĆ, I. 2002, Spätantike und frühbyzantinische Befestigungen in Nordmakedonien. Städte, Vici, Refugien, Kastelle. – Münchner Beiträge zur Vor- und Frühgeschichte 54, München. OSMUK, N. 1990b, Podkraj. – Varstvo spomenikov 32, 180. PAHIČ, S. 1980, Prvi podatki o grobi hišni lončenini z Brinjeve gore. – Arheološki vestnik 31, 89–112 [summary in German / povzetek v nemščini]. PAHIČ, S. 1981, Brinjeva gora 1953. – Arheološki vestnik 32, 71– 143 [summary in German / povzetek v nemščini]. PAHIČ, S. 1984, Die Erforschung der Römerstrassen im nordöstlichen Slowenien. – Arheološki vestnik 34, (1983), 247–287 [summary in Slovene / povzetek v slovenščini]. PAHIČ, S., KOPRIVNIK, V. 2002, Sledovi davne preteklosti. Brinjeva gora z okolico. – Muzejski listi 28, Maribor. 427 PETRIKOVITS, H. 1971, Fortiications in the north-western Roman Empire from the third to the ifth centuries A. D. – Journal of Roman Studies 61, 178–218. PETROVIĆ, P. 1984, Porečka reka, sabirni centar za snabdevanje rimskih trupa u Đerdapu. – Starinar 33–34, (1982–1983), 285–292. PETRU, P. 1967, Neuere Grabungen an den Clausurae Alpium Iuliarum. – In/V: Studien zu den Militärgrenzen Roms, Vorträge des 6. Internationalen Limeskongresses in Süddeutschland, Beihefte der Bonner Jahrbücher 19, Köln, Graz, 122–126. PETRU, P. 1969, Najnovija istraživanja Julijskih Alpa. – Osječki zbornik 12, 5–24. PETRU, P. 1972, Novejše arheološke raziskave Claustra Alpium Iuliarum in kasnoantičnih utrdb v Sloveniji. – Arheološki vestnik 23, 343–366 [summary in Italian / povzetek v italijanščini]. PETRU, P. 1975, Kasnoantične zapore. – In/V: ANSl 1975, 105. PETRU, P. 1976, Novija istraživanja rimskih utvrđenja u Sloveniji. Poznorimski sistem odbrane u Sloveniji. – In/V: B. gavela (ur,/ed.), Velika arheološka nalazišta u Sloveniji, Popularna nauka 5, Beograd, 27–34. PETRU, P. 1977, Die provinzialrömische Archäologie in Slowenien. – In/V: H. Temporini, (ed./ur.), Politische Geschichte (Provinzen und Randvölker: Lateinischer Donau-Balkanraum), Aufstieg und Niedergang der römischen Welt II/6, Berlin, New York, 500–541. PETRU, P. 1978a, Claustra Alpium Iuliarum und die spätrömische Verteidigung in Slowenien. – Arheološki vestnik 29, 505–509. PETRU, P. 1978b, Kontinuiteta in diskontinuiteta naselitve v prehodnem obdobju iz kasne antike v zgodnji srednji vek. – Zgodovinski časopis 32/3, 221–232 [summary in German / povzetek v nemščini]. PETRU, P. 1980–1981, Eine bisher unbekannte Römerstrasse und die Sperrmauer auf der Hrušica (Ad Pirum). Teil des Systems Claustra Alpium Iuliarum. – Archaeologia Iugoslavica 20–21, 132–135. PETRU, S., PETRU, P. 1978, Neviodunum (Drnovo pri Krškem). – Katalogi in monograije 15, Ljubljana [summary in German / povzetek v nemščini]. PFLAUM, V. 2000, Claustra Alpium Iuliarum in barbari. – Unpublished Master’s thesis / Neobjavljena magistrska naloga, Oddelek za arheologijo, Filozofska fakulteta Univerze v Ljubljani. PFLAUM, V. 2001, Katalog št. 39–40, 45, 48–52, 57–58, 83. – In/V: P. Bitenc, T. Kniic (eds./ur.), Od Rimljanov do Slovanov, Predmeti, Ljubljana, 21–26, 31. PFLAUM, V. 2002, Spätrömische Kerbschnittverzierte Gürtelbeschläge im Gebiet des heutigen Slowenien. – In/V: G. Cuscito, M. Verzár-Bass (eds./ur.), Bronzi di età romana in Cisalpina. Novità e riletture. Atti della XXXII Settimana di Studi Aquileiesi, 28–30 maggio 2001, Antichità Altoadriatiche 51, Trieste, 259–287. 