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

RUSTOIU, AUREL

EPHEMERIS NAPOCENSIS 32 (XXXII/2022)

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

(pages 235-252)

DOI: https://doi.org/10.33993/ephnap.2022.32.235

Download PDF

Authors:
AUREL RUSTOIU
Academia Română, filiala Cluj-Napoca. Institutul de Arheologie și Istoria Artei. Str. M. Kogălniceanu 12–14, 400084 Cluj-Napoca, Romania. E-mail: aurelrustoiu@yahoo.com

Keywords: Dacian wars, Trajan, Decebalus, Sarmizegetusa, Ranisstorum, Dacian gold, Koson, Rennaisance.

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.

References:

[1] ANGHEL 2008
GH. ANGHEL, Descoperiri de tezaure antice din aur în zona Munților Orăștiei menționate în cronicile medievale și documente moderne. In: A. Lazăr et al. (eds.), Combaterea criminalității contra patrimoniului cultural european – Combating the criminality against the European cultural haritage (București 2008), 333–368.

[2] BĂIEȘTEAN 2012
G. BĂIEȘTEAN, Castrul de la Sarmizegetusa. Sargetia 3 (39), 2012, 131–150.

[3] DAICOVICIU 1960
C. DAICOVICIU, Apariția și formarea relațiilor sclavagiste în Dacia. Perioada Burebista- Decebal. In: C. Daicoviciu et al (eds.), Istoria României I (București 1960), 255–344.

[4] DAICOVICIU 1972
H. DAICOVICIU, Dacia de la Burebista la cucerirea romană (Cluj 1972).

[5] DAICOVICIU/FERENCZI/GLODARIU 1989
H. DAICOVICIU/ȘT. FERENCZI/I. GLODARIU, Cetăți și așezări dacice în sud-vestul Transilvaniei (București 1989).

[6] EGRI 2019
M. EGRI, Connectivity and social dynamics in the Carpathian Basin (1st century BC–1st century AD). An archaeological investigation (Cluj-Napoca 2019).

[7] FLOREA 2015
G. A. FLOREA (ed.), Matrița de bronz de la Sarmizegetusa Regia (Cluj-Napoca 2015).

[8] GLODARIU 1981
I. GLODARIU, Din nou despre Ranisstorum. Apulum 19, 1981, 51–57.

[9] GLODARIU 1995
I. GLODARIU, Addenda aux “Points de repère pour la chronologie des citadelles et des établissements daciques des Monts d’Orăștie”. Acta Musei Napocensis 32.I, 1995, 119–134.

[10] GLODARIU/IAROSLAVSCHI/RUSU 1992
I. GLODARIU/E. IAROSLAVSCHI/A. RUSU, Die Münzstatte von Sarmizegetusa Regia. Ephemeris Napocensis 2, 1992, 75–58.

[11] IAROSLAVSCHI 1997
E. IAROSLAVSCHI, Tehnica la daci (Cluj-Napoca 1997).

[12] KOLNÍKOVÁ 2002
E. KOLNÍKOVÁ, Mince vo výzdobe nitrianskeho liturgického kalica. Pamyatki múzéa 3, 2002, 52–57.

[13] KUCHARÍK 2021
J. KUCHARÍK, Chalice of ancient coins. In: J. Kucharík (ed.), Romans and Slovakia. Exhibition catalogue (Bratislava 2021), 304–305.

[14] LAZĂR ET AL. 2008
A. LAZĂR ET AL. (eds.), Combaterea criminalității contra patrimoniului cultural european – Combating the criminality against the European cultural haritage (București 2008).

[15] MATEESCU ET AL. 2021
R. MATEESCU ET AL., 18. Grădiștea de Munte, Orăștioara de Sus, jud. Hunedoara, Cronica cercetărilor arheologice din România. Campania 2020 (București 2021), 94–98.

[16] MATEI-POPESCU 2010
F. MATEI-POPESCU, The Roman army in Moesia Inferior (Bucharest 2010).

[17] MATEI-POPESCU/ȚENTEA 2006
F. MATEI-POPESCU/O. ȚENTEA, Participarea trupelor auxiliare din Moesia Superior și Moesia Inferior la cucerirea Daciei. In: E. S. Teodor, O. Țentea (eds.), Dacia Augusti Provincia. Crearea provinciei (București 2006), 75–120.

[18] MATEI-POPESCU/ȚENTEA 2017
F. MATEI-POPESCU/O. ȚENTEA, I primi insediamenti romani nella Dacia: il contributo dell’esercito. In: C. Parisi Presicce et al. (eds.), Traiano. Construire l’Impero, creare l’Europa. Catallogo della mostra (Roma, 29 novembre 2017 – 16 settembre 2018) (Roma 2017), 163–168.

[19] MATEI-POPESCU/ȚENTEA 2021
F. MATEI-POPESCU/O. ȚENTEA, Notes on the Roman camp (stratopedon) in Sarmizegetusa Regia (Cassius Dio 68.9.7). In: K. Narloch et al. (eds.), Nunc decet caput impedire myrto. Studies dedicated to Professor Piotr Dyczek on the occasion of his 65th birthday (Warsaw), 601–610.

