{"title":"Commentaria archaeologica et historica (V). 1. About the Legionary Fort at Sarmizegetusa in AD 102–205 (Cassius Dio 68.9.7). 2. The Destiny of the “Dacian Gold”. About a Koson Type Coin Reused in the 16th Century in a Christian (Renaissance) Context","authors":"A. Rustoiu","doi":"10.33993/ephnap.2022.32.235","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\"1. About the legionary fort at Sarmizegetusa in AD 102–105 (Cassius Dio 68.9.7). Cassius Dio (68.9.7) writes that after the end of the first Dacian war of Trajan, in 102 AD, the emperor left a legion in Dacia at Sarmizegetusa and auxiliary troops in other locations. Over time, the fragmentary accounts of Cassius Dio have been interpreted in two main ways. On one hand, the presence of a legionary fort was presumed in Hațeg Country, on the territory of future Colonia Ulpia Traiana Dacica Sarmizegetusa. On the other hand, this fort (stratopedon) was presumed to have functioned in the Orăștie Mountains, in or next to the Dacian fortress at Grădiștea de Munte, the residence of King Decebalus. The debate has recently been reopened by F. Matei-Popescu and O. Țentea. They place this Roman fort in the Orăștie Mountains, in the close vicinity of the former residence of King Decebalus. Their arguments are based mostly on the recently acquired LiDAR images of the area in question. On these images appears an almost rectangular earthen structure which preceded the stone enclosure and was also ascribed to a Roman fort built after the conquest of Dacia. F. Matei-Popescu and O. Țentea consider that, if the stone enclosure belongs to the period after the second Dacian war of Trajan, the enclosure having an earthen wall must be older, belonging to the period between the two Dacian wars, that is, between AD 102 and 105, this being the fort mentioned in the fragmentary accounts of Cassius Dio. Analysing the available information, the author concluding that the earthen fort from Grădiștea de Munte was more likely built in the context of the second Dacian war, in 105/106 AD. The stratopedon mentioned by Cassius Dio was more likely located on the future place of Colonia Ulpia Traiana Dacica Sarmizegetusa. Finally, the name of the royal residence of Decebalus, it is less likely to be Sarmizegetusa. This was more likely the indigenous toponym of the place where Colonia Ulpia Traiana Dacica was later established. The possible identification with Ranisstorum, the place where Tiberius Claudius Maximus brought the severed head and right hand of King Decebalus to Trajan to be shown to the army, can be perhaps taken into the consideration as a working hypothesis. 