428 PFLAUM, V. 2004, Poznorimski obrambni in vojaški sledovi 5. stoletja na ozemlju sedanje Slovenije. – Unpublished Ph. D. thesis / Neobjavljena doktorska disertacija, Oddelek za arheologijo, Filozofska fakulteta Univerze v Ljubljani. PFLAUM, V. 2007, he supposed Late Roman hoard of tools and a steelyard from Vodice near Kalce / Domnevna poznorimska zakladna najdba orodja in hitre tehtnice z Vodic pri Kalcah. – Arheološki vestnik 58, 285–332. PICK, K., SCHMID, W. 1922–1924, Frühgeschichtliche Befestigungsanlagen im Bereiche der Isonzofront. – Jahreshefte des Österreichischen Archäologischen Institutes in Wien 21–22, Beiblatt, 277–308. PIRKMAJER, D. 1986, Zbelovska gora. – Varstvo spomenikov 28, 252. PLESNIČAR-GEC, L. 2005, Emona in Late Antiquity based on new discoveries, – In/V: Illyrica antiqua, Ob honorem Duje Rendić-Miočević, Radovi s međunarodnoga skupa o problemima antičke arheologije, Zagreb, 6.–8. XI. 2003, Zagreb, 401–409 [summary in Croatian / povzetek v hrvaščini]. PLESNIČAR, L., SIVEC, I. 1978, Emona at the beginning of great migration period. – In/V: D. Dimitrijević, J. Kovačević, Z. Vinski (eds./ur.), Problemi seobe naroda u Karpatskoj kotlini, Saopštenja sa naučnog skupa, 13.–16. decembra 1976, Novi Sad, 59–64. POULTER, A. 1992, he use and abuse of urbanism in the Danubian provinces during the later Roman empire. – In/V: J. Rich (ed./ur.), he city in late antiquity, New York, 99–135. POULTER, A. G. 2007, he Transition to Late Antiquity on the lower Danube: the city, a fort and the countryside. – In/V: A. G. Poulter (ed./ur.), he Transition to Late Antiquity, On the Danube and Beyond, Proceedings of the British Academy 141, Oxford, 51–97. PRÖTTEL, Ph. M. 1996, Mediterrane Feinkeramikimporte des 2. bis 7. Jahrhunderts n. Chr. im oberen Adriaraum und in Slowenien. – Kölner Studien zur Archäologie der römischen Provinzen 2, Espelkamp. RADIĆ ŠTIVIĆ, N., BEKIĆ, L. (eds./ur.) 2009, Tarsatički principij. Kasnoantičko vojno zapovjedništvo / Principia di Tarsatica. Quartiere generale d’epoca tardoantica. – Rijeka RUPEL, L. 2005, Contributi alla carta archeologica della valli del Natisone II. – Forum Iulii 29, 37–116. SANTORO BIANCHI, S. 1992, I risultati dello scavo. – In/V: S. Santoro Bianchi (ed./ur.), Castelraimondo, Scavi 1988–1990, 1, Lo scavo, Cataloghi e monograie archeologiche dei Civici musei di Udine 2, Roma, 125–228. SARIA, B. 1929, Začasno poročilo o izkopavanjih na Gradišču pri Vel. Malenci. – Glasnik Muzejskega društva za Slovenijo 10, 11–17. SARIA, B. 1930, Drugo začasno poročilo o izkopavanjih na Gradišču pri Vel. Malenci. – Glasnik