[20] MIKÓ 1993
Á. MIKÓ, A chalice with “pagan coins” from the early 16th century is the chalice of Udalricus Budai, the prebend of Gylafehérvár, in the treasury of Nytra cathedral? Ars Decorativa 13, 1993, 137–144.

[21] MUSILOVÁ 2021
M. MUSILOVÁ, Roman traces on the Acropolis of Bratislava Celtic Oppidum. In: J. Kucharík (ed.), Romans and Slovakia. Exhibition catalogue (Bratislava 2021), 25–37.

[22] OLTEAN/HANSON 2017
I. A. OLTEAN/W. S. HANSON, Conquest strategy and political discours: new evidence of the conquest of Dacia from LiDAR analysis at Sarmizegetusa Regia. Journal of Roman Archaeology 30, 2017, 429–446.

[23] OPREANU 1999–2000
C. OPREANU, Castrul roman de la Grădiștea Muncelului (Sarmizegetusa Regia). Cronologia și semnificața sa istorică. Ephemeris Napocensis 9–10, 1999–2000, 151–168.

[24] PEȚAN 2017
A. PEȚAN, Date noi despre inscripția “cu arme” de la Sarmizegetusa Regia. Arheovest V.2, 2017, Szeged, 981–999.

[25] PEȚAN 2018
A. PEȚAN, Sarmizegetusa Regia. 1. Redescoperirea cetății (Dacica 2018).

[26] PEȚAN 2021
A. PEȚAN, Grădiștea de Munte – Sub Cununi (Hunedoara county). The file of a forgotten archaeological site. Marisia 3, 2021, 79–98.

[27] PEȚAN 2022
A. PEȚAN, Abraham Ortelius, Harta veche a Daciilor și a Moesiilor – Vetus descriptio Daciarum Moesiarumque. Traducere din limba latină, studiu introductiv și note A. Pețan. Ediție bilingvă (Alun 2022).

[28] PETOLESCU 1991
C. PETOLESCU, Decebal regele dacilor (București 1991).

[29] PETRE 2004
Z. PETRE, Practica nemuririi. O lectură critică a izvoarelor grecești referitoare la geți (Polirom 2004).

[30] PURDEA 2020
C. PURDEA, De la monede la bijuterii. Studiu asupra reutilizării emisiunilor numismatice antice cu legenda Koson. Sargetia 11 (47), 2020, 69–100.

[31] RUSSU 1975
I. I. RUSSU, Însemnătatea și dezvoltarea epigrafiei în Dacia. In: I. I. Russu (ed.), Inscripțiile Daciei Romane 1 (București 1975), 33–63.

[32] RUSTOIU 2007
A. RUSTOIU, Thracian “sica” and Dacian “falx”. The history of a “national” weapon. In: S. Nemeti et al. (eds.), Dacia felix. Studia Michaeli Bărbulescu oblata (Cluj-Napoca 2007), 67–82.

[33] RUSTOIU 2012
A. RUSTOIU, Commentaria Archaeologica et Historica (I). 1. The grave with a helmet from Ciumeşti – 50 years from its discovery. Comments on the greaves. 2. The Padea- Panagjurski kolonii group in Transylvania. Old and new discoveries. Ephemeris Napocensis 22, 2012, 159–183.

[34] RUSTOIU 2016a
A. RUSTOIU, Commentaria archaeologica et historica (II). Banatica 26, 2016, 73–100.

[35] RUSTOIU 2016b
A. RUSTOIU, Slashing knives (hiebmesser) – Curved dagger (sica, -ae). Their function and symbolic role in the La Tene panoply of weapons. Acta Musei Porolissensis 38, 2016, 199–221.

[36] RUSTOIU 2018
A. RUSTOIU, The functional and symbolic life of the “Dacian” sica from its beginning until today. In: E. Nemeth (ed.), Violence in Prehistory and Antiquity (Kaiserlautern und Mehlingen 2018), 69–91.

[37] RUSTOIU 2020
A. RUSTOIU, Commentaria archaeologica et historica (III). Ephemeris Napocensis 30, 2020, 11–38. https://doi.org/10.33993/ephnap.2020.30.15

[38] RUSTOIU 2021
A. RUSTOIU, Commentaria archaeologica et historica (IV). Ephemeris Napocensis 31, 2021, 69–90. https://www.doi.org/10.33993/ephnap.2021.31.69

[39] SPEIDEL 1970A
M. SPEIDEL, The captor of Decebalus. A new inscription from Philippi. Journal of Roman Studies 60, 1970, 142–153.

[40] SPEIDEL 1970B
M. SPEIDEL, Ranisstorum, ultimul punct de sprijin a lui Decebal. Acta Musei Napocensis 7, 1970, 511–515.

[41] ȘTEFAN 2005
A. S. ȘTEFAN, Les guerres daciques de Domitien et de Trajan: architecture militaire, topographie, images et histoire (Rome 2005).

[42] VARSIK 2021
V. VARSIK, Roman residences for Germanic nobles. In: J. Kucharík (ed.), Romans and Slovakia. Exhibition catalogue (Bratislava 2021), 93–109.

[43] VULPE 1976
R. VULPE, Studia Thracologica (București 1976).

[44] WINKLER 1972
I. WINKLER, Considerații despre moneda “Koson”. Studii și cercetări de istorie veche 23.2, 1972, 173–199.

EPHEMERIS NAPOCENSIS

Issues

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