2. The destiny of the “Dacian gold”. About a Koson-type coin reused in the 16th century in a Christian (Renaissance) context. The “Dacian gold” fired the imagination of many people each time a hoard emerged in the mountains hosting the ruins of the royal residence of King Decebalus. One of the largest hoards was discovered in 1543 (containing coins of Lysimachus and perhaps Koson-types). Before this great hoard, a document from 1494 mentions the discovery in 1491 of a hoard consisting of “small and big” gold coins by some gold panners in the vicinity of Sebeș. There was already a number of Koson-type coins “in circulation” among the Renaissance collectors of antiquities at the end of the 15th century or the beginning of the 16th century. In 1520 Erasmus of Rotterdam describes and tries to identify a Koson-type coin, an issue which have also caused difficulties to other scholars. In this context, the author is analysing a liturgical chalice of the first half of the 16th century, which was once in Alba Iulia and is now preserved in the collections of the Catholic Cathedral of Nitra, Slovakia. The chalice is decorated with ancient gold coins. Among them is a Koson-type coin. Both the manufacturing and the biography of the chalice are relevant from the perspective of the destiny of “Dacian gold” during the late Renaissance. The vessel was first mentioned in an inventory from 1531 of the treasury of the Catholic Cathedral at Alba Iulia. The chalice was donated by a certain Udalricus of Buda, who was the prebendary of a cathedral chapel between 1504 and 1523. At a later date, the chalice was owned by Paul Bornemisza, who was Bishop of Alba Iulia in 1553–1556. He had to leave Transylvania, becoming Bishop of Nitra in 1557. On this occasion he brought over the chalice decorated with ancient gold coins. Udalricus of Buda was a member of the Renaissance humanist circle from Alba Iulia, which included a number of scholars, publishers of ancient texts, epigraphists and antiquities collectors. It might be presumed that the Koson-type coin which Erasmus of Rotterdam attempted to analyse was received through the connections with the humanist scholars from Alba Iulia. This coin, as well as the one inserted into the chalice of Udalricus, could have belonged to a hoard which was perhaps discovered a few decades before the one from 1543. Perhaps the coins in question were found in 1491 by the gold panners from Sebeș. It is however certain that the interest of the Transylvanian and European humanist scholars in this kind of “exotic” discoveries arose during this period, alongside the interest in other types of antiquities of the pre-Roman and Roman Dacia. The chalice from Nitra includes probably the oldest discovery of a Koson-type coin for which we have so far the physical evidence.\"","PeriodicalId":365458,"journal":{"name":"Ephemeris Napocensis","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ephemeris Napocensis","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.33993/ephnap.2022.32.235","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