Muzejskega društva za Slovenijo 11, 5–12. SARIA, B. 1939, Doneski k vojaški zgodovini naših krajev v rimski dobi. – Glasnik Muzejskega društva za Slovenijo 20, 115–151. honorem Bojan Djurić, Monograije CPA 1, Ljubljana, 205–214 [summary in English / povzetek v angleščini]. SCHMID, W. 1923–1924, II. Die südlichen Ostalpenländer. – In/V: E. Nowotny, W. Schmid, Römische Forschung in Österreich 1912–1924, Fünfzehnter Bericht der Römisch-Germanischen Kommission 1923–1924, (1926), 178–241. STRMČNIK GULIČ, M., CIGLENEČKI, S. 2003, Ančnikovo gradišče pri Jurišni vasi. Poznoantična in zgodnjesrednjeveška naselbina na Pohorju / Late antique and early medieval settlement on Pohorje. – Slovenska Bistrica. SIVEC, I. 1997, Poznoantično orožje na Slovenskem. – Arheološki vestnik 48, 143–151 [summary in German / povzetek v nemščini]. SVOLJŠAK, D. 1966, Arheološka podoba gradišča pri Sv. Pavlu nad Planino. – Goriška srečanja 1, 46–49. SIVEC, I. 2002, Militaria in Slowenien in der spätrömischen Zeit. – In/V: M. Buora (ed./ur.), Miles Romanus dal Po al Danubio nel Tardoantico, Atti del convegno internazionale, Pordenone-Concordia Sagittaria, 17–19 marzo 2000, Pordenone, 243–249. SVOLJŠAK, D. 1990, Hrušica (Ad Pirum). – Varstvo spomenikov 32, 175–176. SVOLJŠAK, D. 1997a, 6. Podkraj. – Varstvo spomenikov 36/94– 95, 238–240. SLABE, M. 1979, Nova podoba arheološkega območja Turnovšče nad Vrhniko. – Varstvo spomenikov 22, 123–144. SVOLJŠAK, D. 1997b, 7. Podkraj. – Varstvo spomenikov 36/94– 95, 240–242. SLAPŠAK, B. 1978, Rodik-Ajdovščina. – Arheološki vestnik 29, 546–547. ŠAŠEL, J. 1971a, he struggle between Magnentius and Constantius II for Italy and Illyricum. – Živa antika 21, 205–216 [= Opera selecta, Situla 30, Ljubljana 1992, 716–727]. SLAPŠAK, B. 1985, Rodik. Raziskave Arheološkega oddelka Filozofske fakultete v Ljubljani / Rodik. Richerche del seminario archeologico della Facoltà di Lettere di Lubiana. – Trst. SLAPŠAK, B. 1997, Starejša zgodovina Rodika. – In/V: M. Pregelj (ed./ur.), Rodik, med Brkini in Krasom, Zbornik ob 350. letnici cerkve, Koper, 19–64. SOKOL, V. 1994, Das spätantike Kastrum auf dem Kuzelin bei Donja Glavnica. – Arheološki vestnik 45, 199–209. SOKOL, V. 1998, Rimski metal s Kuzelina / Roman metalwork from Kuzelin. – Sesvete, Zagreb. SOPRONI, S. 1985, Die letzten Jahrzehnte des pannonischen Limes. – Münchner Beiträge zur Vor- und Frühgeschichte 38, München. STARAC, R. 1993, Prikaz rezultata pokusnih arheoloških istraživanja na Gradini kod Pasjaka. – In/V: N. Kudiš, M. Vicelja (eds./ur.), Umjetnost na istočnoj obali Jadrana u kontekstu europske tradicije, Zbornik radova sa znanstvenog skupa održanog u Opatiji u svibnju 1992 posvećenog djelu prof. dr. Radmile Matejčić, Rijeka, 27–35. STARAC, R. 2009, Liburnijski limes – arheološko-konservatorski radovi na Lokalitetima Vranjeno i Za Presiku / Limes Liburnico – Ricerche archeologiche e lavori di recupero nelle località di Vranjeno e Za Presikom. – In/V: N. Radić Štivić, L. Bekić, (eds./ur.), Tarsatički principij, Kasnoantičko vojno zapovjedništvo / Principia di Tarsatica, Quartiere generale d’epoca tardoantica, Rijeka, 275–287. STEINKLAUBER, U. 2005, Inneralpine spätantike Höhensiedlungen im steirischen Ennstal. – Schild von Steier 18, 135–198. ŠAŠEL, J. 1971b, Antični viri. – In/V: J. Šašel, P. Petru (eds./ur.), Claustra Alpium Iuliarum I, Fontes, Katalogi in monograije 5, Ljubljana, 17–45. ŠAŠEL, J. 1971c, Zatočišča in utrjene postojanke za zaporo. – In/V: J. Šašel, P. Petru (eds./ur.), Claustra Alpium Iuliarum I, Fontes, Katalogi in monograije 5, Ljubljana, 99–100. ŠAŠEL, J. 1971d, Zgodovina raziskovanja. – In/V: J. Šašel, P. Petru (eds./ur.), Claustra Alpium Iuliarum I, Fontes, Katalogi in monograije 5, Ljubljana, 50–52. ŠAŠEL, J. 1971e, IV. Vzhodno območje Snežnika. – In/V: J. Šašel, P. Petru (eds./ur.), Claustra Alpium Iuliarum I, Fontes, Katalogi in monograije 5, Ljubljana, 62–63. ŠAŠEL, J. 1971f, XIX. San Pietro al Natisone (slov. Šempeter Slovenov). – In/V: J. Šašel, P. Petru (eds./ur.), Claustra Alpium Iuliarum I, Fontes, Katalogi in monograije 5, Ljubljana, 85. ŠAŠEL, J. 1971g, XXIV. Rattendorf im Gailtal. – In/V: J. Šašel, P. Petru (eds./ur.), Claustra Alpium Iuliarum I, Fontes, Katalogi in monograije 5, Ljubljana, 90. ŠAŠEL, J. 1988, L’organizzazione del conine orientale d’Italia nell’ Alto Medioevo. – Antichità Altoadriatiche 32, 107–114 [= Opera selecta, Situla 30, Ljubljana 1992, 813–820]. ŠAŠEL, J., PETRU, P. (eds./ur.) 1971, Claustra Alpium Iuliarum I. Fontes. – Katalogi in monograije 5, Ljubljana. ŠAŠEL, J., URLEB, M. 1971, Arheološka raziskovanja na Benetah. – In/V: J. Brdnik, R. Pavlovec, L. Prvinšek (eds./ur.), Mladinski raziskovalni tabori 1970 / Youth researching camps 1970, Ljubljana, 29–36. STRMČNIK, M. 1997, Mariborsko – bistriško območje v poznorimski dobi. – Arheološki vestnik 48, 269–288 [summary in German / povzetek v nemščini]. ŠEMROV, A. 1998, Die Fundmünzen der römischen Zeit in Slowenien IV. – Berlin. STRMČNIK, M. 2012, Ančnikovo gradišče – nekaj novosti o naselbinski podobi. – In/V: B. Migotti et al. (eds./ur.), Scripta in ŠEMROV, A. 2004, Die Fundmünzen der römischen Zeit in Slowenien V. – Mainz am Rhein. 429 ŠPEHAR, P. 2010, Materijalna kultura iz ranovizantijskih utvrđenja u Đerdapu / Material Culture from Early Byzantine Fortresses in Djerdap. – Cahiers des Portes de Fer, Monographies 7, Beograd. ŠTUKL, J. 2004, Poznoantični depo s Puštala nad Trnjem. – Arheološki vestnik 55, 415–427 [summary in English / povzetek v angleščini]. TUŠEK, I. 1997, Skupina poznorimskih grobov iz območja izkopa za stanovanjski blok B-2 v Rabelčji vasi – zahod na Ptuju. – Arheološki vestnik 48, 289–300 [summary in German / povzetek v nemščini]. Esparraguera, J. Buxeda Garrigós, M. A. Cau Ontiveros (eds./ ur.), LRCW I, Late Roman Coarse Wares, Cooking Wares amd Amphorae in the Mediterranean, Archaeology and Archaeometry, BAR International Series 1340, Oxford, 521–536. VOMER-GOJKOVIČ, M. 1997, Poznorimski