“1。关于公元102-105年在萨尔米泽盖图萨的军团要塞(卡修斯·迪奥68.9.7)。卡修斯·迪奥(68.9.7)写道,公元102年,在图拉真的第一次达契亚战争结束后,皇帝在达契亚的萨尔米泽盖图萨留下了一个军团,在其他地方留下了辅助部队。随着时间的推移,关于卡修斯·迪奥的零碎记载主要有两种解释。一方面,在Hațeg国家,在未来的乌尔皮亚·特拉亚纳·达西卡·萨尔米泽盖图萨殖民地的领土上,假定存在一个军团要塞。另一方面,这个堡垒(stratopedon)被认为是在Orăștie山脉中发挥作用的,在Grădiștea de Munte的达契亚堡垒内或旁边,这是德塞巴鲁斯国王的住所。最近,F. Matei-Popescu和O. Țentea重新开始了辩论。他们把这座罗马堡垒建在Orăștie山上,靠近德塞巴鲁斯国王的故居。他们的论点主要基于最近获得的有关地区的激光雷达图像。在这些图像上出现了一个几乎是矩形的土结构,它在石头围墙之前,也被认为是征服达契亚后建造的罗马堡垒。F. Matei-Popescu和O. Țentea认为,如果石头围墙属于图拉真第二次达契亚战争之后的时期,那么有土墙的围墙一定更古老,属于两次达契亚战争之间的时期,即公元102年至105年之间,这是卡修斯·迪奥的零碎记述中提到的堡垒。通过分析现有信息,作者得出结论,Grădiștea de Munte的土制堡垒更有可能是在公元105/106年第二次达契亚战争期间建造的。卡修斯·迪奥提到的层齿兽更有可能位于Ulpia Traiana Dacica Sarmizegetusa殖民地的未来位置。最后,德塞巴鲁斯的皇家住所的名字,它不太可能是Sarmizegetusa。这更像是乌尔皮亚·特拉亚纳·达西卡殖民地后来建立的地方的土著地名。在拉尼斯斯托姆,提比略·克劳迪亚斯·马克西姆斯将切下的国王德塞巴鲁斯的头和右手带到图拉真,向军队展示,这可能是一种可行的假设。2. “达契亚黄金”的命运。关于16世纪在基督教(文艺复兴)背景下重新使用的科森式硬币。“达契亚黄金”每次出现在山脉中,都能激发许多人的想象力,因为那里有德塞巴鲁斯国王的王宫遗址。1543年发现了最大的一堆硬币(里面有利西马科斯的硬币,可能还有科森的硬币)。在这个巨大的宝藏之前,1494年的一份文件提到,1491年,一些淘金者在塞贝涅附近发现了一个由“大小”金币组成的宝藏。在15世纪末或16世纪初,在文艺复兴时期的古董收藏家中,已经有一些科松式的硬币在“流通”。1520年,鹿特丹的伊拉斯谟(Erasmus of Rotterdam)描述并试图识别一种科松类型的硬币,这一问题也给其他学者带来了困难。在这种情况下,作者正在分析一个16世纪上半叶的礼拜圣餐杯,它曾经在阿尔巴尤利亚,现在保存在斯洛伐克尼特拉天主教大教堂的收藏中。这个圣餐杯装饰着古代的金币。其中有一枚高仙型硬币。从文艺复兴后期“达契亚黄金”命运的角度来看,圣杯的制造和传记都是相关的。这艘船第一次被提及是在1531年阿尔巴尤利亚天主教大教堂的宝库清单中。这只圣餐杯是布达的乌达里库斯(Udalricus)捐赠的,他在1504年至1523年期间担任一座大教堂的主教。后来,这个圣杯的主人是保罗·博内米萨,他在1553年至1556年担任阿尔巴尤利亚主教。他不得不离开特兰西瓦尼亚,于1557年成为尼特拉主教。这时,他拿来了一个装饰着古代金币的圣餐杯。布达的乌达里库斯是文艺复兴时期阿尔巴尤利亚人文主义圈子的一员,这个圈子包括许多学者、古代文献的出版商、铭文学家和古董收藏家。可以推测,鹿特丹的伊拉斯谟试图分析的科松型硬币是通过与阿尔巴尤利亚的人文主义学者的联系而获得的。这枚硬币,以及插入乌达里库斯圣杯的那枚硬币,可能属于一个贮藏物,这个贮藏物可能比1543年的那枚硬币早几十年被发现。也许这些硬币是在1491年被来自塞贝涅的淘金工人发现的。然而,可以肯定的是,特兰西瓦尼亚和欧洲人文主义学者对这种“外来”发现的兴趣是在这一时期兴起的,同时对前罗马和罗马达契亚其他类型的文物也产生了兴趣。 “1。关于公元102-105年在萨尔米泽盖图萨的军团要塞(卡修斯·迪奥68.9.7)。卡修斯·迪奥(68.9.7)写道,公元102年,在图拉真的第一次达契亚战争结束后,皇帝在达契亚的萨尔米泽盖图萨留下了一个军团,在其他地方留下了辅助部队。随着时间的推移,关于卡修斯·迪奥的零碎记载主要有两种解释。一方面,在Hațeg国家,在未来的乌尔皮亚·特拉亚纳·达西卡·萨尔米泽盖图萨殖民地的领土上,假定存在一个军团要塞。另一方面,这个堡垒(stratopedon)被认为是在Orăștie山脉中发挥作用的,在Grădiștea de Munte的达契亚堡垒内或旁边,这是德塞巴鲁斯国王的住所。最近,F. Matei-Popescu和O. Țentea重新开始了辩论。他们把这座罗马堡垒建在Orăștie山上,靠近德塞巴鲁斯国王的故居。他们的论点主要基于最近获得的有关地区的激光雷达图像。在这些图像上出现了一个几乎是矩形的土结构,它在石头围墙之前,也被认为是征服达契亚后建造的罗马堡垒。F. Matei-Popescu和O. Țentea认为,如果石头围墙属于图拉真第二次达契亚战争之后的时期,那么有土墙的围墙一定更古老,属于两次达契亚战争之间的时期,即公元102年至105年之间,这是卡修斯·迪奥的零碎记述中提到的堡垒。通过分析现有信息,作者得出结论,Grădiștea de Munte的土制堡垒更有可能是在公元105/106年第二次达契亚战争期间建造的。卡修斯·迪奥提到的层齿兽更有可能位于Ulpia Traiana Dacica Sarmizegetusa殖民地的未来位置。最后,德塞巴鲁斯的皇家住所的名字,它不太可能是Sarmizegetusa。这更像是乌尔皮亚·特拉亚纳·达西卡殖民地后来建立的地方的土著地名。在拉尼斯斯托姆,提比略·克劳迪亚斯·马克西姆斯将切下的国王德塞巴鲁斯的头和右手带到图拉真,向军队展示,这可能是一种可行的假设。2. “达契亚黄金”的命运。关于16世纪在基督教(文艺复兴)背景下重新使用的科森式硬币。“达契亚黄金”每次出现在山脉中,都能激发许多人的想象力,因为那里有德塞巴鲁斯国王的王宫遗址。1543年发现了最大的一堆硬币(里面有利西马科斯的硬币,可能还有科森的硬币)。在这个巨大的宝藏之前,1494年的一份文件提到,1491年,一些淘金者在塞贝涅附近发现了一个由“大小”金币组成的宝藏。在15世纪末或16世纪初,在文艺复兴时期的古董收藏家中,已经有一些科松式的硬币在“流通”。1520年,鹿特丹的伊拉斯谟(Erasmus of Rotterdam)描述并试图识别一种科松类型的硬币,这一问题也给其他学者带来了困难。在这种情况下,作者正在分析一个16世纪上半叶的礼拜圣餐杯,它曾经在阿尔巴尤利亚,现在保存在斯洛伐克尼特拉天主教大教堂的收藏中。这个圣餐杯装饰着古代的金币。其中有一枚高仙型硬币。从文艺复兴后期“达契亚黄金”命运的角度来看,圣杯的制造和传记都是相关的。这艘船第一次被提及是在1531年阿尔巴尤利亚天主教大教堂的宝库清单中。