grobovi z grobišča pri Dijaškem domu v Rabelčji vasi na Ptuju. – Arheološki vestnik 48, 301–324 [summary in German / povzetek v nemščini]. VUGA, D. 1972, Dolinska pot pri Vrhniki. – Varstvo spomenikov 15, (1970), 148–149. VUGA, D. 1974, Štanjel. – Varstvo spomenikov 17–19/1, 176. ULBERT, T. (ed./ur.) 1981, Ad Pirum (Hrušica). Spätrömische Passbefestigung in den Julischen Alpen. Der deutsche Beitrag zu den slowenisch-deutschen Grabungen 1971–1973. – Münchner Beiträge zur Vor- und Frühgeschichte 31, München. VALIČ, A. 1968, Gradišče nad Pivko pri Naklem. – Arheološki vestnik 19, 485–508 [summary in French / povzetek v francoščini]. VALIČ, A. 1997, Arheološki drobci vojaških prvin pozne rimske dobe na Gorenjskem. – Arheološki vestnik 48, 261–268 [summary in German / povzetek v nemščini]. VIDRIH PERKO, V. 1997a, Some Late Roman ceramic inds from the Slovenian Karst region. – Acta Rei Cretariae Romanae Fautorum 35, 249–258. VIDRIH PERKO, V. 1997b, Rimskodobna keramika z Ajdovščine pri Rodiku. – Arheološki vestnik 48, 341–358 [summary in English / povzetek v angleščini]. VIDRIH PERKO, V., ŽUPANČIČ, M. 2003, Il popolamento della Slovenia sudoccidentale e dell’Istria settentrionale nel periodo tarodomano e nell’alto medio evo alla luce delle ceramiche di importazione. – Histria Antiqua 11, 457–476. VIDRIH PERKO, V., ŽUPANČIČ, M. 2005, Amphorae in western Slovenia and in northern Istra. – In/V: J. M. Gurt 430 VUGA, D. 1985, Moški grob / 1885 z vrta Narodnega muzeja v Ljubljani. Poznorimske in barbarske ledvičaste pasne spone z ovalnim okovom. – Arheološki vestnik 36, 237–254 [summary in German / povzetek v nemščini]. WERNER, J. 1969, Der Lorenzberg bei Epfach. Die spätrömischen und frühmittelalterlichen Anlagen. – Münchener Beiträge zur Vor- und Frühgeschichte 8, München. WILKES, J. 2005, Provinces and frontiers. – In/V: In/V: A. K. Bowman, P. Garnsey, A. Cameron (eds./ur.), he Cambridge Ancient History 12, he Crisis of Empire, AD 193–337, Cambridge, 212–268. ŽUPANČIČ, M. 1991, Poznorimsko najdišče Molida pri Robiču. – Lovrenčičev zbornik, Goriški letnik, Zbornik Goriškega muzeja 18, 166–169 [summary in Italian / povzetek v italijanščini]. ŽUPANČIČ, M. 2002, Kann die Verschiebung der römischen Truppen vom Rheinland nach Norditalien in den Jahren 401/402 archäologisch bezeugt werden? (Bruchstück einer Gürtelgarnitur aus Predloka, Slowenien). – In/V: M. Buora (ed./ur.), Miles Romanus dal Po al Danubio nel tardoantico, Atti del convegno internazionale, Pordenone-Concordia Sagittaria, 17–19 marzo 2000, Pordenone, 231–242.

Log In

Evidence of the Roman army in Slovenia / Sledovi rimske vojske na Slovenskem

Evidence of the Roman army in Slovenia / Sledovi rimske vojske na Slovenskem

Evidence of the Roman army in Slovenia / Sledovi rimske vojske na Slovenskem

Evidence of the Roman army in Slovenia / Sledovi rimske vojske na Slovenskem

Evidence of the Roman army in Slovenia / Sledovi rimske vojske na Slovenskem

Related Papers

RELATED PAPERS