这只圣餐杯是布达的乌达里库斯(Udalricus)捐赠的,他在1504年至1523年期间担任一座大教堂的主教。后来,这个圣杯的主人是保罗·博内米萨,他在1553年至1556年担任阿尔巴尤利亚主教。他不得不离开特兰西瓦尼亚,于1557年成为尼特拉主教。这时,他拿来了一个装饰着古代金币的圣餐杯。布达的乌达里库斯是文艺复兴时期阿尔巴尤利亚人文主义圈子的一员,这个圈子包括许多学者、古代文献的出版商、铭文学家和古董收藏家。可以推测,鹿特丹的伊拉斯谟试图分析的科松型硬币是通过与阿尔巴尤利亚的人文主义学者的联系而获得的。这枚硬币,以及插入乌达里库斯圣杯的那枚硬币,可能属于一个贮藏物,这个贮藏物可能比1543年的那枚硬币早几十年被发现。也许这些硬币是在1491年被来自塞贝涅的淘金工人发现的。然而,可以肯定的是,特兰西瓦尼亚和欧洲人文主义学者对这种“外来”发现的兴趣是在这一时期兴起的,同时对前罗马和罗马达契亚其他类型的文物也产生了兴趣。 尼特拉的圣杯可能是迄今为止我们有实物证据的最古老的科森式硬币。” 尼特拉的圣杯可能是迄今为止我们有实物证据的最古老的科森式硬币。”
Commentaria archaeologica et historica (V). 1. About the Legionary Fort at Sarmizegetusa in AD 102–205 (Cassius Dio 68.9.7). 2. The Destiny of the “Dacian Gold”. About a Koson Type Coin Reused in the 16th Century in a Christian (Renaissance) Context
"1. About the legionary fort at Sarmizegetusa in AD 102–105 (Cassius Dio 68.9.7). Cassius Dio (68.9.7) writes that after the end of the first Dacian war of Trajan, in 102 AD, the emperor left a legion in Dacia at Sarmizegetusa and auxiliary troops in other locations. Over time, the fragmentary accounts of Cassius Dio have been interpreted in two main ways. On one hand, the presence of a legionary fort was presumed in Hațeg Country, on the territory of future Colonia Ulpia Traiana Dacica Sarmizegetusa. On the other hand, this fort (stratopedon) was presumed to have functioned in the Orăștie Mountains, in or next to the Dacian fortress at Grădiștea de Munte, the residence of King Decebalus. The debate has recently been reopened by F. Matei-Popescu and O. Țentea. They place this Roman fort in the Orăștie Mountains, in the close vicinity of the former residence of King Decebalus. Their arguments are based mostly on the recently acquired LiDAR images of the area in question. On these images appears an almost rectangular earthen structure which preceded the stone enclosure and was also ascribed to a Roman fort built after the conquest of Dacia. F. Matei-Popescu and O. Țentea consider that, if the stone enclosure belongs to the period after the second Dacian war of Trajan, the enclosure having an earthen wall must be older, belonging to the period between the two Dacian wars, that is, between AD 102 and 105, this being the fort mentioned in the fragmentary accounts of Cassius Dio. Analysing the available information, the author concluding that the earthen fort from Grădiștea de Munte was more likely built in the context of the second Dacian war, in 105/106 AD. The stratopedon mentioned by Cassius Dio was more likely located on the future place of Colonia Ulpia Traiana Dacica Sarmizegetusa. Finally, the name of the royal residence of Decebalus, it is less likely to be Sarmizegetusa. This was more likely the indigenous toponym of the place where Colonia Ulpia Traiana Dacica was later established. The possible identification with Ranisstorum, the place where Tiberius Claudius Maximus brought the severed head and right hand of King Decebalus to Trajan to be shown to the army, can be perhaps taken into the consideration as a working hypothesis. 2. The destiny of the “Dacian gold”. About a Koson-type coin reused in the 16th century in a Christian (Renaissance) context. The “Dacian gold” fired the imagination of many people each time a hoard emerged in the mountains hosting the ruins of the royal residence of King Decebalus. One of the largest hoards was discovered in 1543 (containing coins of Lysimachus and perhaps Koson-types). Before this great hoard, a document from 1494 mentions the discovery in 1491 of a hoard consisting of “small and big” gold coins by some gold panners in the vicinity of Sebeș. There was already a number of Koson-type coins “in circulation” among the Renaissance collectors of antiquities at the end of the 15th century or the beginning of the 16th century. In 1520 Erasmus of Rotterdam describes and tries to identify a Koson-type coin, an issue which have also caused difficulties to other scholars. In this context, the author is analysing a liturgical chalice of the first half of the 16th century, which was once in Alba Iulia and is now preserved in the collections of the Catholic Cathedral of Nitra, Slovakia. The chalice is decorated with ancient gold coins. Among them is a Koson-type coin. Both the manufacturing and the biography of the chalice are relevant from the perspective of the destiny of “Dacian gold” during the late Renaissance. The vessel was first mentioned in an inventory from 1531 of the treasury of the Catholic Cathedral at Alba Iulia. The chalice was donated by a certain Udalricus of Buda, who was the prebendary of a cathedral chapel between 1504 and 1523. At a later date, the chalice was owned by Paul Bornemisza, who was Bishop of Alba Iulia in 1553–1556. He had to leave Transylvania, becoming Bishop of Nitra in 1557. On this occasion he brought over the chalice decorated with ancient gold coins. Udalricus of Buda was a member of the Renaissance humanist circle from Alba Iulia, which included a number of scholars, publishers of ancient texts, epigraphists and antiquities collectors. It might be presumed that the Koson-type coin which Erasmus of Rotterdam attempted to analyse was received through the connections with the humanist scholars from Alba Iulia. This coin, as well as the one inserted into the chalice of Udalricus, could have belonged to a hoard which was perhaps discovered a few decades before the one from 1543. Perhaps the coins in question were found in 1491 by the gold panners from Sebeș. It is however certain that the interest of the Transylvanian and European humanist scholars in this kind of “exotic” discoveries arose during this period, alongside the interest in other types of antiquities of the pre-Roman and Roman Dacia. The chalice from Nitra includes probably the oldest discovery of a Koson-type coin for which we have so far the physical evidence."